it's looking more and more like 2023 was the peak. so that's one goal we can check off from a very long to-do list. but sometimes when you have a long to-do list, getting the first one out of the way puts the rest into focus.
Extinction rates (1500-2009) peaked around 1900 at 50 per decade. Extinction rates have declined dramatically to around 4 to per decade in the 2000s. So the extinction rate is very low: 900 known lost species for 2.1 million known species in 500 years (IUCN), so from observations there are an average of slightly less than 2 species lost every year. Out of a known species total of over 2 million. That gives an annual percentage loss of less than 0.0001%. That's background extinction. At that frequency it will take over 930,000 years to reach 80% extinction of species experienced at the K-T boundary that saw the extinction of the dinosaurs. Of course, extinction is a natural part of the evolution of life on this planet with the average lifespan of a species thought to be about 1 million years (cf 930,000). It is estimated that 99.9% of all plant and animal species that have existed have gone extinct. It should also be noted that no taxonomic families have become extinct in the last 500 years. In fact marine diversity at the taxonomic level of families is the highest it has ever been in the Earth's long history (see Sepkoski Curve). In a review of 16,009 species, most populations (85%) did not show significant trends in abundance, and those that did were balanced between winners (8%) and losers (7%) (Dornelas et al, 2019). There have been only 9 species of continental birds and mammals confirmed extinct since 1500 (Loehle, 2011). No global marine animals have become extinct in the past 50 years (McCauley et, 2015 using IUCN data).
The Arctic minimum summer sea ice trend is zero for the past 17 years. In the past few years it was almost as high as 1995. The probability that this could be due to chance has now dropped to 10% (after Swart et al calculations, 2015). If the hiatus continues until 2027, it will become statistically significant (p<0.05, or less than 5%) and no longer explainable by chance. Using National Snow and Ice Data Centre (NSIDC) information for September minima (million km²): 2007 4.16 2008 4.59 2009 5.12 2010 4.62 2011 4.34 2012 3.39 2013 5.05 2014 5.03 2015 4.43 2016 4.17 2017 4.67 2018 4.66 2019 4.19 2020 3.82 2021 4.77 2022 4.67 2023 4.23. Plot the trend line for this data and it will be flat. ZERO net change in 17 years. The linear trend since 2007 is indistinguishable from zero ( around -0.17% per year ). In the early 1950s the sea ice concentration anomaly was lower than it is at present. The sea ice anomaly then rose during the 50s, 60s and 70s. This was followed by a decline. This is demonstrated in Arctic and Antarctic Research Institute (AARI) data, which is based on historical sea ice charts from several sources (aircraft, ship, and satellite observations). The AARI data shows the sea ice concentration anomaly was lower in 1952 (-5%) than 2005 (-3%). The anomaly increased in the 50s, 60s and 70s. In the 80s, 90s and early 2000s it decreased. Since 2007 the trend has been flat. JAXA (Japanese Aerospace Exploration Agency) satellite data from 2002 to 2024 Arctic Sea Ice Extent (365 day running average) shows no noticeable trend with values close to 10,000,000km² throughout. Their minimum extent for daily values was in 2012. No other year since has come close. MASIE (Multisensor Analyzed Sea Ice Extent - Northern Hemisphere) shows something similar to JAXA. From 2005 to 2024 Arctic Sea Ice Extent (365 day running average) shows no noticeable trend with values close to 10,000,000km² throughout. Their minimum extent for daily values was in 2012. Again no other year since has come close. It also shows a marked increase in Ice in the Greenland Sea since 2018. Polyakov et al (2003) show "ice extent (1900-2000) in the Kara, Laptev, East Siberian, and Chukchi Seas provide evidence that long-term ice thickness and extent trends are small and generally not statistically significant". Trend -0.5% per decade (±0.7%). Zhang (2021) shows there is no trend for Arctic sea ice volume since at least 2010, and observes that ice draft increased from 1995 onwards. Vinje (2001) shows a deceleration in the rate of ice loss from 1864 to 2000. Recent sea ice extent is very high when compared to the last 10,000 years. Also changes in sea ice extent and the speed of those changes were greater in the past (Stein et al, 2017). NOAA's Global Time Series Average Temperature Anomaly monthly data (1995-2004) for the Arctic region shows the peak anomaly occurred in January 2016 (+4.99°C), another El Niño year, and the trend is now downwards (-0.42°C per decade) as of June 2024. HadCRUT4 Arctic (70N - 90N) monthly surface air temperature anomalies record (1920-2021) shows the greatest number and magnitude of positive temperature anomalies occurred between 1930-49. All anomalies in excess of 5°C, including +7°C (referenced to 1961-1990) are from that period. No temperature anomalies from 2000-2019 exceeded 5°C. It shows no decade warmed faster than the 1930s and the current 'warming' finished in 2005. JRA55 SAT (2010-2020) shows most of the Canadian Arctic and Greenland cooling with parts of Canada cooling by 3°C and western Greenland cooling by 2.5°C in a decade. KNMI data (Twentieth Century Reanalysis V2c, 1851-2011, 68°N-80°N, 25°W-60°W, so Greenland) shows the most pronounced warming took place in the 1870s, and when comparing temperature anomalies, highest are in the 1930s and comparison of that period with recent temperature anomalies shows no net warming.
Sea level appears to be rising at a small 3mm per year. Atolls in the Pacific nations of the Marshall Islands and Kiribati, as well as the Maldives archipelago in the Indian Ocean, have risen up to 8 percent in size (Ford and Kench, 2020). 89% of the globe’s islands and 100% of large islands have stable or growing coasts (Duvat, 2019). No island larger than 10ha decreased in size. As regards NOAA tide gauge data, let's look at some examples from around the world. N.B. All sites show a linear Relative Sea Level Trend: Kanmen, China 2.40mm/yr; Sydney, Australia 0.75mm/yr; Ferandina Beach, Florida 2.20mm/yr; Los Angeles, California 1.04mm/yr; Mera, Japan 3.8mm; Cascais, Portugal 1.32mm/yr; Newlyn, UK 1.94mm/yr. Jevrejeva, et al (2014) estimated 2 mm/year (± 0.3), and Church and White (2006) estimated 1.7mm/year (± 0.3). So that's a total rise of between 126 and 151mm (less than 6 inches) from 2024 to the end of the century. A paper from Frederikse et al (2018) shows a global trend of 1.5 ± 0.2 mm yr−1 over 1958-2014. That's 6cm by 2050, and 30cm by 2100. Or try PSMSL data: Kwajalein (Marshall Islands) 1.95mm/yr; Maldives (Indian Ocean) 3.21mm/yr; Lautoka (Fiji Islands, Pacific Ocean) 3.50mm/yr; Port Elisabeth (South Africa) 2.34mm/yr. Anyway, if you prefer satellite data NOAA's trend was +3.0mm/year Global Mean Sea Level (1993-2022), again linear last time I looked for each set of satellite data (but hey, it may have accelerated in the last month). NASA satellite data (1993-present) for Global Mean Sea Level shows a rise of 3.3mm per year. That's the same as two stacked penny coins. There is no relationship to the increase in CO2 in the atmosphere. It's going to be decades before even your big toe is submerged.
No challenge to this nonsense from the BBC as usual. Sea level appears to be rising at a small 3mm per year. Atolls in the Pacific nations of the Marshall Islands and Kiribati, as well as the Maldives archipelago in the Indian Ocean, have risen up to 8 percent in size (Ford and Kench, 2020). 89% of the globe’s islands and 100% of large islands have stable or growing coasts (Duvat, 2019). No island larger than 10ha decreased in size. As regards NOAA tide gauge data, let's look at some examples from around the world. N.B. All sites show a linear Relative Sea Level Trend: Kanmen, China 2.40mm/yr; Sydney, Australia 0.75mm/yr; Ferandina Beach, Florida 2.20mm/yr; Los Angeles, California 1.04mm/yr; Mera, Japan 3.8mm; Cascais, Portugal 1.32mm/yr; Newlyn, UK 1.94mm/yr. Jevrejeva, et al (2014) estimated 2 mm/year (± 0.3), and Church and White (2006) estimated 1.7mm/year (± 0.3). So that's a total rise of between 126 and 151mm (less than 6 inches) from 2024 to the end of the century. A paper from Frederikse et al (2018) shows a global trend of 1.5 ± 0.2 mm yr−1 over 1958-2014. That's 6cm by 2050, and 30cm by 2100. Or try PSMSL data: Kwajalein (Marshall Islands) 1.95mm/yr; Maldives (Indian Ocean) 3.21mm/yr; Lautoka (Fiji Islands, Pacific Ocean) 3.50mm/yr; Port Elisabeth (South Africa) 2.34mm/yr. Anyway, if you prefer satellite data NOAA's trend was +3.0mm/year Global Mean Sea Level (1993-2022), again linear last time I looked for each set of satellite data (but hey, it may have accelerated in the last month). NASA satellite data (1993-present) for Global Mean Sea Level shows a rise of 3.3mm per year. That's the same as two stacked penny coins. There is no relationship to the increase in CO2 in the atmosphere. It's going to be decades before even your big toe is submerged.
Ok dumbbell how you planning on going to all these different countries and traveling around in general,don't try to tell us you will walk or maybe they will all be electric or solar power.One track minds don't ever figure on ways to do what they do when they say the stupidest things and mess around and get something actually shut down.In this day and age even this crock a bologna is dumb maybe the dumbest thing a person who's supposed to be smart could come out with.So far all her bull has not come to pass.But that's because she dose what she's told and dosent know how to figure out that what the truth would be ,if she has she's not much of a humanitarian to keep up with the bull
Il n'y aucune preuve formelle que les CC ont des causes anthropiques!! Vous répétez la propagande du giec (groupe inter-gouvernemental sur le climat et non pas groupe d'experts IPCC!!!) qui ne parlent pas des élements fondamentaux qui induisent des CC tels que les cycles de Milankovic, du cycle de l'activité du soleil, de l'activité du noyau terrestre, de l'augmentation de la température de la croute terrestre et du volcanisme! Tout ce que ces docteurs nous présentent est une leçon apprise par coeur instruite par ce giec! Oui, parler des gaz à effet de serre est important, mais savent-ils que la vapeur d'eau est le principal gaz et non pas cette infâme manipulation que les petits pets humains de CO2 etc..sont la cause des CC! Le seul bénefice de cette manipulation est qu'on prend conscience sur le plan environnemental pour protéger les ressources naturelles planétaires et arrêter leur prédation par les capitalistes ultraliberaux et non pas par les populations sur terre! L'argument fallacieux de la démographie croissante par l'approche malthusienne est une honte!!!!
ISN'T ABOUT TIME WE PHASEOUT THIS FRAUD??? AFTER ALL SHE DELETED MASSIVE AMOUNTS OF HER SPEWN GARBAGE ON HER COMPUTER THAT DID NOT COME TO PASS!! THE CARP IS PRETTY THICK WHEN GRETTA TALKS AS HER SOURCES AND WHAT THEY REALLY TELL US NOTHING!! DID NOT THE GERMANS TEAR DOWN THEIR WINDMILLS AND TURBINES TO GET AT THE COAL UNDER THEM DURING A COLD SPELL IN GERMANY JUST A YEAR OR TWO AGO!!
ah yes she flyes around the world all year telling people not to fly around so heartwarming to see the left literally use kids for their shite propaganda but hey by know we all know which political side most of the groomers and child predators reside
The media focus on CO2 and "emissions" is a false flag operation by Big Oil/Coal to redirect us away from the true source of climate collapse: waste and trapped HEAT ENERGY. Ironically, those fools complaining about "governments" not doing enough to save us from the obvious oncoming end of life on earth time apparently do not realize that each and every one of us 8B+ humans metabolizes carbon based foods and release about 2,200 Kcal/day into the environment, along with the heat generated by the domestic meat animals we raise. AC installers plan for 160 BTUs of cooling for every human per hour, or 3840 BTUs/day. We are a huge part of the problem and the real problem is HEAT ENERGY.
THis is just more HOPIUM!! The cake is baked and ready to come out of the oven. Tipping points cant be uncrossed in a day, week, decade, century. The wealthy know MOST of us arent going to be here in 2050!
Yes corporations and billionaires are indeed running the world (as has been the pattern of human history in relation to power and control). The BIG difference right now is that the impact of climate change IS going to be the real, inescapable, "great leveller". Nothing the modern world of economics and finance has created (including the vast wealth of the rulers) will survive this coming change. So while we all will suffer under climate change, all life on earth, in human civilization the richest most powerful will end up feeling it hardest, as they lose EVERYTHING they value (wealth). The poor will suffer as they always have, but they loose the least overall, and in many cases will be in the best place to survive the collapse of world economies and slow fall of civilization. The third world knows how to survive, the wealthy rich not so much. So it is ironic that the richest are still driving their own collapse.
When my wife first suggested that dark matter might be causing climate change I laughed. Dark matter after all should be a constant, I thought. When we began looking at the data I stopped laughing. Dark matter it seems is not a constant. Global Warming is happening but dark matter is the chicken and Co2 is the egg. Dark matter phase transitions appear to be a primary climate driver. If the solar system passes through an area of higher liquid dark matter content the planets cores would all receive more heat due to increased phase transitions thus heating the earth from the inside out. Heating of the planet from the inside out would result in : Increased ground temperatures Increased sea temperatures Increased nighttime temperatures Increased seismic activity Increased earthquakes We are currently passing through the S1 dark Matter stream which, as it is going the opposite direction around the galaxy was described as a dark matter hurricane. From spring to fall the earth is downstream from the sun. And from July to December the earth is traveling with the S1 stream and from January to June we get our maximum ongoing dark matter exposure as we travel into the S1stream. There have also been peer reviewed papers about climate change that discuss dark matter annilhilation heating the earth from the inside, they did not mention any impact to climate change. We may also be subject to surges of dark matter June-July 2020 Earth Mercury Venus Mars Jupiter Saturn conjunctions. This means that the earth passed through several consecutive dark matter streams July 2020 Siberian heatwave and Antarctica temperature spike Jan 9 2022 Venus Earth conjunction this resulted in an increase in the amount of dark matter leaving the sun and Venus March 18 2022 Concordia Station spiked 39 C degrees due to unusual air patterns near Australia North Pole regions hit 30C above normal May 2022 mars crosses the dark matter stream to Saturn May 4, 2022 a 4.7 magnitude Marsquake occurs due to tectonic activity. March 26 2024 the Parker Solar Probe began its lap around the sun on April 4 it came out on the other side of the sun to start back towards Venus. In between it was actually inside of the Alfven Limit which is where I believe the surface of the dark matter sphere that surrounds the sun lies. This would be the equivalent of a speed boat sending a wake towards the earth. April 11 mercury and earth are in an inferior conjunction which would also send a bit of extra dark matter in earths direction. Mid June 2024 multiple heat waves. Venus atmospheric temperatures from 2009-2017 also were higher after conjunctions and the atmospheric wind speeds have increased by 33% probably due to the increase in incoming dark matter. Venus atmospheric temperatures from 2009-2017 also were higher after conjunctions Venus atmospheric tsunami If the dark matter spin off to the sun happens every 5 days on average and coincides with the wave facing the sun it may be proof of dark matter. During conjunctions if the tsunami is facing earth we get an extra surge of dark matter heading to the earth which also affects the time it takes for the tsunami to circle Venus. The gravity well fills up and dumps back to the sun but if it fills faster due to a conjunction it can spill toward the earth resulting in higher temperatures about 60 days later. The streams of liquid dark matter are constantly overflowing the suns dark matter sphere which extends to the Alfven radius. This distance varies dependant on how much dark matter reaches the point at which it vaporizes. (Velocity/gravity/temperature) NASA issued a climate change warning for Mars after Mariner 9 Neptune has been heating up since 2018
There is no objective observational evidence that we are living in a global climate crisis. The UN's IPCC AR6, chapter 12 "Climate Change Information for Regional Impact and for Risk Assessment", section 12.5.2, table 12.12 confirms there is a lack of evidence or no signal that the following have changed: Air Pollution Weather (temperature inversions), Aridity, Avalanche (snow), Average precipitation, Average Wind Speed, Coastal Flood, Agricultural drought, Hydrological drought, Erosion of Coastlines, Fire Weather (hot and windy), Flooding From Heavy Rain (pluvial floods), Frost, Hail, Heavy Rain, Heavy Snowfall and Ice Storms, Landslides, Marine Heatwaves, Ocean Acidity, Radiation at the Earth’s Surface, River/Lake Floods, Sand and Dust Storms, Sea Level, Severe Wind Storms, Snow, Glacier, and Ice Sheets, Tropical Cyclones.
Claire it doesn't matter HOW to remove the co2, what matter's is that it is POWERED by a non-co2 emitting energy source. There is only ONE ultimate means: atomic. There is only ONE source of the necessary money: a carbon tax on the fossil fuel industry. Attack the concept of why the industry deserves to keep their TRILLIONS by selling the world power that is killing the planet.
Claire stop being so naïve. The "government" has always "stepped up." Stepped up to the fossil fuel MONEY that gets those politicians elected that continues on with the fossil fuel narrative that puts TRILLIONS into the fossil fuel bank accounts. Your words are important and true but of no consequence, get serious. Change your strategy and approach, you really think that you can simply "educate" people about the danger? No enough until the "people" start voting fossil fuel politicians OUT OF OFFICE. YOU must start to politically support candidates who will support the change and politically attack the candidates who will not support the change. The Oil Will End, co2 or no co2. Do some research, HOW and WHY did the Suffragette Movement succeed in Britain and the US? HOW do the Guns lobbies in the US become so powerful with their endorsements? Emulate them.
LOL Walk the walk stop using fuel based products. The people must pay the price, with their lives if needed right? She is nothing but a useful idiot to the globalist regime and a hypocrite for using fossil fuel herself. You dont want to use it then dont. Dont tell me what to do.
Classic virtue signalling for a fake cause, used by the globalists to lie to her generation. Ours is not fooled. She is a paid puppet for her generation.
What precise eligibility criteria makes this " hideous brat" to lecture adults. If she is so upset about clinate change then she should end herien "misery" .
No the real problem is Canada. If we reduce our carbon we can make a huge difference and save the world. From what I have no idea but they keep repeating it LOL. Must be true.
