People have got it all wrong about how to reverse man-made climate change. It's as though we are facing backwards on a bicycle but pedaling forwards. Well, I've turned myself around and I'm facing forward now. The core cause of man-made climate change is our behavior towards the environment, and this is the first thing that we must change. Our behavior is driven by the following equation: "profit = income - expenses". The reason why we aren't correcting our behavior is that it is too expensive to do so. Our first step must be to change the meaning of "economic expenses". I know how to do this: "profit = protecting and enriching the environment, and sharing the sustenance that it provides to all of us". This profit model works because it changes the meaning of "economic expenses". Now there are only two expenses. It is a major expense to ignore the fact that in nature's economy our main job is to protect and enrich the environment. It is also an expense to damage the environment unnecessarily.
Yes. We must change the way we measure success and standard of living. You can be blissfully happy living in a small cob hut with minimal possessions and growing your own food. The only way we are going to make a dent in this problem is to lose the delusion that buying more stuff is the road to happiness and status. I'm growing my own food. I would love to live in a cob hut but government won't let me. It's either a big high environmental impact house or a park bench or tent. No in-between is allowed. Governments need to make it easier to live a low co2 lifestyle.
Couldn't agree more. You aren't the first or only one to say this. What will it take to kick-start real change? There are several good responses to this but not addressed by the scientists yet. It's part of the reason we're not getting anywhere. Sadly people aren't moved by data and statistics, only by emotion creating the desire to change, and the urgent necessity. Good wishes
The raw data should be made easily accessible for the public. i.e. the reflects what they are saying, so it can be further scrutinised. Not that we don't trust you. Just that it's helpful to make the case, publicly, if the raw data is made readily accessible to the public.
There have been End of the World cults in every generation. This is yours. The funny thing is that there's always some ostensibly legitimate "expert" who makes some predictions. When those predictions fail to materialize, the cult is usually abandoned -- not so in the current case.
Yeah, no. When AMOC collapses (as soon as 2025) temperatures in Europe will plummet to be equivalent to Canada on the same latitude. (Canada isn't benefiting from the warmer water being currently channelled north by AMOC. Winter is coming! to the northern hemisphere.)
@@skudlugs I'm snuggled in next to the Coral Sea in Australia so I'll grow the bananas for you (assuming sea level doesn't rise too much). You guys in the northern latitudes will have enough to worry about with icy weather and rising electricity costs. Maybe invest in insulation and thermal/ ski clothing.
I am very high above sea level here, I hope your coral sea area does okay but we Scots like the cold weather! I do not think any region will escape in all honesty and that saddens me.@@whatbringsmepeace
I like how people act just like you just build bountiful clean energy sources to replace the non-clean sources overnight. It's almost like there are no solutions, only trade-offs. But that can't be the case here in Magical Fairy-Dust Rainbow Land -- where we all live and breathe. FYI, governments insure those plants, so I guess you don't know what you're talking about.
This reporting reminds me of the effectivity of the NASA engineers who brought their data and their charts to a presentation where they communicated to NASA launch decision makers (who were NOT technical engineers) that they should not launch the Challenger because the cold temps could affect the shuttle's o-rings. You know the rest of the story. What we had here was a failure to communicate. For godsake. The planet is dying. This is irreversible. Ten degrees celsius of global warming is already "built in" and going to happen, even if all human activity ceased today. Nothing on the planet can survive a 10 degree celsius increase in temps. Tell people in plain language what is really happening. Get the Biden Administration to declare a climate emergency and work with other nations to deal with the 469+ nuclear reactors that can no longer be kept cool -- unless we take drastic measures and move them away from the oceans to where they can be cooled. "As of May 2023, there are 410 operable power reactors in the world.... Additionally, there are 59 reactors under construction and 100 reactors planned...while 325 more reactors are proposed." Under severe global warming conditions that are only going to get worse, THIS IS INSANITY.
@@erdelegy What crisis? Are you referring to the supposedly "hottest temperatures in 120,000 years"? If you believe the garbage spewed by morons like Ilhan Omar et. al. then you really do need to get your advice elsewhere...!
The planet isn't dying -- not according to nature. Wake up and be an adult. Any adult would know that those who are instilling "clear and present" fear and crisis are lying to you. Just because someone has absolute power over you doesn't mean they have your best interests in mind. In fact, it almost never means that. Only children believe in some paternal salvation. Trust no expert if he can't prove his premise -- and none of these "experts" have been able to prove anything. They can't even predict anything -- and they've failed to do so for 30 years of this GCC religion.
Their data doesn’t support a climate crisis, only climate models who have always been wrong. CO2 has NO correlation to temp in ice core data going back centuries
Government has no special interests which influence policy and promises. Rest easy gentle reader, your government will take care of everything for you -- we have your best interests at heart. We promise. Just keep paying those taxes on time. We'd hate to send a squad of armed agents to bust down your front door, put you in chains, then throw you in prison for failure to give us what we politely asked of you. Know your place, citizen. We love you -- but you must work and you must pay us and do as we say. We shall do everything we can to lighten your burdens. We legalized bribery in order to serve you best. We made exceptions for insider trading for us in order to serve you best. We aren't a collection of self interested Machiavellians who are particularly good at selling narratives -- despite what those naysayers like Aristotle, Machiavelli, and the rest have been asserting. Governments exist to serve the vast mass of the public at government's expense. We are but mere servants. We can be trusted to equitably distribute the resources at our command. Don't worry. We'll inform you of the depredations we're going to inflict upon you and your families so that we can save you all. When you see that we behave as if we don't believe what we're telling you, don't worry. We're the Experts and entirely uncorrupted and incorruptible. We'd honestly tell you if we were compromised. Rest easy. We've got this. Just be as fearful as we tell you to be --- and endure every ounce of suffering we tell you to tolerate so that we can tell you when you can stop being afraid. Any choice you make out of the fear and desperation we instill will always benefit you and your children. We're all in this together!
I wonder what the difference is between the amount of environmental pollution that is created by NASA vs the average individual US household? It should be fairly obvious that the organizations that have the most money & power to make effective changes are the very ones that contribute the most to the narrative being given.
@@bicenulge765A great way to see where this problem came from, is to look at videos showing CO2 emissions on a map, animated to show their increase over time. At first, in the early 1800s, all the emissions come from two places: Germany and Britain. Then in the late 1800s the US joins the club. Then some other parts of Europe. And so on. Someday NASA will have to look at their own emissions. But right now, they are a drop in the ocean as far as emissions are concerned. If they were shut down tomorrow, it would make no difference at all, except that we would become blind to what is happening. Maybe that's what you want? What is driving climate change is the many thousands of fossil fuel burning power plants operating 24-7 year after year burning and burning and burning and burning. They are the main driver, along with gas powered heavy industry, and many millions of gas powered home appliances, and many millions of internal combustion vehicles. All of these burners will have to be shut off and replaced with other systems that do the job without fossil fuels. Only this will stop the warming. The energy transition is underway. As long as the fossil fuel companies don't sabotage it, this transition will get us off of fossil fuels and stop the warming.
The warming ocean is a layer of climate change I’ve only recently (last 10 years) been made aware of. Watching the Marshall, Coffee, Paradise, and Lahaina fires as a US citizen is terrifying. And humans are the cause every time, whether that be downed power lines due to high winds in conjunction with drought and abundance of non native grasses, etc. or an intensification of natural events like El Niño combined with excess greenhouse gases, all living beings MUST adapt. Get off the grid, grow your own food, and build your own small sustainable home! Governments must lead those who don’t understand or don’t have the means. The military industrial complex and petroleum/ chemical / tech industries are obscenely wealthy. This wealth ultimately comes from the earth’s resources and human’s labor. It’s time to give back to the Earth, it’s our ONLY island home. Check out the Hokule’a voyage and Moananuiakea project of Pacific Voyaging Society- on their way south from Seattle now. 43,000 nautical mile indigenous cultural exchange to bring awareness to our Earth and its systems- especially the ocean.
My friend, it's wealth that keeps you safe. When a hurricane hits the American Eastern Seaboard, 30 people might die. When they hit the Philippines 20,000 often die. This applies to every single threat facing humanity whether its weather related, Earthquakes or pandemics. Millions are currently fleeing poverty and migrating to wealthy nations for a reason. Nature is not nurturing. It is not some kind of pristine place of harmony and purity that humans, like a parasite are wrecking. In fact, the Earth is a hostile place that will kill you at any opportunity. Humans have made it safer and more livable with each passing century resulting from economic growth.
That's where we, the viewers, come in... you can't expect them to guide you every step along the way. Also, they literally have no power. Their sole purpose is to research, and they're now providing the analysis. Every individual is responsible to act in whatever way they (think they should, can afford, are willing to afford). Whether it's to spread awareness, donate, cancel junk mail that ends up in the garbage, recycle, install solar, drive electric, utilize public transportation, buy a bamboo toothbrush, compost, go paperless, take shorter showers, repurpose, carpool, treat your A/C better, meat-free Mondays, vote, advocate renewable AND nuclear energy, literally take your pick.
@@dedryu That is all obvious and most of us have been doing it. What isn’t being done is new legislations against corporate greed and fossil fuel corporations. Is that something ordinary public can tackle? Obviously not. So my question is, what is government doing about it?!
@ded_ryu5522 , in my opinion, you've hit the nail on the head! It's up to each and everyone of us to engage into the 'fight' against global warming. If the governments are making half-hearted pledges to limit emissions and we criticise them for their inaction, shouldn't we follow with our personal efforts?
@@miaross777 They provide information. The policy makers and decision makers are supposed to use the information and do their job. The citizens are supposed to elect policy makers and decision makers that are capable of understanding science and obligated by principal to make best decisions on behalf of the citizens they represent. But that is an idealist expectation and far removed from the actual state of how many citizens understand and pay attention and consequently what policy / decision are in charge resulting in policies that do not align with what the science says is needed for Earth to remain hospitable for our current population distribution.
I'm very glad you mentioned economics because the core cause of man-made climate change is "profit = income - expenses". This old profit model defines the entire environment, and that also includes all of us, as expenses. How sick and bizarre when we consider that all of our actual gains come to us from the environment. How about this instead: "profit = protecting and enriching the environment, and sharing the sustenance that it provides to all of us". This profit model works because it changes the meaning of "economic expenses". Now there are only two expenses. It is a major expense to ignore the fact that in nature's economy our main job is to protect and enrich the environment. It is also an expense to damage the environment unnecessarily.
There is no “until”. Not for eight billion humans that only exist as a direct result of fossil fuels. Not for a globalized civilization that remains utterly dependent on them for literally everything we need now simply to survive. Not for a society that puts it’s highest priority on a monetary system based fossil fuels. Not for a species so rapidly consuming it’s own habitat to it’s own demise with or without fossil fuels.
Your opinion was assigned to you using your fear. There is no crisis and there never was. They've been making predictions for 30 years. None have materialized. Not one. How many more years will it take for people to understand that government doesn't care about their people and it's impossible for them to function in that way.
Change is happening now. Massive battery factories are being built now, all over the world. They will form a part of the global energy transition that will take us off of fossil fuels. The transition needs to be accelerated. If it is not sabotaged by the fossil fuel companies or the "free market" devotees, this transition will get us off fossil fuels and stop the warming. The only question is how long we will take getting the job done.
3 or 4 observations I found valuable: There are local and momentary contributors to climate change, and medium term factors - such as the change in the rainfall belt in the Pacific. Also the phrase "threat multiplier" is quite handy. Climate change is a threat multiplier (~17:25). We've been looking at this attributional problem [i.e., human caused climate change, or natural variation?] for many decades now, and what we've found is that the long-term trends we've been seeing since the 19th century, particularly since the 1970s, they are all due to anthropogenic effects (18:15-18:35.) And that anthropogenic component, the human part of this, is driven mostly by greenhouse gases: carbon dioxide, methane second, chloroflourocarbons, also ozone. And then changes in air pollution, deforestation, all help. But all of those things are human created. Without those human contributions to the drivers of climate change , we would not be seeing anything like the temperatures we're seeing right now (18:42-19:08). The temperatures we are now experiencing, you can only get those temperatures if you include those greenhouse gas emissions into the atmosphere and the land use change we have created on the Earth. And so as a result, you only get the temperatures that we have right now, the enhanced warming, this [statistically anomalous] value that is so far exceeding what our natural climate would be. So we are in a different climate state as a result right now (19:57-20:20).
One day, when your pockets are finally fully filled To your greedy heart's content, There will be nothing to spend it on, Nothing to see, Nothing to do. No one to consume it with, And almost nowhere it will matter. You scorched the earth in search of gold. Now turn to all the ash and spend it.
Problem is, I don't know anybody who can stop driving their car, including me. What is your answer to this problem? Cause I don't have one. Best I can do is drive less, use less, buy less.
Maybe get an electric car if you can afford it. If not, a smaller petrol engine car, no diesel. And if you really have to drive diesel, again see if you can switch to a smaller engine. Even if it's only a couple of hundred ccs smaller engine, that's something. Bonus is you'll save money on your journeys too.
Trees arent fast enough my friend, large hydoponically grown bamboo, algea farms, rock weathering, and Biochar are our best Bio-Solutions. We do have new technology in the field of carbon sequestration that pulls co2 directly from the atmosphere,@greg234234
@@kudr66 Yeah, don't mention it because it's not the same science that allows you to even know about the medieval warm period that measures current climate change. Nooooo, completely different, and they don't talk to each other.
@kudr66 can you then share with us the titles of some of the peer reviewed articles and abstracts on climate related science that you have read that have helped you form your opinion? Thanks in advance.
of course not. These people are not allowed to step on anyone's toes. They are like old people without a single tooth to bite with. Or like a declawed cat!
Shhhh. You're giving up the game. If they believed what they were saying, they'd be attacking this like the ostensible threat to humanity that it is. You're too smart. If you keep asking quesitons like this, you'll end up on a list.
The expansion of water from heating is certainly insignificant compared to ice melt globally. The observation of coral bleaching should be more accurately linked to hazardous waste burners and cogeneration power plants.
Hate to break it to you, but there's more coral than ever before. It's almost as if it evolved though repeated cosmic and volcanic extinction events over hundreds of millions of years. If an asteroid can smash into this planet and throw up enough CO2 and SO2 to suffocate all dinosaurs, then our trickle of CO2 is sure to destroy all life on Earth... some day... in some way... so they say.
More climax scam, hoax, and fear mongering. Let's enslave masses, while big corporations being protected from their careless and ignorant approach and deeds as well as filthy rich individuals (who own those corporations, NASA, and other 'trustworthy' organisations and institutions) keep using their private jets, while you eat zee bugz, giving up on your personal comfort and going 'green' using pushbike pedaling from and back to your cubicle or 'tiny house', while the elite's grinning in their luxury cars passing by, driving from and back to their huge fortresses, happily consuming the energy that you, naive and obedient citizen, saved for them. All in name of the 'cult of true science' (using twistwed facts).
Over the psst 30 years sea levels have risen at least 3 feet.Over the next 30 years expect another 3 feet of increase. This is going to have a significant impact on nuclear power plants along America's coastline-especially along the eastern seaboard.
Hunga Tonga the volcano? It's impact will last only a few years with maximal impact falling in 2022 and declining from there. We are talking about a multi-decade increase in the several factors contributing to the thermal capacity of the atmosphere and oceans. This is why they are talking about current long-term contributors plus the future projected boost by the current el niño cycle. Hunga Tonga, in other words, like el niño, has a temporary impact. El niño's coming year of impacts will be far greater than the one very large volcanic eruption now 20 months passed.
@@ScotHarkins HT is indeed temporary and you did not answer the question but rather chose to espouse on a not relevant stuff. Clearly these natural oscillations in currents and upwellings play a major role in weather. We are back on a warming cycle here in the NH and this is made worse globally by the addition of huge levels of GHG to our tropo and strato-spheres. I am reacting to your conflation of a natural phenomena with AGW
Using reconstructions of global climate, Jenkins and his colleagues established the monthly baseline conditions for the 7 years prior to the eruption, then simulated the effect of water vapor in the stratosphere for 7 years after the event. The researchers assumed that the injected water vapor would settle out of the stratosphere in that time. Their model parameters are conservative, Jenkins said, and assumed the volcanic plume spread widely between altitudes and latitudes. The model calculated the monthly change in Earth’s energy balance caused by the eruption and showed that water vapor could increase the average global temperature by up to 0.035°C over the next 5 years. That’s a large anomaly for a single event, but it’s not outside the usual level of noise in the climate system, Jenkins said. But in the context of the Paris Agreement, it’s a big concern.
These add nothing to the warming trends. However, the warming trends do add to the degradation of the ocean ecosystems. I don't know how much a chatbot will care, but there's your answer.
If the climate is warming...when do we start talking about the largest co2 emitter on the planet? The US military? If people cared about the planet so much why aren't they trying to stop these wars all over the place? Hello?
@@grindupBaker I looked through the content on this channel.... Hundreds of videos about climate change and zero on the largest co2 emitter on the planet.. How is that even possible?
Can someone please advise a peer reviewed paper on the causal effect of ~+0.1C for a non-super El Niño and whether there is a trough for La Niña of -0.1C? A super El Niño seemed to be occurring every 22 years in the solar cycle, but I am sure that one cannot say that with certainty, though there I understand there to be peer reviewed evidence for a link of ENSO to the solar cycle. Thank you!
time wasted on yet another study that does not solve any tangible outcome of current pollution and waste. Feed back loops and nincompoops Nature is not on our schedule either. Humans will not do what is required until they are on their knees and praying and find gawd. ShakeUp XR
AFAIK there is known strong correlation, not sure if the causal link was already identified (see "Recommended" at the end). However, the La Nina in 2020 was successfully predicted by Leamon et al. in 2017: _"we expect a rapid transition into La Niña conditions later in 2020 following the sunspot cycle 24 terminator"_ The problem was that at that time it was so "revolutionary" that it was rejected several times and was finally published in 2021 in Earth and Space Science, Volume 8, Issue 4 - "Termination of Solar Cycles and Correlated Tropospheric Variability", Leamon et al., 2021 Then there was a follow up paper with recapitulation: "The triple-dip La Niña of 2020-22: updates to the correlation of ENSO with the termination of solar cycles", Leamon, 2023 This whole story is very good testament to the state of our "science". Anything that links our sun to the climate is refused. Recommended (potential link): Then there was another paper that shows that sun is about 10x more significant than what is currently acknowledged: "Using the oceans as a calorimeter to quantify the solar radiative forcing" (Shaviv, 2008)
I don't see why anyone would claim a casual link of super El Niños to a 22 solar cycle because the strongest El Niños have occurred at variable intervals. 1982-83, 1997-98, 2015-16 and now possibly 2023-24. Going from a 15 year interval to an 18 year interval to an 8 year interval. There's not enough data to draw a conclusion.
More climax scam, hoax, and fear mongering. Let's enslave masses, while big corporations being protected from their careless and ignorant approach and deeds as well as filthy rich individuals (who own those corporations, NASA, and other 'trustworthy' organisations and institutions) keep using their private jets, while you eat zee bugz, giving up on your personal comfort and going 'green' using pushbike pedaling from and back to your cubicle or 'tiny house', while the elite's grinning in their luxury cars passing by, driving from and back to their huge fortresses, happily consuming the energy that you, naive and obedient citizen, saved for them. All in name of the 'cult of true science' (using twistwed facts).
Anyone want to bet that the most popular comment on the thread will be why there was no discussion about volcanoes? Actually, there was a merde-load of water vapor projected into the atmosphere, and by not talking about it you open yourselves up to criticism.
I've had enough! I can no longer stand, BEAR, temperatures higher than 32, 33° C, I'm 58 and live at 51°N, central Europe. This is insanity. I'm glad I don't have childrens of my own yet I have nephwes
Exactly what "climate" is the right one? What % of CO2 ?? What mean temperature? What ended the last ice age? Was that bad? They just alarm, but can't tell you what the correct values are.
The sooner the public acknowledges the fact we are entering unknown territory is regard to weather, the sooner we can make reasonable plans for save lives and preserving a comfortable lifestyle. Thanks for the information. 😐👍💙🇺🇸🕊
How's about we turned off every factory farm and threw everyone back to the land to fend for themselves? At least then people would have something to do instead of driving around aimlessly and staring at their phones like me now...?
A scientific paper has already been published cover this, once the ice is gone the Hadley cell will reverse and the polar vortex will be replaced with convection zone instead. This will result in temperate rain forest surrounding the Arctic ocean in place of the boreal forest.
@@allanwilmath8226 prove it. My hypothesis is that it won’t and i ask you to disprove that. You alarmists just make stuff up. May, might, probably, experts say, likely to, ought etc… well you ought to stop spouting nonsense
The peak of natural global warming in our current interglacial was roughly 3000 yrs ago. It has been cooling since that peak. As it cools, Earth will have cyclical warming periods on the way down to glacial maximum. It's like a ball bouncing down a very long hill. Eventually, that ball stops bouncing and just rolls to a stop. We currently see 400 year warming periods, and 400 year cooling periods. But the long term trend is cooling. The longer term cycle is 120,000 to 128,000 years from interglacial to interglacial. This loosely coincides with Milankovitch theory. But even that cycle has variations. Then there is the fact that it could all stop happening and Earth goes into a natural greenhouse period. Greenhouse periods are not disasters. They are a time of growth and species radiation. We must always remember that Earth is a garden and that WE are not the only life that exists here. Insects, reptiles, plants, birds, and fish love warm weather. They thrive in the sun and the warmth. When dinosaurs dominated the Earth for 175 million years, the average temperatures were well above what they are right now. Global co2 averages were in the thousands. Cold kills life. Warmth supports life. One more thing. STOP CUTTING DOWN ALL OF THE TREES. You're killing the forest.
Yes. It took millions of years for dinosaurs to evolve, though. They didn't disappear overnight either. The current changes in climate started only 250 years ago, and are increasing on a daily basis.
@PavelDatsyuk-ui4qv Yes. Lately, it's been averaging every 400 to 600 years. There are documented patterns with names. A. Roman warm period B. Medieval warm period C. Little ice age In between these periods, is it considered average weather? Or is it a cooling period? If you average out temperatures and global carbon dioxide levels just since the appearance of multi cellular life, We are in an unusually cold period in geologic time. Over the last 542 million years, the average global atmospheric carbon dioxide level has been 1960 PPM. The average global temperature has been at least 10°F warmer during that time. The last time Earth was this cold was the late Ordovician glaciation extinction. 70% of marine species. There were no terrestrial species at that time because photosynthesis had not produced enough atmospheric oxygen to create the ozone layer. By the way... There is only one way to create ozone or to destroy ozone. The lack of or the abundance of atmospheric oxygen in the troposphere.
Look I know hope is in short supply but from my obsession with this topic I can tell you there is hope especially for those of you who care enough to stay informed and since you are here and have watched this video I will name a few things to be hopefull for. First lets get this out of the way, if you live anywhere close to the equator or in southern states you will have to move, these droughts and extreme heat will remain. The ice caps are melting and fast but ice will remain there for a long time, humanity can survive for another few hundred years or much longer if they adapt properly in the northern and southern hemispheres, there are forest in Greenland which can grow inland when the heat rises and a massive lake right in the middle of it that will be full of fresh water. As the world heats this place (with proper agricultural methods) will be farmable. Now that human survival is covered here are some things we are already thinking about to remove Co2 from the atmosphere. There are facilities being created today that pull co2 straght from the air, new studys in biochare and rock weathering are hopefull techniques that remove co2 in the air to use as products in agriculture, algea farms are being created, and my favorite new disovery is Bamboo which (one newly planted bamboo plant can sequester 2 tons of carbon dioxide in just 7 years. In comparison, a typical hardwood tree will sequester 1 ton of carbon dioxide in 40 years) so planting bamboo forest will be a slow but better method than trees yet trees still have to be planted as welll. Ecosystems will change drastically, species will go extinct, humanity may be brought to its knees but there is hope there are people taking this seriously and if you stay informed you may be well ahead of millions of other people. As for me im moving to minnisota where the new human climate niche will be in the next few decades, where the climate takes me next idk, Alaska? Canada? Greenland? Argentina? Idk but somehwere well away from my home state of Louisiana, ill miss her and my people but I have to look ahead and make future plans.
Giving up and running away won't change a thing. The core cause of man-made climate change is our collective behavior towards the environment, and the only way to correct our collective behavior is by changing the meaning of "economic expenses". The only way to do that is with this new definition of "profit": "profit = protecting and enriching the environment, and sharing the sustenance that it provides to all of us". This profit model works because it changes the meaning of "economic expenses". Now there are only two expenses. It is a major expense to ignore the fact that in nature's economy our main job is to protect and enrich the environment. It is also an expense to damage the environment unnecessarily.
"minnisota where the new human climate niche will be in the next few decades," Won't be so niche when eight billion people try climbing onto the same life raft.
being on the side of Good,. YOU acknowledge that there is something worth looking after that is greater than Yourself We are the tillers of this garden and the Custodians of this Library, .. also created by something Greater than Yourself. There is only Your Human potential that can be applied to this service that does indeed preserve Life and battle Evil/
They are just talking about it. No saving happening yet. How can "professionals" not figure out planned obsolescence in automobiles and other consumer products half-a-century after the Moon landing?
@@apostolosvranas4499 bs it's up to companies and government funding professionals to do work that reverses greenhouse heating not individuals the global economy would crash if everyone actually tried to solve this issue
Honga tonga volcano injected water vapor that increases temperatures globally. Yet it's impact is not included. Is this because it was a natural event?
It is because it has a tiny effect. Estimated at about 0.035°C contribution to the overall temperature rise in the atmosphere. It was in the math just not significant enough to mention, also a temporary effect instead of the other overall upward trend.
You mean B-i-l-l G-a-t-e-s and the US govt proudly spraying the skies (with god knows what) to block the sun and 'save' the planet, doing it all for us, poor slaves?
@@kudr66 Since 1975 when it was warming 0.18 degrees per decade and post 2010 when it's warming 0.28 degrees and now when global measurements are all doing the same rise and you want to suggest that the data from rural stations have not changed at all. If you want to say something, personally I think is stupid and ignorant but let's say it's as system altering as you might think it is then please by all means prove that rural stations have not changed at all, please offer or put me towards this groundbreaking info that you think it was worth your time writing and my time reading it. We could have another 55% jump in temps this el nino so please, pass on this precious proof..
Have you bothered to check this? I'm doing that now by copying and pasting your comment and the amount of lies you are spreading is sad. You can find the info yourself so why don't you? "Even looking at the monthly data we can see that more points are above 0 than below, and the magnitude of the anomaly is generally greater in the positive direction than the negative. So even if the chart didn't show warming during this 12 year period, it is showing warming compared to the baseline period from 1981 to 2010." Have you double checked what you are regurgitating?@@remdoczl8739
"There are huge non climate effects of carbon dioxide which are overwhelmingly favorable which are not taken into account. To me that's the main issue that the earth is actually growing greener. This has been actually measured from satellites the whole earth is growing greener as a result of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. So it's increasing agricultural yields, it's increasing the forests, it's increasing all kinds of growth in the biological world and that's more important and more certain than the effects on climate." ~Freeman Dyson, Institute of Advanced Study in Princeton, New Jersey.
Food plant yeilds are a result of GMO 😅. Greening is increasing again because we pushed for it globally since the 1970's😂. And even before that when we learned about our part in creating the dust bowl. Earth isn't greener than it was pre-industrial ....not even close. You shared cherry picked information
This line is a furphy. Climate change will create massive deserts that will offset any gains from the plants that are left. And, unless you also increase the amount of nitrogen in the soil, increased CO2 does nothing to speed plant growth. So outside of farmed areas that we fertilise, nothing will change. Apart from the size of the deserts.
And if human society was sufficiently advanced that we could accept millions of people fleeing the tropics to live in what we currently call temperate regions, this would be relevant. We're a long way away from Sar Trek, sadly.
Were are the date sets and the evidence of causality? This is just folks saying stuff and giving oppinions. Reality needs transparency and access to the data as we all know there have been many instances of data misrepresentation and models that suggest future development that is way out of touch with acctual progression.
The problem is industrial agriculture. They feed these animals the worst possible feeds because later on the Chipotle will load up the salsas and no one will care or tell the difference. In just about every industry in fact, governments are helping the big companies to consolodate power and that means the family farmer is being hung out to dry and go out of business. The best land and animal husbandry incorporates animals and plants in any ideal ecosystem. No friendly animals means you will have nothing but pests.
So you propose that animals are a principle cause? Even though natural phenomena blast forth with VASTLY more of these ostensible "greenhouse gases"? Your math doesn't check out.
Because it means nothing in the scheme of things, if we were talking usa, all animals are 5% of the total emissions, replacing just the food would mean another 2% added to the 5% that comes from agriculture. ruminants are 65% of the total at 3.25%. If you takeaway the 2% then 1.25% is left and from that you need to replace so many products. From pet food to make up to leather to possibly the stearic acid that is in the device you are reading this on, to activated carbon that could be in your water filter or filters your sugar. We feed them more of our waste from things like seed oils, than grain and if like beef they are mostly on non arable, self, fertilised and weather irrigated land, pretty hard to beat that. 90% of new global warming is from fossil fuels, going towards crops that need more tractors, sprays, fertilisers, irrigation, will not make the world better, especially when you consider just changing the food is not the full problem that need solving.
Can you then share with us the titles of some of the peer reviewed articles and abstracts on climate related science that you have read that have helped you form your opinion? Thank you in advance.
the consequences of ocean acidification need to be emphasized much more. the loss of coral reefs and the resulting inability of calcifying species to build their shells will lead to a chain of awul consequences. these are key stone species. coral reefs, sea urchins, sea snails, plankton, etc. are key sources of survival for quite literally every species on the planet.
Fire is a self-exciting phenomenon. The hotter it gets, the hotter it will get. That's why when I heard the head speaker of the U.N. say (in a different vid) that a 1.5 degree increase in global temperature over a ten-year period is acceptable, I felt horrified. Who told that jerk to say that? Fire doesn't passively cooperate: it increases exponentially. The more substance there is for it do burn, the more it will burn and the hotter it will get. There is a way to reverse man-made climate change. We must change our collective behavior towards the environment. "profit = protecting and enriching the environment, and sharing the sustenance that it provides to all of us". This profit model works because it changes the meaning of "economic expenses". Now there are only two expenses. It is a major expense to ignore the fact that in nature's economy our main job is to protect and enrich the environment. It is also an expense to damage the environment unnecessarily.
They don’t run the show. Conservative data is released to the public only after its approval from the economics community. Then it’s forwarded to governments for them to spin. And handed to corporate media to bury.
Why is water vapour not discussed here. the industrial production of massive amounts of water vapour causes more heat trapping as well as converting visible light from the sun into infra red light ( ergo heat) as well as dissolving the carbon , sulphur and nitrous dioxides to convert these into their respective acids as rain eventually.. ... the increase has made stratified layers of water vapour is now at higher altitudes than all previous decades... NASA already presented wv in the mid 2000s as the most important green house gas ( over and above carbon , sulphur and nitrous dioxides and why do they now fail to discuss this ?
Because water vapor has very short term effect on greenhouse heat retention. Atmospheric is long term. And most of the human activities that create atmospheric water vapor also create carbon emissions so cutting one cuts the other. Water vapor turns into clouds that reflect solar radiation, then it turns into rain and falls back into our oceans. Atmospheric carbon stays up there for decades. So human activities have barely changed atmospheric water vapor, when they massively increased atmospheric carbon. Even though the Tonga volcano was had an effect on global climate, the estimate is it is about 0.035° total effect vs the 1.5° we see from atmospheric carbon. Not really significant.
Here in Texas, there are hundreds of windmills that have been built and are operating as needed, depending on the electrical need. Yesterday was 108 degrees F, and we in a rural area did not lose electricity as we have many summers before.
Why isn't nasa explaining the shift in magnetic poles? A weaker magnetosphere, that is allowing more energy from the sun to warm our planet.? How is man-made climate change moving the poles?
We really need to know about the factors climate scientists won’t discuss: the human systems, both qualitatively and quantitatively. There is no boundary where the economy ends, and the climate system begins. They cannot be considered in isolation, nor can either be framed around liberal democratic assumptions as ‘natural’. This is a crisis of modernity, and scientists don’t have to make decisions, but they can tell us what is possible and consequential, albeit without doing so in ideological frames such as cost/benefit and value references such as market value.
What are you smoking. We are already at the edge of the abyss and you're still mealy mouthing about the economic impacts of not using fossil fuels. WTF up!
I think the climate scientists know exactly what to say. They're the scientists who study the environmental data. I agree that we need to also consider the effects on society, but this is a planet wide issue, not just a society issue.
You could look up oxone cascade and nuclear cascade to get a sense of the primary causes of global warming climate change. Greenhouse effect and greenhouse gases are blocking radiant cooling.
There's no crisis and nobody has proven this "effect". Maldives and Florida Keyes were supposed to be undwater by now. The predicted it 20 years ago. They were all wrong. There's no crisis and there never was. There was only a narrative and pretty charts and graphs we all nodded our heads to.
Nature has never been "wonderful". It will kill you at any given opportunity. Try going camping without any modern gear. A wolf that has evolved over 200,000 years to survive in its "natural" environment has a life span of around 2 - 4 years, lives a tortuous life of starvation and dies a horrible death. Place that wolf in an "un-natural" human environment and it can live to 14 years, lives a very comfortable life and dies a painless death.
Curious what you think about ocean volume increases which will exponentially increase pressures in deepest areas of oceans often adjacent lava ridges potentially effecting tectonic plates activity and volcanoes and super volcanoes activity
Earths Average Global Temperature In 1850 Was 60 Degrees f--In July 2023 It Rose To 62.6 Degrees f!!! That Is A Greater Than A 2.5 Degree f Increase In Global Average Temperature Since 1850!!! July 2023 Is An Ugly Snapshot Into The Near Future To Be Blunt!!!
Human cause is defined by the fact that millions upon millions park there ovens in the blazing sun and release that heat at closing time. If only we could trust each other and leave the windows open on those ovens.
Yeah, no. Do the math: e.g. 50 million cars a day per time zone releasing 43 degrees above ambience @ 5PM times x number of days per year. It's impossibly difficult to quantify, really, but it is an example of one more thing "advanced society" does without thinking of the impact.
Maybe we can get an endorsement of Edison generators and dynamos power plants to replace nuclear power plants and fossil fuels use. While realizing plastic solar panels are more dangerous than beneficial due to halogenated vinyl and halogenated carbon pollution.
Maybe we can get a breakdown on which chatbot technologies Chevron is using to generate all these seemingly psychotic comments so systematically and spamming them all over RU-vid.
I HOPE NASA DIRECTS THEIR EFFORTS AND BUDGETS TWARDS CLIMATE CHANGE, AS MOTHER EARTH IS BOILING. WE NEED HEALTHY MOTHER EARTH FOR THE CONTINUATION OF LIFE ON EARTH. MAY HEAVENLY FATHER AND SON BE WITH NASA & NOAA. AMEN
Ya - so what are we gonna do about it? We've already heard and seen enough but feel powerless as individuals to make any significant headway in turning this ship around.
It's obvious that the gasses that is returning to the atmosphere was always in the atmosphere as the temperatures dropped from the impacts certain gasses froze but are now returning to the atmosphere this is the normal way it was for millions of years
So many doesn't emit any gasses into the atmosphere? Certainly you're not saying that the CO² released by every engine that burns fossil fuels has always been in our atmosphere? Are you?
@@randal_gibbons When wine grew in northern England during Roman Climate Optimum so well that Roman Empire had to introduce tariffs to it what the cause of that? Or when Vikings settled in the Greenland in 10th century and farmed there for >200yrs during Medieval Warm Period until they died due to much colder climate when LIA started, what was the reason for that? Did everybody eat just beef and travelled around in SUVs back then?
@@kudr66 Much like the MWP, it was a regional change - with either no change or concordant opposing changes elsewhere - so it is likely due to changes in ocean current and/or changes in solar radiation affecting atmospheric circulation.
Sea level in Maine has not risen .....I'm not sure you really know. It seems to me that we are in pre ice age and continental shift. With the magnetic poles settled into their new locations one year ago,we are more geared for the next ice age then we are a scorched earth. You only go back to the 19th century. Weather patterns are much longer then that....do any of you have a clue??
More climax scam, hoax, and fear mongering. Let's enslave masses, while big corporations being protected from their careless and ignorant approach and deeds as well as filthy rich individuals (who own those corporations, NASA, and other 'trustworthy' organisations and institutions) keep using their private jets, while you eat zee bugz, giving up on your personal comfort and going 'green' using pushbike pedaling from and back to your cubicle or 'tiny house', while the elite's grinning in their luxury cars passing by, driving from and back to their huge fortresses, happily consuming the energy that you, naive and obedient citizen, saved for them. All in name of the 'cult of true science' (using twistwed facts).
Maine? What about the other 50 states? I heard the sea level in Oklahoma is up substantially. So therefore my comment is as ridiculous as yours. Maybe a little less.
@@randal_gibbons when the left political party says the sea level has risen 3 feet in 5he last 60 years,they are wrong......what else are they wrong about?...I think that it's a valid point even if you deny it
Scientist salaries are about average those of any other profession. If you want to find the millionaire they are sitting in Wall Street investing in oil
Currently rockets are about 7500t of atmospheric carbon emissions per year adding up all launches globally (only a percent of these are NASA if you were attempting to imply anything about their contributions to science not justifying their contributions to emissions). So that is 7500t out of the overall 50,000,000,000t of humanity emissions per year. Around 0.000015% of human caused emissions. So it would get great if rockets were lower or zero emissions, but it is not really the priority problem.
You have no idea how bad it is. We passed the tipping point long ago. It is not carbon, its sprawl and gasoline. Forget el niño. Look at Barents and impact of coastal heat islands.
Information, data and discussion are important but will not change criminal corporate governments. Only non-violent civil resistance will kick-start change in population attitudes and cost govt. The window for action to minimise social chaos and the millions of deaths and suffering already happening is closing rapidly. Many scientists privately admit the chances of success are low
Especially when those criminal corporations own govts, 'trustworthy' organizations, institutions, and charities as well the majority of scientists (generously sponsoring their research and studies, while at the same time the minority is being effectively silenced), using the cult of 'real science' against ordinary (and sadly, mostly well brainwashed) people, only to enslave them. The most sad thing is, these ordinary people are cheering these criminals, defending them, and clapping tirelessly. Stockholm syndrome.
We need to stop fossil fuel emissions rapidly (by 2030). We must ramp up renewables massively. We must establish energy storage via renewable power to gas in hydrogen and methane. We must increase energy efficiency. But we also have to cut back western consumption patterns (housing, appliances, textiles, cars, flights) quite drastically as the above mentioned measures alone are not sufficient to achieve sustainability.
That would have been great 30 years ago but now we only have a few years left and we are not even close. 2015 was Paris climate agreement and that was 8 years ago. 2030 is 7 years away and we have accomplished 0 reduction in GHG. We have failed. But who would have believed we could have alternatives to cement production, cattle methane, fertilizer, diesel ships and airline jet fuel. And EVs are still 5% of our fleet. Judging by the slow rate of our progress it’s now easily predictable that we have shifted our attention from mitigation to adaptation…then ultimately bankruptcy.
All of these are ideas are opinions which were assigned to you. There's no crisis and there never was. How do I know? Because I once believed it as fervently as you do -- up until about 5 years ago. When reality no longer matched what they've been selling for 30 years, I had to give it up. They don't use your logic, they use your fear. This is how you know they're lying to you.
@@michaeldavid6832except what is happening is what they said would happen. A lot of the actual data graphs match the predictions from 30 years ago and more. The time to act would have been 30 years ago but very few on the planet did, so we barely improved anything until recently when we have started to be able to physically see the changes formerly predicted. If more had changed 30 years ago we would not be seeing these "minor by some accounts" changes today. And the direction this thing is going towards catastrophy would not be so threatening.
We need more fossil fuels not less. Fossil fuels created the economic growth that brought us the modern world. It's the modern world and wealth creation that keeps you safe. The modern world mitigates and neutralizes threats from warming. Threats from everything. Poverty kills vastly more people than warming ever could. Meanwhile all climate policies induce greater poverty. It's not climate change that is the threat. It's the climate movement.
Heat domes are not unnatural. They are natural phenomena. Just like the greenhouse effect is a natural phenomenon. It's what happens when you put greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. Humans doing things that will hurt them in the long run: Natural phenomenon. Humans figuring out new and better ways to do things: Natural phenomenon.
We live in a democracy there are not decision makers and the public there are just the public who vote and make decisions about policy. I think that was a very significant Freudian slip.
@@michaeldavid6832 Exactly. More climax scam, hoax, and fear mongering. Let's enslave masses, while big corporations being protected from their careless and ignorant approach and deeds as well as filthy rich individuals (who own those corporations, NASA, and other 'trustworthy' organisations and institutions) keep using their private jets, while you eat zee bugz, giving up on your personal comfort and going 'green' using pushbike pedaling from and back to your cubicle or 'tiny house', while the elite's grinning in their luxury cars passing by, driving from and back to their huge fortresses, happily consuming the energy that you, naive and obedient citizen, saved for them. All in name of the 'cult of true science' (using twistwed facts).
"...on 25 January 2017, Trump's administration instructed United States Environmental Protection Agency to remove climate change page from their website."
Probably because China was defying all treaties as well. Look at the CO2 graphs per country. China is the VAST offender -- yet nobody demands they lift a finger. It's almost as if there could be a financial incentive for everyone to keep their mouths shut about the world's manufacturing location. As if nobody really believes in this "crisis" and they've just done it so they could offshore manufcaturing and destroy the middle class with a fiction designed perfectly to the task. But what do I know? I'm just really good at pattern recognition.
At a time when we need well educated scientists and marine biologist, DeSantis put a new board in place at New College to shut down marine science and start a baseball team. Republican were unwilling to forgive student debt but DeSantis board handed out 10,000 dollar scholarships to increase enrollment at New College while having returning students discover their major departments, like marine biology, no longer exist. So, students not studying baseball had to scramble to transfer to new schools. Florida has got to stop the insanity. Vote. Vote for the integrity and intelligence DeSantis does not have.
One would think that if climate change is responsible for increased wildfire action then why are the governments not responding by putting them out while they are small. In British Columbia most of the fires that have caused major concern have just been left to burn for over a month and until they threaten or burn people out
We have been masking our planet for a hundred years with soot and other reflective particles. If we remove those pollutants our atmosphere will automatically heat up another .5 degrees. So what do we do then? We continue to mask and hope we can last another few decades. Then it’s all over for future generations.
@@robertreyes9541 But aerosols rip holes in the ozone layer which increases temperatures even worse. It's not better. There's a lot of things going on all at the same time.
