Thought you might like this......
Climate Change
- Thread starter Addict2sex
- Start date
Thought you might like this......
I don't know who caused those fires but I think a
comparison of carbon emission level over 2016--
--2022 to what it was over 2006--2015 should place
Trudeau above Harper as the more likely cause. Libtards
here would want you to believe voting Trudeau and his
Liberals would save us from natural disasters though.
comparison of carbon emission level over 2016--
--2022 to what it was over 2006--2015 should place
Trudeau above Harper as the more likely cause. Libtards
here would want you to believe voting Trudeau and his
Liberals would save us from natural disasters though.
Wow, is that ever stupid.
This guy claims that glaciers 'hold' temperature 'memories' and that you can drill down and measure different depths and detect the temperature the ice was when it was created?
That's really stupid, have you not heard of heat transfer?
Your industry caused those fires, the oil&gas industry.
Good Climate News: New EPA Rule would make Fossil Fuel Plants cut Emissions 90% by 2040
yeah nutjob activists have no qualms about blocking roadways, gluing their faces to pavement, intentionally misleading children or destroying priceless works of art
but they draw the line at starting bush fires?
they are irrational , irresponsible lunatics , so yes they start wildfires
It's all great, but these two are the best:
#3 is pure gobbledygook. The 15 micron wavelength of what? Is saturated how? Are you trying to say that no 15micron radiation reaches through the atmosphere? You seem to be operating in a world where people don't have google. I'm not a beer-lambert expert, but that form of the equation has 6 conditions needed to be valid, none of which are true when it comes to the atmosphere. Further, the form of the equation that is applied to the atmosphere is not the one you posted here.
The tropopause is a boundary layer. It doesn't really have a temperature. But then you post a graph showing a 0.6°C increase in 40-ish years?
#3 is pure gobbledygook. The 15 micron wavelength of what? Is saturated how? Are you trying to say that no 15micron radiation reaches through the atmosphere? You seem to be operating in a world where people don't have google. I'm not a beer-lambert expert, but that form of the equation has 6 conditions needed to be valid, none of which are true when it comes to the atmosphere. Further, the form of the equation that is applied to the atmosphere is not the one you posted here.
what a ridiculous statement
height of troposphere in km - Google Search
The troposphere is where climate is determined and it is also where the alarmist scientists have predicted the warming will occur
of course there is a temperature
do you know of any other 20 km high sections of atmosphere without a temperature ??
and a 0.2 C decrease since 1998 despite a 17% increase in CO2 concentration . this is nearly a quarter of a century
Temperatures are just not following the alarmist play book
if you have to ask what the 15 micron wavelength is, you clearly do not have the slight clue about the absorption of electromagnetic radiation by organic molecules. this is the fundamental mechanism underpinning the greenhouse gas theory
hint: the 15 micron wavelength is the relevant absorption wavelength for Co2 , water vapor also absorbs at this wavelength
As i already mentioned absorption has a logarithmic relationship to concentration
if you are going to be rude at least avoid being ignorant as well and pay attention
incremental additions to concentration absorb diminishing incremental energy.... until you can no longer measure the incremental energy..
think of painting a barn red , the first two coats of red paint make the barn redder, the 8th or 9th coat do not make the barn appear redder, you are just wasting paint
the 15 micron wavelength is opaque when viewed from space
???
you seem to be operating in a world where scientific principals get ignored in favor of propaganda
no you are not
the Beer- lambert law is most commonly applied in solutions , no doubt your conditions are related to solution chemistry
the underlying principal is same for gasses
a photon traveling at the speed of light does not stop to ask if this is a solution or a gas
so now you confirm the Beer- lambert law is applied to the atmosphere??
Please make up your mind
no doubt the form of the equation is modified to account for the unit length l, which is length of the cuvette cell used in solution chemistry
the logarithmic relationship between absorption and concentration still holds true
like so many things in nature
[/QUOTE]
Last edited:
No no it's all because of poor forest management. Trump said it a few years ago. We need to vacuum our forest. Simple.
You actually went back and edited your original comment to say Troposphere and not Tropopause. To cover up for the fact that you were wrong. Not realizing that like 3 other people had quoted the original. On a message board dedicated to sex worker reviews...
Man, I've been arguing on the internet since the 90's. You've shown me something new today.
Go find a soup kitchen to volunteer at. Do some good in the world.
.
yep
no i strive to be accurate & fix typos when i notice them
irrelevant
just as irrelevant
and yet you still do not understand the subject matter
good please pay attention
go scare some more children with your lies
The troposphere is where climate is determined and it is also where the alarmist scientists have predicted the warming will occur
too bad for you Temperatures are just not following the alarmist play book
you think tropopause vs troposphere is a got ya moment
you are so wrong
it is clear you do not have the first loose clue about the absorption of electromagnetic radiation by organic molecules
this is the fundamental mechanism underpinning the greenhouse gas theory
yet you take the propaganda as absolute truth
you are out of your depth
you just spew propaganda & are incapable thinking for your self
Last edited:
poor forest management is a factor that can not be ignored, yet alarmist ignore this
just like cloud formation is ignored in climate models
just like urban island heat effect are ignored in surface temp records
just like natural variability is ignored (despite multiple ice ages before the industrial revolution)
just like the million sub sea volcanoes are ignored
just like solar variability is ignored
just like the abysmal computer model track record is ignored
but a 0.01% change in atmospheric composition is unquestionable proof positive of AGW ??
I do not think so
Last edited:
What role did climate change play in Alberta’s wildfires?
There are a few main ingredients behind wildfires in Alberta. The province’s particularly grim fire season so far this year — in which more than 400 wildfireshave burned more than 122,000 hectares of land, and displaced around 30,000 people — is mostly due to weather conditions, according to Mike Flannigan, research chair for predictive services, emergency management and fire science at Thompson Rivers University.
In particular, this is because, under climate change, Alberta is growing warmer and drier, creating an ideal stomping ground for wildfires. “I attribute this primarily to human-caused climate change. And the reason is, you know, as we get warmer, we are seeing more fires,” he told The Weather Network.
But it’s a complex issue, and there are many other factors that go into whether any given year is going to be average or a rager. And, not every factor this year (and others) is immediately connected to a warming climate, caused largely by burning fossil fuels.
Here’s what can and cannot be blamed on climate change this fire season, and going forward.
Did climate change literally start the fires?
Well, no. There’s not some kind of Captain Planet villain going around and starting fires. Captain Planet is a now ancient cartoon and this is real life. Wildfires generally start one of two ways: lightning, and human activities, a person flicking a cigarette butt into dry grass for instance. Mostly, but not always, these are accidental cases. Across Canada, the number of incidents where humans start wildfires has been decreasing thanks to things like fire bans. This holds true in Alberta too, where the five-year average, as of 2022, shows that 68 per cent of fires were caused by humans, and 32 per cent were caused by lightning. That year, the numbers were 61 and 38 per cent, respectively (one per cent is listed as under investigation). This year there have been a number of human-casued fires, but half are still under investigation.
But, climate change may also cause an increase in storms in Alberta. On one hand, this could mean more precipitation and, thus, less dry matter to catch flame. On the other, it could mean more lightning strikes. This latter point is a concern this year as well. So, it’s kind of a mixed bag.
Ok, but, where does El Niño fit in?
This year, the world appears to be transitioning away from a La Niña (cold) to an El Niño (warm) weather system. This is believed to have contributed to how hot Alberta got this year and, as such, the fires. Both events usually happen every three to seven years, but often on irregular schedules, and the warmer version occurring more often.
According to Marc-André Parisien, a research scientist with Natural Resources Canada, Alberta was expected to see a later spring, but La Niña ended “a little bit faster than anticipated.”
“And it looks like we're kind of barging into an El Niño situation here a little bit quicker than we thought,” he told The Weather Network.
It’s possible that climate change could cause more frequent, and stronger, El Niño events, but the verdict is out.
Doesn’t May always get wildfires?
For sure. May is regularly the busiest wildfire month in Alberta, but May got off to a rough start this year.
According to Parisien, the seeds for this year’s fire season were sewn late last summer. The province got a moisture deficit because of a late summer drought, which, at least, was made more likely by climate change. Then the following winter was mild and had below average precipitation. So, by the time May rolled around, the “spring window” — the period of time between when the snow melts and when plants start turning green again — was a dry one. And then it got hot, and windy.
It was pretty hot, dry and windy wasn’t it?
Take a look at some of the biggest fires the province has seen recently: namely the 2011 Slave Lake fire, the 2016 Fort McMurray Fire, and the 2019 Chuckegg Creek fire. Flannigan noted that this year has similar conditions to those past events. “It seems like every three to five years, we have a very active spring,” he said.
According to Flannigan’s previous research, eight of the worst wildfire weather years on record happened in the past decade.
Plus, according to Parisien, after wildfire crews put out a blaze, the fire can still do a slow burn in the soil. When things get warmer, drier and windier, these fires spread more. This means more fires can start, or escape the initial efforts to suppress them. “You’re gonna get fires that grow faster, bigger and more intensely,” he said.
That sounds bad.
Flannigan noted that not every year is going to be as bad as this one. Some will inevitably be relatively mild. But it’s worth noting that it’s just three per cent of fires in Canada that are responsible for 97 per cent of the total area burnt. These fires are more likely to start on days with extreme heat, he said, which Alberta can expect to see more of going forward.
The first week of May saw record high temperatures broken across the province and some weather stations reported temperatures as high as 30C.
Beyond the area burnt, people displaced, and inevitable health impacts that come from wildfire smoke, these fires also feed into climate change. One study found that forest fires alone, including those in North America, usually make up 10 per cent of global emissions. But the fires in 2021 accounted for 23 per cent.
So, it’s not great, no.
ca.sports.yahoo.com
.
There are a few main ingredients behind wildfires in Alberta. The province’s particularly grim fire season so far this year — in which more than 400 wildfireshave burned more than 122,000 hectares of land, and displaced around 30,000 people — is mostly due to weather conditions, according to Mike Flannigan, research chair for predictive services, emergency management and fire science at Thompson Rivers University.
In particular, this is because, under climate change, Alberta is growing warmer and drier, creating an ideal stomping ground for wildfires. “I attribute this primarily to human-caused climate change. And the reason is, you know, as we get warmer, we are seeing more fires,” he told The Weather Network.
But it’s a complex issue, and there are many other factors that go into whether any given year is going to be average or a rager. And, not every factor this year (and others) is immediately connected to a warming climate, caused largely by burning fossil fuels.
Here’s what can and cannot be blamed on climate change this fire season, and going forward.
Did climate change literally start the fires?
Well, no. There’s not some kind of Captain Planet villain going around and starting fires. Captain Planet is a now ancient cartoon and this is real life. Wildfires generally start one of two ways: lightning, and human activities, a person flicking a cigarette butt into dry grass for instance. Mostly, but not always, these are accidental cases. Across Canada, the number of incidents where humans start wildfires has been decreasing thanks to things like fire bans. This holds true in Alberta too, where the five-year average, as of 2022, shows that 68 per cent of fires were caused by humans, and 32 per cent were caused by lightning. That year, the numbers were 61 and 38 per cent, respectively (one per cent is listed as under investigation). This year there have been a number of human-casued fires, but half are still under investigation.
But, climate change may also cause an increase in storms in Alberta. On one hand, this could mean more precipitation and, thus, less dry matter to catch flame. On the other, it could mean more lightning strikes. This latter point is a concern this year as well. So, it’s kind of a mixed bag.
Ok, but, where does El Niño fit in?
This year, the world appears to be transitioning away from a La Niña (cold) to an El Niño (warm) weather system. This is believed to have contributed to how hot Alberta got this year and, as such, the fires. Both events usually happen every three to seven years, but often on irregular schedules, and the warmer version occurring more often.
According to Marc-André Parisien, a research scientist with Natural Resources Canada, Alberta was expected to see a later spring, but La Niña ended “a little bit faster than anticipated.”
“And it looks like we're kind of barging into an El Niño situation here a little bit quicker than we thought,” he told The Weather Network.
It’s possible that climate change could cause more frequent, and stronger, El Niño events, but the verdict is out.
Doesn’t May always get wildfires?
For sure. May is regularly the busiest wildfire month in Alberta, but May got off to a rough start this year.
According to Parisien, the seeds for this year’s fire season were sewn late last summer. The province got a moisture deficit because of a late summer drought, which, at least, was made more likely by climate change. Then the following winter was mild and had below average precipitation. So, by the time May rolled around, the “spring window” — the period of time between when the snow melts and when plants start turning green again — was a dry one. And then it got hot, and windy.
It was pretty hot, dry and windy wasn’t it?
Take a look at some of the biggest fires the province has seen recently: namely the 2011 Slave Lake fire, the 2016 Fort McMurray Fire, and the 2019 Chuckegg Creek fire. Flannigan noted that this year has similar conditions to those past events. “It seems like every three to five years, we have a very active spring,” he said.
According to Flannigan’s previous research, eight of the worst wildfire weather years on record happened in the past decade.
Plus, according to Parisien, after wildfire crews put out a blaze, the fire can still do a slow burn in the soil. When things get warmer, drier and windier, these fires spread more. This means more fires can start, or escape the initial efforts to suppress them. “You’re gonna get fires that grow faster, bigger and more intensely,” he said.
That sounds bad.
Flannigan noted that not every year is going to be as bad as this one. Some will inevitably be relatively mild. But it’s worth noting that it’s just three per cent of fires in Canada that are responsible for 97 per cent of the total area burnt. These fires are more likely to start on days with extreme heat, he said, which Alberta can expect to see more of going forward.
The first week of May saw record high temperatures broken across the province and some weather stations reported temperatures as high as 30C.
Beyond the area burnt, people displaced, and inevitable health impacts that come from wildfire smoke, these fires also feed into climate change. One study found that forest fires alone, including those in North America, usually make up 10 per cent of global emissions. But the fires in 2021 accounted for 23 per cent.
So, it’s not great, no.
What role did climate change play in Alberta’s wildfires?
A heady brew of factors went into the fires the province saw this spring. How climate change impacted them is complex.
Thankfully changes driven by climate alarmism should render disasters like
this a thing of the past in the near future. Our leaders and majority of the population
have long understood and accepted climate change. What needs to be done is
to see to it that climate policies initiated are to remain in place and progress
steadily. By 2050 emission will be reduced to zero if government's climate
plans are on schedule. Oil production will carry on beyond 2050 but according
to Steven Guilbeault he approved the Bay Du Nord project only under the
condition that the project will attain zero emission by then. Extending zero
emission requirement from offshore Newfoundland to Alberta oil sands and
other oil producing regions should enable us to continue exporting oil into
the distant future free of concerns about hurricanes and forest fire.
Climate activists' would better shift their focus from climate alarmism
to monitoring our government's climate policies. Any signs of slack in
our climate leaders must be dealt with by climate lawsuits and strikes.
Convoy people are not the ones I'll worry about setting
forest to fire as it won't serve their interest.
Climate alarmists must understand it is not climate change
people should be warned about and educated on. It is the lack
of climate action and its consequence that merit more of their
attention.
nationalpost.com
www.justice.gov
forest to fire as it won't serve their interest.
Climate alarmists must understand it is not climate change
people should be warned about and educated on. It is the lack
of climate action and its consequence that merit more of their
attention.
'Pipelines will be blown up,' says David Suzuki, if leaders don't act on climate change
'It is now the age of consequences,' Extinction Rebellion organizer tells protesters in Victoria. Critics called the statement 'dangerous' and 'reckless'
nationalpost.com
Des Moines Woman Sentenced to Eight Years in Prison for Conspiracy to Damage the Dakota Access Pipeline
DES MOINES, IA – A Des Moines woman was sentenced today by United States District Court Judge Rebecca Goodgame Ebinger to eight years in federal prison for Conspiracy to Damage an Energy Facility. Jessica Rae Reznicek, age 39, was ordered to serve three years of supervised release to follow her...
www.justice.gov
Last edited:
None of those issues are ignored, if you actually looked at an IPCC report you'd know that.
Ignorance is not bliss, its ignorance.
This is an idiotic statement from larue as he tries to cover his ass for attempting a bait and switch.
Climate change uses surface temperatures for their projections and measurements, not the temperature 4-20km up in the atmosphere.
To try to claim that the temperature on the surface of the planet isn't warming because its not warming as fast in the troposphere is dishonest and idiotic.
You can't bait and switch by changing the terms in the discussion.
The global temperature is going up on the surface of the planet you live on larue.
Global Surface Temperature | NASA Global Climate Change
Vital Signs of the Planet: Global Climate Change and Global Warming. Current news and data streams about global warming and climate change from NASA.
