Bad bad things are going on in Norway these days. Please spread the word.

[Woody girl]

The trouble is we have accelerated the natural change with our carbon footprint. The last time we ..heated up ....we were not chucking out so much pollution into the atmosphere and sea. Also when we had hippos in the UK we were situated much much further south. We have drifted northward over millenia. So realy we were not experiencing hippos etc while occupyang our present global position. Everyone forgets that!

 

[Broch]

The trouble is we have accelerated the natural change with our carbon footprint.

We don't actually know that for certain. As a control systems engineer it was my job to identify instability in cyclic behaviour and control it - looking at geological data I cannot say that the earth would have been any colder today if there was not an industrial revolution - there are lots of people that want us to believe it but the evidence is not conclusive. As I said, in my opinion, the destruction of habitat and species is far more urgent - but that is just an opinion.

And in the end that is what makes this so difficult; opinion is stated as though it was fact - there are very few 'facts' in this whole subject.

 

[Woody girl]

Agree that we can only surmise a great deal. I believe we have vastly accelerated by our mode of living the climate change fluctuations that are natural in the great scheme of things. It's now a runaway scenario. No matter what we do we can't realy stop it now. 20 or 30 years ago we had a small chance to slow things down but I believe it's a done deal now. It's still not a reason to ignore the situation though. We really need to stop but we are so addicted to our comfortable lives we just conveniently forget or say my efforts won't change anything so why bother? It's sad. Where I live nobody realy gives a dam. Disheartening to say the least. Still at least it's nice and warm today!

 

[Paul_B]

We had our roof redone last year. New sarking and tiles, etc., and the difference in the heat loss, and the useability of the loft is really noticeable.
I didn't know about the windows though, and will look into that since ours are now over 20 years old and starting to need replacing.

M

If you have the money then triple glazing is even better.

However shop around for windows. The design of them is very important. IIRC the seals within the frame is important. You're basically trying to isolate the heat inside the window from getting out. I can't remember the design of ours but the metal in the edge of the frame does not pass through or something like that. There's a big gap extending within the frame where older and cheaper used to fill. Tbh I've not looked at them for a year plus so I can't even remember what they're like.

TLR
Shop around. There's very good window makers and there's not so good. Check energy efficiency. They'll all be A rated but it's the plus number after the A rating that's important. IIRC the salesman explained it as a measure of how it let's energy from the sun pass through to contribute heating the room in winter. The higher the number the better the winter heating effect. Our windows were +8 or +10, only one manufacturer could beat them in performance.

 

[Paul_B]

Ten years ago a mate worked for a direct, government funded climate research establishment. Located on our local University campus to take advantage of the excellent environmental school at I believe is a UK top 10 research university. He managed research projects (having already done PhDs and post docs). Basically an expert in a few aspects of climate change and right up to date on the area of research since he's competing for research funding so needed to be right at the front of the research.

I explained the above because knowing a bit about the guys history you might be able to trust his view on this like I did. Anyway, 10 years ago he told us that climate change due to human activity is a done deal. There is so much high quality research on it that the theory is the best available based on current knowledge and research. That was 10 or more years ago.

Believe that or not is your choice. Until a better theory comes along I do believe it because of what my mate told me. He was someone I trusted in many things, this matter too.

I wish I had kept in touch with him because it might be good to have been able to ask him to point me towards something published that might convince others too.

 

[Janne]

A couple of thousand years ago some weirdoes decided to erect some heavy rocks in lines and random patterns..
Maybe to appease the Gods. Using stone so they would be there forever and forever.

Still there. But you need scuba equipment to see them. Outside France.

I am worried about the toxins we infuse Nature with. Plastic. mercury. Stuff like that.

 

[Broch]

I believe we have vastly accelerated by our mode of living the climate change fluctuations that are natural in the great scheme of things. It's now a runaway scenario.

You may choose to believe that Woody girl, and you are entitled to, but there is plenty of evidence that suggests we would be exactly where we are now without man's involvement. This 'warming' period (and remember, we are still in a technical ice age as far as the world is concerned) is exactly on queue based on the historic temperatures of the globe. We 'may' have had a slight influence and, by deforestation etc we may be changing how the natural cycle of things will occur, but we are unlikely to have caused it. People that want you to believe it only publish post 1880 data - and that shows a 1 degree C increase in temperature - but the earth was a lot warmer 5,000 years ago, 125,000 years ago and 330,000 years ago …

And, to be honest, I don't trust any research that is funded by Government or large corporate organisations with a financial interest (I have been paid to do Government research and know how it is manipulated )

 

[Tengu]

Its the fact that the Age of Dinosaurs is still not over...This is what gets me.

Why will no one address this problem?

(Yeah, I know I am part bird and all that, We Tengu dont like this constant reminder we are actualy related to our class enemy, the Tatsu...)

 

[Broch]

I am worried about the toxins we infuse Nature with. Plastic. mercury. Stuff like that.

I agree. That is an area I am very concerned about. On an industrial scale it's colossal but even on a domestic scale it's worrying. When we emptied my parents place we took a trailer load of kitchen, decorating, and gardening chemicals to the local recycling centre (things like bleaches, pesticides, herbicides etc...). The only place we could put it, after enquiring, was the 'land fill' skip!

 

[Billy-o]

You may choose to believe that Woody girl, and you are entitled to, but there is plenty of evidence that suggests ....

This will possibly get up your nose Broch, and apologies if it does, but, if it isn't your field, how do you know what you quote is evidence and not, as you say of Woody Girl's position, a belief? ... or even just a drawing.

 

[Corso]

This will possibly get up your nose Broch, and apologies if it does, but, if it isn't your field, how do you know what you quote is evidence and not, as you say of Woody Girl's position, a belief? ... or even just a drawing.

I will dig out the paper when I'm at work but if it is published and not withdrawn or disproven

publication in a peer reviewed scientific journal that has origins since the 1890's would be pretty legit.

First time I've seen this bit of evidence though...

 

[Glass-Wood-Steel]

I find the effect or global warming (whoever is responsible) on the Atlantic conveyor quite interesting.
https://www.carbonbrief.org/atlanti...lowed-15-per-cent-since-mid-twentieth-century
Rhis current seems to act rather like a radiator and boiler system. There have been speculations that if the conveyor stopped it would have dire consequences for the weather and actually drive cooling in the north.

 

[Fadcode]

Going back to the OP's point,
Ever since man has started interfering with nature there have been problems, and in some aspects man has through his interference delayed or abolished potential problems, take for instance the annihilation of the Buffalo in North America, a very sad occurrence , especially for the native tribes, but imagine what the world would be like if the masses of buffalo's were still there today, the gasses they emit, as well as the crops and grasses they consume.

Now saying that, we no doubt will have to at some point, have to choose between wildlife and man's survival, and the biggest problem with that is we always think we are right, so we usually go ahead without any thought for the consequences, we are broadening the urban areas into the countryside and taking up valuable arable land, which we will need in the future to grow food to feed the increasing population, and I include the solar power farms as well in this, I don't know what the soil ( fertile or not) will be like once the solar panels have wore themselves out.

We can, if we look at this problem in an open minded way, list animals that don't add value to human existence, but use up needed resources for example, Elephants, Rhino's, Bears, Deer, the list goes on, and although I am not advocating the destruction of these species, I am sure one day they will disappear. It is a fact that about 95% of all the species that lived are now extinct, due to many factors including the behaviour of humans, we are now the custodians of what is left, we need to remember that.

Now on the other hand we could start developing our surroundings to ensure our survival, as well as the wildlife, we could limit the roaming of some species to avoid crop and soil damage,We could design towns linked to industry with the ability to walk to work to reduce pollution.


Now the biggest thing we face is the believers and none believers regarding Climate change, it is obvious that the climate is changing, we only have to look back a few hundred years to see that, the massive salt flats where the lakes have disappeared, the sea erosion, not because of rising sea levels but the lack of preventative measures being taken(in my opinion) to master the forces of the oceans. we were once linked to Europe by land so it's obvious the earth is in a state of flux.

Of course it wont be easy to get all this done without World Governments that fully understands the problems of the future, and the importance of coming together to conquer them, without simply costing it out and doing nothing, making airports bigger is not the answer, making people having to travel less is.
We all have to do our bit to help in this situation

 

[Paul_B]

Interesting graph broch, but I'm not sure how relative to human caused climate change it is. Why? Well the x axis is in thousands of years when human caused climate change has really only become significant post industrial revolution which is not even a single thousand. How are you going to see the effect that's only occurred in the last few hundred years when the smallest unit of time on the x axis is 9 thousand years?

Also, as I understand the issue, it's not about absolute temperature but the way the average global temperature is rising, the direction of movement that AIUI is against the trend that should be in place.

Another question I have is whether the record of temperatures at the location of those graph samples is representative of true global averages? Does anyone know if the one location in the graph matters? Would different locations not be better?

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you broch but IMHO that graph does not support your view on this matter because it can't.

 

[Nice65]

Going back to the OP's point,
Ever since man has started interfering with nature there have been problems, and in some aspects man has through his interference delayed or abolished potential problems, take for instance the annihilation of the Buffalo in North America, a very sad occurrence , especially for the native tribes, but imagine what the world would be like if the masses of buffalo's were still there today, the gasses they emit, as well as the crops and grasses they consume.

Now saying that, we no doubt will have to at some point, have to choose between wildlife and man's survival, and the biggest problem with that is we always think we are right, so we usually go ahead without any thought for the consequences, we are broadening the urban areas into the countryside and taking up valuable arable land, which we will need in the future to grow food to feed the increasing population, and I include the solar power farms as well in this, I don't know what the soil ( fertile or not) will be like once the solar panels have wore themselves out.

We can, if we look at this problem in an open minded way, list animals that don't add value to human existence, but use up needed resources for example, Elephants, Rhino's, Bears, Deer, the list goes on, and although I am not advocating the destruction of these species, I am sure one day they will disappear. It is a fact that about 95% of all the species that lived are now extinct, due to many factors including the behaviour of humans, we are now the custodians of what is left, we need to remember that.

Now on the other hand we could start developing our surroundings to ensure our survival, as well as the wildlife, we could limit the roaming of some species to avoid crop and soil damage,We could design towns linked to industry with the ability to walk to work to reduce pollution.


Now the biggest thing we face is the believers and none believers regarding Climate change, it is obvious that the climate is changing, we only have to look back a few hundred years to see that, the massive salt flats where the lakes have disappeared, the sea erosion, not because of rising sea levels but the lack of preventative measures being taken(in my opinion) to master the forces of the oceans. we were once linked to Europe by land so it's obvious the earth is in a state of flux.

Of course it wont be easy to get all this done without World Governments that fully understands the problems of the future, and the importance of coming together to conquer them, without simply costing it out and doing nothing, making airports bigger is not the answer, making people having to travel less is.
We all have to do our bit to help in this situation

Who is this “we”? You can’t think the profiteers are going to ask or value an opinion? That “we” have any real say in the matter? We can do our bit, but it’s almost a silent thing in the face of huge railroading financial companies and government economics.

If I listed animals that don’t add value to human existence, then I’d say it’s definitely humans that aren’t doing the place much good at all and I like my couple of dogs better than I like sea eagles. We can’t just overpopulate, overindulge, live off the fat of the land, and it not have any consequences. Attempting to engineer it, or choose what lives and what dies is assuming omnipotence, that of a deity having unlimited power. When in fact we are smaller than the dust of the earth itself, know nothing, and will not be either noticed or missed by the rest of the Universe if gone. We aren’t the custodians of anything bar a very simple personal responsibility for how we behave.


Well I’ve read the whole lot at last. I was a bit taken aback that the opening post about land being cleared and species seemed so shocking to @Skaukraft when it’s been happening in a far more destructive and more lamentable manner in the planets rain forests, mines, dam projects etc for decades. It’s a NIMBY response personal to him and his folk. The non present OP hasn’t bothered to follow his not very shocking or terrifying announcement, which has lead to a brilliant thread about the gigantic battery we all live on, and how it’s used.

 

[petrochemicals]

I must make this point, all of this co2 in the atmosphere pale in comparison to the increased water vapour content, is far more numerous and effective in any radiation reflection

https://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/vapor_warming.html

It's just another illustration of too many people too much pressure. Population is not only increacing because of people reproducing, people live longer, population goes up. 2 kids each and the population will maybe just about stay level and then decline, 3 kids and we will surely destroy ourselves.

 

[Fadcode]

Who is this “we”? You can’t think the profiteers are going to ask or value an opinion? That “we” have any real say in the matter? We can do our bit, but it’s almost a silent thing in the face of huge railroading financial companies and government economics.

If I listed animals that don’t add value to human existence, then I’d say it’s definitely humans that aren’t doing the place much good at all and I like my couple of dogs better than I like sea eagles. We can’t just overpopulate, overindulge, live off the fat of the land, and it not have any consequences. Attempting to engineer it, or choose what lives and what dies is assuming omnipotence, that of a deity having unlimited power. When in fact we are smaller than the dust of the earth itself, know nothing, and will not be either noticed or missed by the rest of the Universe if gone. We aren’t the custodians of anything bar a very simple personal responsibility for how we behave.


Well I’ve read the whole lot at last. I was a bit taken aback that the opening post about land being cleared and species seemed so shocking to @Skaukraft when it’s been happening in a far more destructive and more lamentable manner in the planets rain forests, mines, dam projects etc for decades. It’s a NIMBY response personal to him and his folk. The non present OP hasn’t bothered to follow his not very shocking or terrifying announcement, which has lead to a brilliant thread about the gigantic battery we all live on, and how it’s used.

"we" are the individuals that can put some pressure on Governments and large conglomerates to do something, probably the only thing that social media is good for, we are already seeing less plastic being used because of public pressure, the move to electric cars, even solar panels and wind turbines, all contributing a little to fight Global warming and cutting pollution.
We already choose what lives or dies without assuming omnipotence, culling deer, bull calfs, rodent and pest control, whether we have the right to do this is another question,
We (as humans) cannot just sit back and do nothing, we can if we feel all is lost, but we have to try at least to do something, As a dog lover I am sure you get your dog(dogs) inoculated against various diseases, that is because you want them to live, and you are their custodian and feel a responsibility towards them, and do it to safeguard their future, "we" can do the same, prevention is sensible.If it's too late well then we will go down fighting, the Bulldog Spirit to the end..............

 

[santaman2000]

Going back to the OP's point,
Ever since man has started interfering with nature there have been problems, and in some aspects man has through his interference delayed or abolished potential problems, take for instance the annihilation of the Buffalo in North America, a very sad occurrence , especially for the native tribes, but imagine what the world would be like if the masses of buffalo's were still there today, the gasses they emit, as well as the crops and grasses they consume.........

The gasses they emit? Probably about the same as the domestic cattle herds that replaced them. Likewise with the grasses (and to a lesser extent even the crops) they consume.

 

[Janne]

If the CO2 goes up, does the atmosphere became more ‘dense’, or if the density is the same, which of the gasses goes down?
The O2?

I remember being thought that a high level of CO2 made all trees and plants grow better.
That the CO2 level was being regulated by the trees and plants.

 

[santaman2000]

That’s part of the problem with deforestation; fewer trees to control the CO2