1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi, If you are looking at signing up to the BF forum please be aware that we are sadly refusing signups from anyone using a UK mobile network. You can use a UK mobile network after your initial signup. This is due to an increase in forum spam. Thanks Admin
    Dismiss Notice

We have 12 years to limit climate change catastrophe, warns UN

Discussion in 'News from the UK, Europe and the rest of the World' started by KeithAngel, Oct 8, 2018.

  1. oss
    Offline

    oss Not Here

    We had a neighbour in Manila pay 3000 peso for an old fridge that was totally knackered, I was mortified that we accepted the money, likewise people have taken a couch that was wrecked when they could have bought a new one for 5000 peso.
    • Like Like x 1
  2. graham59
    Offline

    graham59 Well-Known Member

    Seems a lot of them do the same with husbands... fortunately. :ninja:
  3. KeithAngel
    Offline

    KeithAngel 2063 Lifetime Member

    A court in The Hague has upheld a historic legal order on the Dutch government to accelerate carbon emissions cuts, a day after the world’s climate scientists warned that time was running out to avoid dangerous warming.

    Appeal court judges ruled that the severity and scope of the climate crisis demanded greenhouse gas reductions of at least 25% by 2020 – measured against 1990 levels – higher than the 17% drop planned by Mark Rutte’s liberal administration.

    https://www.theguardian.com/environ...-court-upholds-landmark-climate-change-ruling
  4. KeithAngel
    Offline

    KeithAngel 2063 Lifetime Member

  5. Jim
    Offline

    Jim Well-Known Member Trusted Member

    • Agree Agree x 2
  6. oss
    Offline

    oss Not Here

    While they weren't trying to draw a direct connection in that article, there are connections between earthquakes and climate change, when ice melts the ground that was covered by the ice rebounds, this has been happening in the UK for the last 12,000 years since the last ice age we used to have glaciers miles thick over the whole country and after they melted the ground floated back up as the crust adjusted to the pressures, that's why Scotland is rising ;) and England is sinking (really it is :)).

    Likewise as freshwater glaciers melt today that changes the pressure applied to the regions that were covered, further freshwater land based glaciation melting contributes to sea rise and all of that water has mass and weight, the increased pressure that results from the extra water is thought to be a potential contributing factor in the triggering of earthquakes. increase the overall mass of the ocean and potentially you might increase the ingress of water at plate subduction zones and water is a lubricant when it comes to one plate sliding down under another plate, hence climate change could potentially influence the overall levels of tectonic activity.

    Nothing is as simple as common sense might lead us to believe.
    • Like Like x 1
  7. Bootsonground
    Offline

    Bootsonground Well-Known Member

    1. What exactly do the climate scientists agree on?

    Usually, the person will have a very vague answer like "climate change is real."

    Which raises the question: What is that supposed to mean? That climate changes? That we have some impact? That we have a large impact? That we have a catastrophically large impact? That we have such a catastrophic impact that we shouldn't use fossil fuels?

    What you'll find is that people don't want to define what 97% agree on--because there is nothing remotely in the literature saying 97% agree we should ban most fossil fuel use.

    It’s likely that 97% of people making the 97% claim have absolutely no idea where that number comes from.

    If you look at the literature, the specific meaning of the 97% claim is: 97 percent of climate scientists agree that there is a global warming trend and that human beings are the main cause--that is, that we are over 50% responsible. The warming is a whopping 0.8 degrees over the past 150 years, a warming that has tapered off to essentially nothing in the last decade and a half.

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexep...e-scientists-agree-is-100-wrong/#69c692f43f9f
  8. oss
    Offline

    oss Not Here

    Keeping your head in the sand is a great way to get your arse kicked ;)

    upload_2018-10-11_18-12-19.png
    • Funny Funny x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  9. Bootsonground
    Offline

    Bootsonground Well-Known Member

    I prefer to keep an open mind and learned long ago not to immediately believe anything that comes from the consistently hypocritical and lying politician.... or the scientists in their employ, or the sheep that follow them blindly and fanatically.
    This guy also seems knows a thing or two about global warming. Very interesting IMO.

    • Agree Agree x 1
  10. Bootsonground
    Offline

    Bootsonground Well-Known Member

    • Like Like x 2
  11. CatchFriday
    Offline

    CatchFriday Member

    This is all about governments creating more taxes ie more revenue for themselves isn’t it?

    In London lorries will have to pay £100 a day to drive there.

    This is a scam......
    • Agree Agree x 2
  12. Jim
    Offline

    Jim Well-Known Member Trusted Member

    12,000 years ago! we are talking about recent climate change Jim. Then even 12,000 years I very much doubt ice melting into the earth's crust causing an earthquake. I do know how earthquakes happen and ice melting is not one of them :)
    • Like Like x 2
  13. oss
    Offline

    oss Not Here

    No the ice did not melt overnight :) it's not ice melting into the crust it is the change in mass at various locations, the earth's crust is not static it effectively floats on the mantle below it and when mass is redistributed all of it moves albeit very slowly.

    When you are talking about a half a metre to 1.5 metres increase in ocean sea levels that is a hell of a lot of mass and it will have an effect on the underlying crust that supports it, subduction zones will experience greater pressure as a result of all the extra water above them, these are tiny amounts but they are enough to make a difference.

    Take a look at this much simplified view of a subduction zone below and just imagine what happens at the slipping boundary, significant amounts of water end up deep in the mantle the greater the pressure above the more water there is to lubricate the plates, like most things it's not quite as simple as that.

    My point is that current melting and acceleration of melting is rapidly changing sea level and the oceans are physically heavy, very heavy, redistribution of water around the planet today and over the last couple of hundred years has the potential to interact with the slippages at plate boundaries that cause earthquakes, therefore there is a potential link between earthquakes and climate change.

    https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-...l9MOzHS0/s1600/Earthquake_subduction+zone.gif

    Mr Ash is no longer here and won't see this as it is a private forum anyway but he would have backed me up on this. (edit: I'm wrong I thought this was the politics section but it's not it's public :()

    There are lots of papers on this but not so much published in the popular science press this link below is one which is primarily talking about a different interaction between water and earthquakes as in rain and landslides but it is another connection between climate change and earthquakes.

    https://news.nationalgeographic.com...urricanes-typhoons-earthquakes-science-earth/
    Last edited: Oct 12, 2018 at 3:57 PM
    • Like Like x 1
  14. oss
    Offline

    oss Not Here

    Ok lets say we are wrong and you are right what's the worst that can happen, looks to me like we end up a world that is a lot cleaner and a much nicer place to live in, it'll cost a bit but a lot less people will be dying from pollution and the other creatures we share this planet with will have a clean world to live in.

    Lets say we're right and you are wrong, what's the worst that can happen, well billions dead, thousands of species extinct, habitable area of the planet vastly reduced, standards of living well what standard of living, it'll be desperate.

    It'll be a dark and miserable time for all of our descendants and given that most of them won't survive only a very few of us will have surviving descendants in a couple of hundred years, how many childless couples do you know right now every one of them is an evolutionary dead end, families die out, even in the good times huge swathes of family trees result in a dead end, increase the environmental pressure and even fewer will have a future.

    So I take you like gambling, and make no mistake this is a bet the farm bet, lock stock and barrel, me I'd rather have a future for my children and their children.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  15. Jim
    Offline

    Jim Well-Known Member Trusted Member

    yes, Jim, I get it but the fault in the earth plates are already there. The heavy rain/floods trigger the inevitable.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  16. oss
    Offline

    oss Not Here

    Yeah my point was that you asked what the connection was not the cause, the point is that slippage frequency could increase which might in some cases be a good thing if it resulted in smaller magnitude quakes but the main point is that there is indeed a connection.

    I am less interested in the rain landslide issue and more interested in the trillions of tons of melt water that is being added to the oceans as I think that may result in bigger problems particularly for example on early triggering of lets say the Cascadia fault on the coast of the north west Americas for example.

    And if the entire ice sheet in Greenland were to melt (which would take several hundred years) global sea level would rise seven metres, that is a colossal amount of water indeed I just worked it out 2849 trillion metric tonnes of water even spread over the whole planet that's going to have an effect.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  17. Dave_E
    Offline

    Dave_E Well-Known Member Trusted Member

    Not even 12 years left according to an earlier report by the same rag.

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2004/feb/22/usnews.theobserver
    We only have 14 months left!

    :eek:
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  18. oss
    Offline

    oss Not Here

    That report would have been predicated on a complete shutdown of the Gulf Stream though freshwater melt off the Greenland ice sheet shutting down the gulf stream conveyor, that's something that could happen suddenly and the result would be quite dramatic.

    I would like to see the context of the nuclear war predictions though as I suspect they are conflating the ideas of mass migration from equatorial regions as a result of drought and uninhabitable lands and competition between countries for water with other political tensions between more developed countries, I really don't see nuclear weapons as an aspect of defending against that as the migration is largely from regions that are far less economically developed.

    However when the climate does tip and we get a short period of truly dramatic climate changes, then food and water shortages start to become a real issue, and its not impossible that food production could collapse to the point where a country like the UK started to reintroduce rationing or worse, these sorts of things can and could happen quite suddenly on the scale of a few years, not saying that I expect this by 2020 but when it starts the transition could be sudden and dramatic.

    At the moment it is still expected that there will be an increase in the frequency of dramatic weather events such as we have seen in the last few years both at home and over the rest of the globe but the disruption from this will eventually start killing more and more people everywhere.

    As I have said before our generation might be lucky enough to miss most of it but our kids will very likely live through some pretty terrible times.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  19. Bootsonground
    Offline

    Bootsonground Well-Known Member

    Senior Researcher Questions Satellite Measurements of Global Sea-Level
    With a lot of rhetoric about the claimed sea-level rise and threat of global warming due to carbon emissions from human activities, the actual science of sea-level measurements and scientific inquiry of the verifiable degree of climate change has been lost in the noise. The following correspondence with Albert Parker, PhD, author of the 2014 paper Problems and reliability of the satellite altimeter based Global Mean Sea Level computation casts light on how reliable the various sea-level measurements are and whether the actual, on-ground science verifies the narrative of carbon-based climate change and alarming sea-level rise.
    https://newsblaze.com/issues/scienc...llite-measurements-of-global-sea-level_84168/
    • Like Like x 1
  20. oss
    Offline

    oss Not Here

    Oh well done Boots, Albert Parker alias Alberto Boretti.
    Read this, the above quote is the last paragraph but the rest makes very interesting reading too http://theconversation.com/peer-review-isnt-perfect-and-the-media-doesnt-always-help-11318

Share This Page