Climate change reaching unprecedented levels as records tumble

There’s one thing we can always count on in climate change threads. Eventually the true believers will tell those who aren’t convinced that they’re just too dumb to understand it.

If we were only better educated or smarter or not so stupid we'd believe everything a 'scientist' says, just like they do. :ROFLMAO:
Well, yeah. It's not a case of belief. It's a fact. It's happening...it has been happening for a very long time- all the data says so. Why do you believe other than what the data says? That's not logical. I don't understand why anyone would ignore what has been scientifically observed for a very long term. Do you also believe the sun revolves around the earth? Please defend the logic of your position. Let me see the peer reviewed long term data that says climate change isn't happening and that humans aren't contributing to it. I'll be looking forward to it. Meantime, enjoy this: Climate Change Evidence: How Do We Know?. Climate change: evidence and causes | Royal Society
 

Earth’s climate is entering “uncharted territory” – and we have no idea what’s coming next.
This was the message from the 2023 State of the Climate report, which measures how the planet is faring based on 35 vital signs. As levels of heat and carbon dioxide hit record heights, the authors are blunt about the challenges facing humanity.
‘As scientists, we are increasingly being asked to tell the public the truth about the crises we face in simple and direct terms,’ they wrote. ‘The truth is that we are shocked by the ferocity of the extreme weather events in 2023. We are afraid of the uncharted territory that we have now entered.’
While the report doesn’t make for cheerful reading, a few vital signs are moving in the right direction. Levels of renewable energy are at an all-time high and continuing to rise, while the loss of the world’s forests is in decline.
The report also emphasises that restoring the rest of Earth’s vitals is in our hands. By demanding our governments, businesses and institutions act now to stem its decline, we have the best remaining chance of preserving our planet.
The full report was published in the journal BioScience.

Our climate in numbers

  • 1.1⁰C – the temperature Earth has warmed by since 1880.
  • 4.93 tonnes – the average carbon dioxide emission of every person on Earth.
  • 150% – levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere compared before the Industrial Revolution.
  • 1.75 million square kilometres – the area of sea ice lost in the Antarctic in 2023, compared to the 1981-2010 average.
Ice from the end of a glacier collapses into the sea by a rocky cliff.

Sea ice is hitting record low levels, while glaciers are in retreat. Image © MomentumStock/Shutterstock.

2023: A record-breaking year

The past year has been a time of climate firsts, mainly for the wrong reasons. There have been over 38 days this year that were more than 1.5⁰C hotter than average – higher than any other year on record.
This follows a warning from the World Meteorological Organisation that 1.5⁰C of warming will start to become the norm in the next five years – and become permanent by the mid-2030s.
Meanwhile, the oceans have also been rapidly heating up. While the oceans’ ability to absorb heat has helped to buffer our climate, there are concerns that they may be reaching their capacity.
This year, sea surface temperatures hit record highs for four months, and were almost 1⁰C hotter than is normal at this time of year.
This had a devastating effect on Antarctic sea ice, which has shrunk drastically over the past decade. It collapsed to a historic low this year, being around a million square kilometres smaller than the previous record from 1986 – an area of ice around four times the size of the UK.
Wildfires, extreme heat and storms have also been constant across the year, with concerns that Earth’s climate may already be passing tipping points that will be hard to recover from anytime soon.
Dr Christopher Wolf, a co-author of the report, says, ‘As scientists, we are hugely troubled by the sudden increases in the frequency and severity of climate-related disasters.’
‘The frequency and severity of those disasters might be outpacing rising temperatures. By the end of the 21st century, as many as three to six billion people may find themselves outside the Earth’s liveable regions, meaning they will be encountering severe heat, limited food availability and elevated mortality rates.’
While 2023’s records may have been contributed to by other factors, including natural climate patterns like El Niño, these are just exacerbating the increases that climate change is already causing.
Vapour is emitted from two tall chimneys above a sea of cloud, with the sun behind them.

Levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere have never been higher than now during the entire existence of our species. Image © Bilanol/Shutterstock.

What’s changed since the last report?

Since the last report, 20 out of the 35 vitals have hit all-new records. These are a mixture of both good and bad moments in the ongoing climate crisis.
Starting with the bad news, it’s estimated that concentrations of carbon dioxide now stand at around 421 parts per million. Levels as high as this haven’t been seen since the Pliocene around four million years ago, back when oceans were over 20 metres higher than they were today and mastodon roamed the Earth.
Emissions of carbon dioxide have also reached a new high, at around 39 gigatonnes per year. While they appear to be levelling off over the long term, emissions need to be declining rapidly by the end of the decade if there is to be any chance of global warming being limited to just 1.5⁰C.
These emissions are being driven by fossil fuel subsidies, which reached new heights in 2022. Driven by the impact of the war in Ukraine, the amount nations paid to keep the prices of polluting coal, oil and gas artificially low reached £900 million, more than double the figure for 2021.
On the plus side, renewable energy is now coming into its own. Enough wind and solar power was generated last year to power the UK more than four times over – and is set to rise even further in the years to come.
A recent report from the International Energy Agency (IEA) found that by 2030, renewable energy will provide as much as half the planet’s electricity. Coal, oil and gas emissions will have peaked, as carbon emissions from the energy sector start to decline.
The IEA’s Executive Director, Fatih Birol, says, ‘The transition to clean energy is happening worldwide and it’s unstoppable. It’s not a question of “if”, it’s just a matter of “how soon” – and the sooner the better for all of us.’
‘Governments, companies and investors need to get behind clean energy transitions rather than hindering them. There are immense benefits on offer, including new industrial opportunities and jobs, greater energy security, cleaner air, universal energy access and a safer climate for everyone.’
The IEA warned that, even with this progress, the use of fossil fuels is still far too high, with the planet on course to warm by as much 2.4⁰C this century – far above safe limits.
Two men install solar panels on a tiled roof.

Power from renewable sources is rising, and will continue to do so as net zero goals get closer. Image © anatoliy_gleb/Shutterstock.

How to improve Earth’s vital signs

Looking to the future, the State of the Climate report identified six key areas that humanity needs to focus on to save our planet. Because of the linked nature of the threats, the recommendations focus not just on the climate crisis, but also on those affecting biodiversity, food security and disease.
Some of the recommendations, like stopping global warming and phasing out the use of coal, are relatively straightforward. As well as cutting emissions, the team also called for more research into how more carbon dioxide can be absorbed.
While the team prioritised expanding nature-based solutions to this problem, such as restoring forests, they also said that new technology to take greenhouse gases out of the atmosphere will be needed.
At the moment, this industry is still in its infancy, and hasn’t yet been tested at a large scale. While recommending that negative emissions technology must be explored, the paper warns that relying on its development can’t be an alternative to slashing emissions.
There are also more complex proposals in the report. It echoes the call of a group of economists, including former Bank of England Governor Mark Carney, that our economies should be transformed to support the needs of people and planet.
This transition must be done fairly to ensure social and climate justice for the world’s countries, with nations needing to share resources more equally so that everyone can benefit.
Having sounded the alarm in four previous reports, and seen little progress made so far, the researchers are aware that change will not be immediate. But as the effects of climate change become more pronounced, they hope that more people will start to take notice.
Professor William Ripple, the report’s lead author, says, ‘Life on our planet is clearly under siege. The statistical trends show deeply alarming patterns of climate-related variables and disasters, and so far, there has been little progress to report as far as humanity combating climate change.
‘As scientists, our goal is to communicate climate facts and make policy recommendations. It is our moral duty to alert humanity of any potential existential threat and to show leadership in taking action.’


Climate change reaching unprecedented levels as records tumble
I appreciated you sharing this important article, @Paco Dennis! I agree with the report. We are using solar panels on our house, and I feel that is helping in its own minuscule way. I've always advocated solar panels because they help the environment (no pollution) and they use the natural resources of the sun.
 
Well, yeah. It's not a case of belief. It's a fact. It's happening...it has been happening for a very long time- all the data says so. Why do you believe other than what the data says? That's not logical. I don't understand why anyone would ignore what has been scientifically observed for a very long term. Do you also believe the sun revolves around the earth? Please defend the logic of your position. Let me see the peer reviewed long term data that says climate change isn't happening and that humans aren't contributing to it. I'll be looking forward to it. Meantime, enjoy this: Climate Change Evidence: How Do We Know?. Climate change: evidence and causes | Royal Society
Amazing isn’t it? It‘s a mystery to you that anyone could be less than impressed but there it is. :rolleyes:
 

Amazing isn’t it? It‘s a mystery to you that anyone could be less than impressed but there it is. :rolleyes:
Folks are choosing to believe something there is no evidence for. I guess they've made climate change denial into their religion. I am not religious so I do not understand a belief in something for which there is no evidence. I don't want to believe things, I want to know things (paraphrasing Carl Sagan here). Again, show me the logic and data upon which you base your conclusions and I will be happy to check them out. It seems that it makes you happy to deny reality. I don't understand that. If you can explain it I would be glad to try to understand.
 
The situation seems to be that we are being presented this news by media who use science to explain Climate Change. These days there also seems to be a preponderance of evidence that shows it is getting worse, fast. I accept this as being very reliable, and that makes me aware of the possibility/probability of there being many very challenging impacts to our societies. That awareness alone will guide my everyday activities and help me choose who can best represent this in Government.
The awareness alone, with mature evaluation will guide us into an unknown future. At least I really hope so.
 
Ok, I tried to stay out of this but I can't anymore. Lol.

First, climate is always changing. Always has always will.

Second, any atmospheric/climate/history book from any decent university has the recorded history of our weather. This shows that there have been times a lot worse than this, and a lot better. Just the other day a friend in Madrid Spain sent me some articles that Madrid had temps of 45-51 (yes 51) in the early 1900's. We are not breaking temp records from history, we may be breaking temp records from current (last 100-125 year) time period in some places. So we need to pump the breaks on the hysteria.

Third, so tired of tv, re: news and govts, trying to put fear in our minds with the scare tactics about catastrophic end because we drive a car, or buy a tv, or use AC, blah blah blah. You know that any decent statistical search can show that factories producing non-essential items (tvs, plastic toys from china, garden gnomes, picture frames, nick nacks, porcelin angels, plastic plants, and a whole host of other utter junk, is from the last I saw 61 percent of industrial production, but also 78 percent of pollution.

Fourth, there is no one on earth that can quantify electric cars as better. If you research the production of electric cars, they are just as polluting as gas to make and source, but...the batteries are massively damaging. Just to create one battery, it takes massive trucks and tractors hours and hours to mine the ore, using thousands of liters of fuel, then hours and massive resources to refine it anywhere close to usable material to put into a single battery. The environmental damage is unreal.

Anyone even seen the oil sands in Alberta just for oil?? Lithium and other rare earth minerals are far far greater damage to our environment. No one talking about that on tv!

Fifth, electricity. Anyone even read the paper in the last 20 years will see many many headlines of rolling blackouts, power failures of many major cities. As a Canadian, I have seen the blackouts of Toronto myself when I was posted in Ontario for years. It was a regular thing. Other major canadian cities have had blackouts on and off over the years. So...this brings me to my biggest question that no politician or scientist even attempt to answer. If we barely or can not make enough electricity 20 years ago, or 10 years ago or even now when people turn on their AC units for a hot day...how do we make 10-50 times that requirement for that amount of ev's any govt says is a must?

It is highly laughable! In fact many nations have turned back on their coal powered plants to deal with greater demand. But you don't see much of that in the news do you? Lol.

Sixth, since third world countries around the world, along with China and India produce the majority of emissions, how in the heck will anything 1/3rd of the world does affect what the 2/3rds do? I mean what happens if 1/3rd of a football teams runs and the 2/3rds stand there? You lose! So please explain how we overcome that? Punish those countries? Sure why not go after the poor! Lol!! China and India really? What are you going to do to make them change? Already most countries import more than 50 percent of goods from China. (more like 75 -80).

People going to go to the small villages in India and arrest some farmer for using at 89 toyota engine as a water pump for his irrigation? Hah.

Seventh, ev's are not safe. Say what you might, but the insurance claims and registration statistics show that ev claims are 97 percent total loss claims, whereas ce (combustion engine) claims are 31 total loss claims. We have all seen the ev's catch fire, can't be put out, people stuck locked in an ev, etc. Then ev's tire replacement rates are 23 percent greater that ce use tires. The increased weight of the vehicle are wearing tires out faster. Collision fatalities are greater.

With scant stats so far, the increased weights of ev's create more physical damage at the same speed as ce's. Basic physics. Surely we can not be blind to this.

Eight, the cost of purchase then maintenance. Evs are way more costly to begin with. Less range, and when the batteries need replacing...watch out. We have all heard the stories. 12 grand or more, not covered under warranty of course!

Ninth, forest fires lies. Again as a Canuck, the fires in Canada are 80 plus percent man made. Either accidental, purposeful burns that get out of control, or according to news-arrests of arsonists.

Tenth, and my favorite-sea level rise. Al Gore in the 90's---we are all under water in 20 years! LOL. That was good! Well Victoria BC, sea marker that has been there since around the time of the first british military port/base was there, tells a much different story! My fathers brother lives on Islamorada Florida since the 8o's. His dock, waterfront and property has not changed 1 bit.

Eleventh, IPCC report from the 90's. Told a much different story than today. Yes times change. But according to FOIA there was attachments to the IPCC that said to conceal this info. Why? Hmmm. I wonder.

Twelfth, new research proving Temp precedes Co2.
According to an extensive study on the matter recently published by Demetris Koutsoyiannis titled "Stochastic assessment of temperature–CO2 causal relationship in climate from the Phanerozoic through modern times." Koutsoyiannis holds an engineering doctorate and is a professor emeritus of hydrology and hydrosystems at the National Technical University of Athens.

The study is a stochastic assessment determination of the sequencing of CO2 variations versus temperature variations since the 1950s, over the last 2,000 years, and throughout the last 541 million years. The strong conclusion of the study is that the causality direction certainly shows the temperature changes lead and CO2 changes lag on yearly, decadal, centennial and millennial scales.

Not the other way around.

The claim that "increases in CO2 drive temperature changes" is merely a "narrative" perpetuated by climate alarmists. The claim that humans, through their emissions by fossil fuel burning, are responsible for the changes seen in climate can be regarded as a "non-scientific issue." (Related: Proof 'climate change' is a hoax: Climate models are engineered with 'dangerous' CO2 warming conclusions built right into the code.)

"The premise of this study is that the climatic system is very complex and subject to perpetual change due to numerous processes, either internal or external to it. The fact that one of them, namely the relationship of climate with atmospheric CO?, is highlighted in the last decades does not correspond to its actual importance as a climate driver," Koutsoyiannis wrote. "The promoted importance is a non-scientific issue, related to the narrative that humans, through their emissions by fossil fuel burning, are responsible for the changes we see in climate."

Then...we get to CO2 itself. Well it is less than .04 percent of all atmosphereic gases. So...is science telling us that .04 that has risen from .03 in the last 50 years is the death bell for all of humanity? Really? Are we that numb to logic? Do we all not learn from past mistakes? Just outright believing everything that they say? Do we not have logic, deductive reasoning of our own?

So in Canada, we have less forest fires then 10 years ago, and 20 years ago. According to NOAA there are less hurricanes then the last decade. So where are these extreme weather events? Maybe the storms are more devastating because our infrastructure is old and heck, people live next to natural disaster zones more than ever, and govts make arbitrary rules and bad decisions that affect our response.

Re: Hawaii where the govt turned off the water in Maui so the people couldn't fight the fires on their own, the govt in Alberta recently threatened people who were willing to use thier small fleet of water trucks to put out a small forest fire on their own. So their are a lot of questions to ask.

All in all, I know this post is long, and of course someone will come after it, likely a few, but, I have my opinion, and I stand by it. We have been told we all will be under water by now, all be burnt to death, all be nuked by now by a whole host of doomsdayers and politicians for decades, yet here we are. The only catastrophes on earth are what the govts are doing.

Destroying farming, mass immigration uncontrolled spending and inflation, unprecedented business closures, unheard of crime and homelessness, corruption and so on. It's high time we the people wake up to the fact that we need to research and learn the truth for ourselves, and not rely on some overpaid, corrupt person or politician to feed you your daily slop of doom!
 
Hi @Tazx and welcome to the forum!

I am very glad that you expressed your opinion/s on this important subject. I agree that I do not want to listen to unscientific, and arguments for the sake of arguing. So, I think the best I can do is give some references to some knowledge that I rely on to find out what IS going on with "climate change". I won't explain these explanations myself and will let the reader decide their validity.

1. Scientific Consensus - NASA Science

Evidence - NASA Science

References | Advancing the Science of Climate Change | The National Academies Press

2. List of extreme temperatures in Spain - Wikipedia

https://www.cairn.info/revue-annales-de-demographie-historique-2010-2-page-147.htm (automatic translation)

3. Why scare tactics won't stop climate change

4. https://www.sustain.life/blog/electric-vehicles-environment

https://climate.mit.edu/ask-mit/are-electric-vehicles-definitely-better-climate-gas-powered-cars

https://earth.org/environmental-impact-of-battery-production/

5. https://stateline.org/2020/01/09/electric-cars-will-challenge-state-power-grids/

https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/electric-vehicle-myths

6. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/11/08/climate/cop27-emissions-country-compare.html

https://www.cnbc.com/2024/05/14/chi...on-coal-climate-targets-remain-difficult.html

https://apnews.com/article/carbon-d...-china-india-aa25e5a4271aa45810c435280bb97879

https://www.iea.org/reports/co2-emi...eather-pushed-emissions-up-in-china-and-india

7. https://www.autoremarketing.com/ar/analysis/ev-total-loss-claims-soar-as-prices-fall/

https://www.namic.org/pdf/publicpolicy/240122_ev_implications.pdf

https://www.iihs.org/media/e894e9dc...%20Research/Bulletins/hldi_bulletin_33_04.pdf

8. These references will have to be googled separately:

On EV total loss rates:
Mitchell International. (2024). Electric Vehicle Claims Report Q1 2024.
On EV fire risk:
National Fire Protection Association. (2023). Electric Vehicle Safety Training.
On EV safety ratings:
Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS). (2023). Vehicle Ratings.
On EV collision claim frequency:
Highway Loss Data Institute (HLDI). (2023). Electric vehicles have lower collision claim frequency than their conventional counterparts.
On EV maintenance costs:
Consumer Reports. (2020). EVs Offer Big Savings Over Traditional Gas-Powered Cars.
On EV battery longevity and warranties:
U.S. Department of Energy. (2023). Electric Vehicle Batteries.
On total cost of ownership for EVs:
Argonne National Laboratory. (2023). Light Duty Electric Drive Vehicles Monthly Sales Updates.
On EV range improvements:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2023). Electric Vehicle Range Testing.

9.
https://climateatlas.ca/forest-fires-and-climate-change

https://natural-resources.canada.ca...breaking-wildfires-2023-fiery-wake-call/25303

https://cwfis.cfs.nrcan.gc.ca/ha/nfdb

10. https://www.theguardian.com/environ...y-to-rapid-decline-a-timeline-of-ipcc-reports

https://archive.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_ipcc_first_assessment_1990_wg1.shtml

https://www.ipcc.ch/about/history/

11. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPCC_First_Assessment_Report

https://www.ipcc.ch/about/history/

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...y-to-rapid-decline-a-timeline-of-ipcc-reports

https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2016-08/documents/response-volume2.pdf

12. I think that is enough material to chew on. I hope you find it interesting, and maybe add to your understanding of climate change.

If you have any other concerns, let me know, and maybe I will be able to discuss them with you, or provide resources for you to consider.
 
Hi @Tazx and welcome to the forum!

I am very glad that you expressed your opinion/s on this important subject. I agree that I do not want to listen to unscientific, and arguments for the sake of arguing. So, I think the best I can do is give some references to some knowledge that I rely on to find out what IS going on with "climate change". I won't explain these explanations myself and will let the reader decide their validity.

1. Scientific Consensus - NASA Science

Evidence - NASA Science

References | Advancing the Science of Climate Change | The National Academies Press

2. List of extreme temperatures in Spain - Wikipedia

https://www.cairn.info/revue-annales-de-demographie-historique-2010-2-page-147.htm (automatic translation)

3. Why scare tactics won't stop climate change

4. https://www.sustain.life/blog/electric-vehicles-environment

Are electric vehicles definitely better for the climate than gas-powered cars?

https://earth.org/environmental-impact-of-battery-production/

5. https://stateline.org/2020/01/09/electric-cars-will-challenge-state-power-grids/

https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/electric-vehicle-myths

6. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/11/08/climate/cop27-emissions-country-compare.html

https://www.cnbc.com/2024/05/14/chi...on-coal-climate-targets-remain-difficult.html

https://apnews.com/article/carbon-d...-china-india-aa25e5a4271aa45810c435280bb97879

https://www.iea.org/reports/co2-emi...eather-pushed-emissions-up-in-china-and-india

7. https://www.autoremarketing.com/ar/analysis/ev-total-loss-claims-soar-as-prices-fall/

https://www.namic.org/pdf/publicpolicy/240122_ev_implications.pdf

https://www.iihs.org/media/e894e9dc-b9aa-4ba1-a088-87d8587b1b6e/Wfv7GQ/HLDI%20Research/Bulletins/hldi_bulletin_33_04.pdf

8. These references will have to be googled separately:

On EV total loss rates:
Mitchell International. (2024). Electric Vehicle Claims Report Q1 2024.
On EV fire risk:
National Fire Protection Association. (2023). Electric Vehicle Safety Training.
On EV safety ratings:
Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS). (2023). Vehicle Ratings.
On EV collision claim frequency:
Highway Loss Data Institute (HLDI). (2023). Electric vehicles have lower collision claim frequency than their conventional counterparts.
On EV maintenance costs:
Consumer Reports. (2020). EVs Offer Big Savings Over Traditional Gas-Powered Cars.
On EV battery longevity and warranties:
U.S. Department of Energy. (2023). Electric Vehicle Batteries.
On total cost of ownership for EVs:
Argonne National Laboratory. (2023). Light Duty Electric Drive Vehicles Monthly Sales Updates.
On EV range improvements:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2023). Electric Vehicle Range Testing.

9.
https://climateatlas.ca/forest-fires-and-climate-change

https://natural-resources.canada.ca...breaking-wildfires-2023-fiery-wake-call/25303

https://cwfis.cfs.nrcan.gc.ca/ha/nfdb

10. https://www.theguardian.com/environ...y-to-rapid-decline-a-timeline-of-ipcc-reports

https://archive.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_ipcc_first_assessment_1990_wg1.shtml

https://www.ipcc.ch/about/history/

11. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPCC_First_Assessment_Report

https://www.ipcc.ch/about/history/

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...y-to-rapid-decline-a-timeline-of-ipcc-reports

https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2016-08/documents/response-volume2.pdf

12. I think that is enough material to chew on. I hope you find it interesting, and maybe add to your understanding of climate change.

If you have any other concerns, let me know, and maybe I will be able to discuss them with you, or provide resources for you to consider.
Hey thanks for the info. Appreciate responses like this.
But as for scientific consensus, its has proven to be a false narrative. I don't trust any govt funded entity as far as I can throw them. NASA, ipcc, epa, and any other 'funded' news or govt sponsored research is blatantly false. I understand some of these reports may sound great and scientific, but they are not.
The famous hockey stick graph is a lie, the 75 percent consensus has been proven many times to be cherry picked information to accommodate their narrative.

Just like the computer models of covid in England were proven a lie. Just like the statements like...you won't get covid, you wont spread it if you get the jab. Just like we'd all be under water in 20 years ago. Wasn't that in the 90's? Lol. All the glaciers by now should be gone in Canada, but somehow their not. A GWPF (global warming policy foundation) Polar bears population is growing, their habitat has not declined or been affected since 2017. Yet all I heard was they were all dying cause their ice flows are melting. Not only is their ice solid and maintained, it actually showed a bit of growth. The bear pop is growing as well.

The columbia climate school found the ice in Canadas glaciers are thicker than they thought. Their computer models were wrong, and 'expert' evaluations were off. By a lot. It took actual factual ice depth core samples to prove otherwise. Just like Islamorada, Key West, Vic BC, Hawaii, and Japan sea markers have shown no drop or increase in the last 100 years or so.

Now I know some of these things can be interpreted differently, some exaggerated, some may be true. But, my experience in the forces for 23 years showed me a lot. I worked for a few years in experimental research section, and saw a lot. A lot of top secret research, testing, information etc. None I am going to violate my oath for disclosing. But, I mean a lot. There is about 25 percent of what the govt tells you is the truth. Another 25 percent could be or can be extrapolated into the truth-maybe truthfully or not, and the rest of the 50 percent is outright made up like a 6 year old telling fibs.

From first hand experience, I know (as we all know now) were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. But, but, but the govt said so. Started a war over it. No. My unit was attached to an American team there and the entire unit never found anything. Despite that being our only mandate. Nothing. Ever. Years late in Afghanistan many of my unit and myself witnessed many times a black unmarked air transports come in at 0230 or 0300, land, get loaded with pallets of drugs, fuelled, then take off into the darkness. No tail markings, no call sign, nothing. ???

Talking to the other specops units (other seal teams) said the whole Bin Laden thing was a cow pie cocktail, and despite more than a dozen ranger units, csor, seals, sas, jtf and more searching and verifying intelligence reports over years, checking every nook and cranny, cave and outhouse, house and tunnel, there never was ever a lead. Ever. Oh but this one is confirmed by sources on the ground. Nope. Wasn't even in the area. Huh. Not very funny as dozens of men lost their lives following these 'truth's', which were outright fabrications, or at the very least unverified paid informants or snitches.

Intel had no idea where he was, and it became a running joke that the intel of the 5 eyes (Can, US, UK, Aus, NZ) among the others (Cia, Mi6) knew he was long dead, but couldn't admit defeat, so kept it running. Then years later....Oh we got him! No pictures no videos, just buriel at sea! Lol. Then the entire seal unit that 'got' him died in a helo crash. Yeah convenient.

So forgive me if anything the govt or one of the funded or grant fed corps tell me something, that is apparently fact, when more likely is a version of it blown up, or fiction all together. I spent at least 15 of my 23 years in various high level postings, and 5 years 'in the know' so to speak. It's mostly garbage to save face. Talk amonst the teams is the cia knew he was dead long before as they were running him.

So anyway after my rant, which I am sorry for, I get passionate when I talk about that and feelings come up to the surface.

Some of the links you attached are great and back up my statements, some disprove my sections. The Madrid temps were true, I have a copy of the posted article, but yes the temps are higher historically in the southern region. So my bad there.

All in all we have been told so many lies by govts and govt related organisations over the years, that nothing-absolutely nothing is to be believed. Fear porn or not. Vietnam war, JFK, 9/11, london bombings, Iraq, Afghan, covid, Russia-Ukraine war (still have friends in Nato in Poland base-it's not what we are told), us southern border infiltration, its all fabricated. Just like climate change. Oops, no sorry. Climate change is real. It always goes in cycles. Monthly, quarterly, years, decades, centuries and milennia. Always has always will.

Heres one fact. Plants, trees, grasses, gardens, etc all require co2 to live and thrive. Many greenhouses pump in co2 and get huge yields from it. Without co2 nature dies and we soon follow. Scientific fact shows that co2 levels currently are the lowest in thousands of years. The fact it is going up is awesome. I hope it goes higher.

No one, can control the weather, co2 and earth. The very fact that we think we can do anything is ridiculously laughable. A once famous saying by an woman from India...If we think we can affect mother nature at all we are delusional. Mother earth could shake us all off like a bad case of the fleas if she chose.
 
Great response! I will reconsider the truth of these sources for sure. I will also look at any sensational "government" info with a very suspicious look, because I know also how much they lie and protect their interests. I also know there is so much misinformation that is propagandizing to convince us of things that are covert in nature, and that we will have a very hard time finding the truth.

I find this world of ours is a mystery and it will remain so until I leave. Maybe our future generations will start being truthful and form governments that really serve the people, but for now I don't trust most anything. I have moved in this direction for a while now...from saying to others "read this or that because the evidence is overwhelming", to "your gonna have to decide for yourself...good luck."

There's a whole lot of action around the idea that there is big change baked into the near future. Critical thinking is a very good practice now. Don't believe anything and look at all sides of the arguments. (which me and you have just done). I have already learned a lot from your knowledge. I will continue to keep those doors open. Thanks for expressing yourself so well.
 
I don't trust any govt funded entity as far as I can throw them. NASA, ipcc, epa, and any other 'funded' news or govt sponsored research is blatantly false. I understand some of these reports may sound great and scientific, but they are not.

... also the good people on this site seem to trust in the investment opportunities that government provides. I think that's a mistake. We may be headed for a reset.
 
Think most of the Ash from Coal Fires was spread on roads and sidewalks for traction.
Sure everything is radioactive now.

Many afternoons you can’t see for crap In China or India. 1969 and I never went back to L.A. or Sacramento Valley again. Eyes burning nose and throats burning all because of Air Pollutions!


Sunset yesterday was really beautiful and bright orange sun.

.
 
Last edited:
Actually we can, and do with CO2, Methane, etc. from human activities, much the same as we did with lead in gasoline, and CFCs that affected the Ozone layer.
0.04 percent of gas can not make the changes we think or are told. Get real. Methane does nothing. Oh are you referring to the cow farts? Lol. How about the 2 current lies we call war. Ukraine and israel?? More co2 and methane than 75 percent of the world being created. You think bullets bombs and fire are clean? Lol. Get some real world experience in these types of events, then come back to me. Do you know the smoke and pollutants were so bad in Iraq that all of us had throat and nose issues. Headaches and breathing issues. Afghanistan as well. Libya and Syria as non combatant observers we felt the same.

How about the private jets of the rich? Mega yahts the size of small cargo ships for 2 or 4 people? No? Just us and our cars right! Tax my food purchaese to cover their polluting. Oh and leaded gas was phased out leaded starting in 1975—not for direct health reasons, or environmental, but because it fouled catalytic converters that were part of emissions equipment. FOIA docs show it was costing the auto industry billions in warranty work in the 80's. So hundreds of billions today or more. It also was found to damage the earliest electronic sensors. Nothing to do with earth or people.

CFC's are actually according to many organization, higher today than the whole 'hole in the ozone layer'. You think China, India and Africa-3/4 of the world-are using clean tech and no cfc's. Ha.

You think anything is done for human health benefits? Have you seen the food industy? Chem trails, pharma, air and water, pollutants in vaccines that would be illegal if in food!
 
The real reason lead was removed from gasoline.

'There is no safe level of lead exposure, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). And lead poisoning can cause a wide range of serious, lasting health problems, including lower IQ, attention deficits, reduced brain size, and an increased risk of mental illness and cardiovascular disease.'
Leaded Gasoline Exhaust Shrank IQ for Half of U.S. Adults.
See your believing the narrative. 'Oh it was removed for your safety'. C'mon man, you really think they removed it for your safety or for the fact it was costing billions of dollars? Hmmm. Have you seen the ingredients in food today? Industrial cleaners, toxic chemicals, outright poisons, yet you still think they care about you.
 
According to Yale University researchers, increasing CO2 levels are "fast-tracking" photosynthesis in plants. What CO2-rich air does is allow plants to more efficiently use scarce water, functioning as a fertilizer in even the driest of deserts.

Scientists have been aware of this CO2 greening effect for some time, which they should be, seeing as how children used to learn this basic scientific fact in elementary science class. Somehow, elementary science facts have become new revelations in today's "woke" scientific establishment.

Carbon Brief is another media source that has long complained about how climate change is supposedly expanding the world's deserts. Now that we know the opposite is true, will the outlet adjust its narrative or double down?

Carbon Brief, by the way, is funded by green activist billionaires like Sir Christopher Hohn, a past provider for recently jailed Roger Hallam, and so-called "Extinction Rebellion."

Even Yale, which admits the world's deserts are shrinking, is still clinging to climate fearmongering by claiming that all the greening will "obliterate arid-land ecosystems." In other words, they are now pushing an "arid ecosystems matter" type of campaign to defend their crumbling climate narrative.

Chinese scientists recently discovered that over the past 20 years, about 55 percent of the world's land masses showed an "accelerated rate" of vegetation growth. Four different datasets reveal that nearly 60 percent of the globe has been greening since around 2000.

"Global greening is an indisputable fact," these scientists declared.

Daily Sceptic environment editor Chris Morrison reports that plants in general thrive at about three times the current atmospheric levels of CO2. This means that a whole lot more greening is still to come, assuming current trends continue.

"This recovery of CO2 levels in the atmosphere holds out hope for higher food resources in many parts of the world that suffer from periodic famines," Morrison writes about the benefits of greening.

This of course is only one thing. Using science and facts to prove the earth is greening. Well...in Canada farmers have had record yields for the past few years doing absolutely nothing different. So how come the 'extreme heat' as they say is not affecting the food production? Crazy weather events. Excessive rain, heat or cold. No, the slowly rising co2 levels are making food grow bigger and faster. Well in a starving world is that not a good thing?

People in the world have lost their ability for open dialogue and logical thinking. Looking at what they can see, hear touch and feel instead of what they are told on the black box in front of them, by people who only have interest in taking your money and keeping their job. Even people saying 'well I know so and so who has this or got sick or died', sure, you probably did. But of what? What was their health like? True health. What was their diet? Any conditions-known or unknown? Too many variables to accurately state a fact without knowing the intricate details.

I can tell you in my experience in the forces, the militaries of the world are not concerned or preparing for 'climate anything'. Many high ranking officers talk openly about the info they are privy to and no where other than on the news are the govt concerned about it. So, they question is...what's going on? Well during this past 4 years, we all heard and saw violations everywhere. Proving health status, forced testing, mandates (which are not legal anywhere), forced business closures (again illegal) 15 min cities, promoting eating bugs, carbon taxes, and so on.

In canada, millions of fines were refunded or wiped out. Business are suing the govt in the tens of thousands, former employees winning lawsuits weekly. All of it that Canada did was against the Constitution and Bill of Rights. But, still after all that, you still believe what they say (in this case Can, as I won't speak of other countries without first hand knowledge) about climate change. You can't cherry pick belief. It's either a govt is telling the truth about everything or they are lying about everything.

Yes, this dumb grunt who was in the military for 23 years and a spec op for the last 15 years has education as well! Who knew there are thinking solders! I did my 4 years in uni before the military, continued a bit during (depending on tempo) then finished it after retirement.

I think when you studied the mind sciences (philo, Psych, and socio) then are behind the scenes in real world activities you get a much better perspective of the truth.

My father was a police man, retired after 25, and then went into govt security. Some of the things he told me over the years were nothing short of, well I guess you would have to say, shocking. I fully believe that the only way for someone/anyone to truly understand society and politics is to be behind the scenes or fully embedded into it. Otherwise you are just in front of the tv, and you don't really know the truth. Other than what they say.

I of course do not judge people or discriminate for it, as only a few get to experience both sides of the coin. But, I do remember people used to ask questions and demand answers. And if the answers didn't add up, they asked more. The who, what, when, where, why and how?

So we can argue about this till the cowns come home, but we will get no where. All I can tell you is this. I can admit I know some things, not everything, not even close. But, what I can tell you...is outright belief of anything is dangerous.
 
The planet has reportedly been warmer than normal for the past 12, going on 13 months with temperatures reaching 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. And yet absolutely nothing in terms of a climate calamity has occurred despite decades of fearmongering.

For many years, the world was told that if temperatures rose by the 1.5 degrees, the amounts averaged over the past year, that ocean levels would rise, polar icecaps would melt and the world would basically end. Look around you: has any of this actually changed?

June 2024 was supposedly the warmest June on record with July 2024 shaping up to be a similar record-breaker. And yet the world is still spinning, the nation is just as corrupt as ever and all is “well” in terms of being the same ol’ rotten thing as always.

“Global warming caused by human activities reached approximately 1°C over the past 170 years, increasing at 0.2°C per decade,” writes Anthony Watts for Climate Realism. “Scientists warn that an average rise of more than 1.5°C in the surface temperature of the earth compared to pre-industrial levels will be catastrophic for the environment and human health.”

“But despite 12 months of the globe being above the so-called temperature limit, nothing bad happened on a global scale. Predications of climate catastrophe once we passed the so-called 1.5C temperature limit, never happened. The limit was nothing more than a political talking point from the 2015 Paris Climate Conference, as described in this Associated Press article: The magic 1.5: What’s behind climate talks’ key elusive goal.”
 
Last year, William Happer, Professor Emeritus of Physics at Princeton University, spoke on Sky News Australia about common misconceptions in climate science, particularly the negative perception of carbon dioxide (CO2).

“More CO2 is beneficial for the world, not harmful. It’s absurd to try to reduce CO2,” he stated. (Related: Carbon dioxide revealed as the “Miracle Molecule of Life” for re-greening the planet.)

Why is CO2 beneficial?

Happer explained that the planet is currently experiencing a CO2 shortage compared to what’s typical of plant life. “If you provide more CO2 to almost any plant, it will thrive. Greenhouses often double or triple CO2 levels because plants grow better and the quality of flowers and fruits improves,” he said. (Related: New NASA satellite data prove carbon dioxide is GREENING the Earth and restoring forests.)

He added that since the Cambrian explosion, which marked the rapid emergence of complex life about 541 million years ago, CO2 levels have significantly decreased. High CO2 levels during that period likely played a key role in life’s evolution. Studies indicate that CO2 concentrations were much higher then, with some estimates suggesting levels between 1,000 to 4,000 parts per million (ppm), compared to around 400 ppm today.

“Historically, CO2 levels have often been three to five times higher than they are now. Plants evolved to thrive in higher CO2 conditions, so today’s lower levels can harm them,” Happer explained.

One such harm is photorespiration, a process where low CO2 levels cause plants to expend energy detoxifying oxygen instead of growing. “When CO2 is low, the enzyme plants use gets poisoned by oxygen – forcing plants to use resources to counteract this instead of growing,” he said. Doubling CO2 levels reduces the need for this protective effort – enhancing plant growth.

Happer criticized the portrayal of CO2 as a threat. “It’s incredible that a gas essential to life has been turned into a villain. We’re made of carbon, and each person exhales about two pounds of CO2 daily. With 8 billion people, it’s a natural part of life,” he remarked.

A vital and useful gas

The Compressed Gas Association (CGA) noted that despite its often negative portrayal, carbon dioxide (CO2) is a naturally occurring gas essential for life on Earth.

Humans and animals need CO2 to help regulate respiration and maintain proper blood pH levels. Plants use CO2 for photosynthesis, a process where they absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and release oxygen. This oxygen-rich air supports the oxygenation of our blood, benefiting brain function and overall health.

CO2 is a versatile gas with numerous applications:

Agriculture

In agriculture, CO2 enhances growth in greenhouses and similar environments, promoting faster growth and higher yields. All animals, including humans, rely on green plants that convert CO2 and water into carbohydrates, releasing oxygen. Plants get carbon from CO2 in the air and other nutrients from the soil. Plants grow better in CO2-rich environments, which is why greenhouses often pump in additional CO2 to boost plant growth.

Higher CO2 levels also make plants more drought-resistant. Plant leaves have tiny openings called stomata, which allow CO2 to enter the leaf and be used in photosynthesis. However, water molecules can also escape through these openings. With higher CO2 levels, plants can reduce the number of stomata, losing less water and becoming more efficient in water use.

The 30 percent rise in atmospheric CO2 during the 20th century increased crop productivity by around 15 percent. Ongoing improvements in crop varieties, fertilizers and water management, combined with higher CO2 levels, will enhance food security in regions where hunger is prevalent, such as parts of Africa and Asia.

Medical diagnostics

CO2 is used in medical diagnostics, particularly in gas mixtures with oxygen to help diagnose respiratory diseases like chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). These mixtures are crucial for assessing lung function.

Dry ice, a solid form of CO2, is widely used in medical settings for flash-freezing biological samples, removing growths and refrigerating medications during transportation.

Food preservation and processing

CO2 is used to preserve and freeze foods. Liquid CO2 or dry ice quickly freezes food, maintaining its color and texture by limiting ice crystal formation.

In the meat and poultry industries, CO2 is used for stunning animals and keeping meat cool during processing and blending.

Cleaning

Dry ice is used across various industries for cleaning surfaces and enhancing sanitation without harmful chemicals. It is also an eco-friendly method for stopping leaks and cleaning up industrial spills, leaving no waste product behind.

CO2 serves as an effective cleaning solvent in industries like semiconductor and electronics manufacturing, replacing other solvents that can have harmful environmental impacts. Dry ice blasting is an alternative to sandblasting, used for cleaning without leaving residues.
 
Massive increases in coral across the Australian Great Barrier Reef (GBR) have been reported for 2023-24 making it the third record year in a row of heavy growth. Across almost all parts of the 1,500 mile long reef, from the warmer northern waters to the cooler conditions in the south, coral is now at its highest level since detailed observations began. The inconvenient news has been ignored in mainstream media which, curiously, have focused on a non-story in Nature that claimed “climate change” poses an “existential threat” to the GBR.

“The science tells us that the GBR is in danger – and we should be guided by the science,”
Professor Helen McGregor from the University of Wollongong told Victoria Gill of BBC News.

The existential threat is “now realised reported the Guardian.

Travelling back from the reality inhabited by the Guardian, it can be reported that last year’s gains were eye-catchingly large. On the Northern GBR, hard coral cover leapt from 35.8% to 39.5%, in the central area it rose from 30.7% to 34%, while in the south it went from 34% to 39.1%. The report is the result of monitoring of hard coral cover reefs from August 2023 to June 2024 by the Australian Institute of Marine Science (AIMS). The percentage of hard coral cover is a standard measurement of reef conditions used by scientists and is said to provide a simple and robust measure of reef health. Similar reports have been published by the AIMS over the last 38 years.

For the first two years of record coral growth, the narrative-driven mainstream media ignored the recovery story. But this year, the suspicious might contend, something had to be done to blunt the sensational news of the stonking rises.

Help has come in the form of a paper just published in Nature which uses proxy temperature measurements and climate models to suggest temperatures around the vast reef area are the highest recorded in 400 years. This time period is the blink of an ecological eye-lid given that coral has been around for hundreds of millions of years during periods when temperatures and atmospheric carbon dioxide have been markedly different. Nevertheless, this is said to pose an existential threat despite it being known that sub-tropical corals thrive between 24°C-32°C, and in fact seem to grow faster in warmer waters.

Another failure by climate fear mongers.
 
All the evidence is there and still countries are chopping down trees and destroying nature. Why do politicians seem to think it is not their problem? Don't they understand how the environment works?
 
The crazy train just keeps on chugging. The UK is now asking doctors to take a role in conducting doctrinal re-education upon patients.

 
What I know for sure.... most all the 'believers' will continue to believe. Also, most all the non-believers will continue to not believe.
All others either don't care or don't know, may eventually agree or disagree or of course remain undecided...

So, let's move on...
 
There is little doubt that the climate IS changing.....as it has done many times over the centuries. The problem NOW is that there are billions of people living in low lying coastal areas, in major population centers/cities, that are at increasing risk IF the predictions of rising oceans, etc., come true. Thousands of years ago, the people could simply fold their tents, and move to more favorable areas. That option no longer exists, and IF the oceans DO rise, those people will lose everything they own, and trillions of dollars of urban development, etc., will be abandoned.

There is little chance that those of us living today will be affected, but those living in the next century, and beyond, may be faced with tragic issues we can only imagine. Even if all the fossil fuel use, etc., was ceased today, the existing pollutants would continue to cause the climate to warm for decades. We are well into the "tipping point" where the damage has already been done.
 


Back
Top