Climate change is upon us....

[Roses]

It is very bad news, but no doubt the climate change deniers will keep on pretending it has nothing to do with human activity.

[Aruntraveller]

It is very bad news, but no doubt the climate change deniers will keep on pretending it has nothing to do with human activity.

Unfortunately I think you are correct.

[Nearly Sane]

I feel it's probably past the point of no return

[Nearly Sane]

But it's all ok Alok Sharma is 'literally throwing the kitchen sink at climate change'

[Sriram]

Photos showing rapid changes....

https://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2021/08/weather/antarctica-climate-change-cnnphotos/

[Sriram]

Temperatures at the Greenland summit over the weekend rose above freezing for the third time in less than a decade. The warm air fueled an extreme rain event that dumped 7 billion tons of water on the ice sheet, enough to fill the Reflecting Pool at the National Mall in Washington, DC, nearly 250,000 times.


https://edition.cnn.com/2021/08/19/weather/greenland-summit-rain-climate-change/index.html

[Alan Burns]

There is a very significant activity which seems to be ignored in most climate change discussions.
It currently causes more damage than the entire aerospace industry.
It is set to double within the next four years, with no indication of restraint.
What is it?
See below ........


























Mobile phone technology

[Gordon]

Mobile phone technology

What aspects of mobile phone technology do you think are especially problematic with regard to climate change?

[Nearly Sane]

What aspects of mobile phone technology do you think are especially problematic with regard to climate change?

I think it's related to this

https://theconversation.com/how-smartphones-are-heating-up-the-planet-92793

[Aruntraveller]

I don't want to continue posting depressing articles but.......

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/sep/09/earths-tipping-points-closer-current-climate-plans-wont-work-global-heating

The last paragraph sums it up:

If Earth systems cross critical thresholds, everything we did and everything we were – the learning, the wisdom, the stories, the art, the politics, the love, the hate, the anger and the hope – will be reduced to stratigraphy. It’s not a smooth and linear transition we need. It’s a crash course.

[Nearly Sane]

Ffs!


https://youtube.com/shorts/aZXrDXRwgq0?feature=share

[Harrowby Hall]

Ffs!


https://youtube.com/shorts/aZXrDXRwgq0?feature=share

Here is the official transcript of Johnson's 2019 speech to the UN.
https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/pm-speech-to-the-un-general-assembly-24-september-2019

Alexander Johnson's jaw looks a little strange as he is talking about Kermit the Frog. There is software available which can produce fake spoken material both auditory and visual.

My judgement is that "Ffs!" is intended to be a judgement of Johnson's choice of words. It's not that I disagree with your sentiments about the PM, NS, but I think that you have been conned here. He mentioned Prometheus in his speech (which is in line with his claimed proficiency in dead Mediterranean languages) and it is my suspicion that this passage has been ... err ... adjusted. And you have swallowed the adjustment.

[Nearly Sane]

Here is the official transcript of Johnson's 2019 speech to the UN.
https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/pm-speech-to-the-un-general-assembly-24-september-2019

Alexander Johnson's jaw looks a little strange as he is talking about Kermit the Frog. There is software available which can produce fake spoken material both auditory and visual.

My judgement is that "Ffs!" is intended to be a judgement of Johnson's choice of words. It's not that I disagree with your sentiments about the PM, NS, but I think that you have been conned here. He mentioned Prometheus in his speech (which is in line with his claimed proficiency in dead Mediterranean languages) and it is my suspicion that this passage has been ... err ... adjusted. And you have swallowed the adjustment.

Not sure why you thought a 2019 speech was relevant but your 'suspicion' is unfounded

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/entertainment/news/boris-johnson-accuses-kermit-the-frog-of-being-wrong-in-climate-speech-at-un/ar-AAOK1uc

[Harrowby Hall]

So ...there was I - I took him for his better. That'll teach me.

I made a search for the speech and the 2019 one was the only UN speech which came up. One newspaper article I came across said that  Johnson would be adressing the UN on 24 September. You can't believe anything in the papers, now.

[Nearly Sane]

So ...there was I - I took him for his better. That'll teach me.

I made a search for the speech and the 2019 one was the only UN speech which came up. One newspaper article I came across said that  Johnson would be adressing the UN on 24 September. You can't believe anything in the papers, now.

He's a dangerous lying corrupt thug.

[Gordon]

The Guardian's take on Johnson's speech: what he actually said and what the Guardian think he really meant.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ng-interactive/2021/sep/23/boris-johnsons-climate-speech-annotated-what-he-said-and-what-he-meant

[Aruntraveller]

Seen in the twittersphere:

"Muppet literally quotes Muppet at the UN. Muppet inception. We are in hell."

and also:

"For ten years after the release of Al Gore’s film ‘An Inconvenient Truth,’ @BorisJohnson carried on as a committed climate change denialist, and now, apparently, we’re meant to take this cartoon clown seriously, as he stands up there, dribbling words out of his mouth arse."

[Nearly Sane]

Marina Hyde on right royal hypocrisy on climate change


https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/oct/15/green-royals-saving-the-planet-helicopter-queen-charles-william-climate

[Sriram]

And now....heritage forests apparently emit carbon into the atmosphere instead of removing it....

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/10/27/world/unesco-world-heritage-sites-carbon-emissions-climate/index.html

***********

Human activity and climate change-fueled disasters have turned 10 of the planet's internationally recognized forests, also known as World Heritage sites, from carbon absorbers into carbon emitters, researchers have found.

The report from UNESCO found these sites can absorb approximately 190 million tons of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere each year -- roughly half the amount of the United Kingdom's annual fossil fuel emissions.

But in the past 20 years, many of these sites showed an increase in emissions, some even exceeded how much carbon they were removing from the atmosphere.

UNESCO researchers said two main factors are causing forests to flip from sinks to sources: climate change-fueled extreme weather events including wildfires, storm and drought; and human land-use pressures such as illegal logging, wood harvesting and agricultural practices such as livestock grazing.

***********

We just can't win, it seems....

[Udayana]

And now....heritage forests apparently emit carbon into the atmosphere instead of removing it....

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/10/27/world/unesco-world-heritage-sites-carbon-emissions-climate/index.html

...

We just can't win, it seems....

We? This is all down to human activity. Global warming and continuing pollution could be halted if we humans only organised ourselves properly - to achieve that.
 

[ProfessorDavey]

We? This is all down to human activity. Global warming and continuing pollution could be halted if we humans only organised ourselves properly - to achieve that.

Interesting point in one of the papers today.

There is a lot of concern about the willingness of China and India to engage in action to limit or reduce global warming. But the former (but not the latter) spent about 30 years with a policy which is perhaps the most important in terms of reducing emissions - limiting population growth. Without their one child policy just imaging how much worse the situation would be today if China had had exponential population growth over the past 30 years.

Saving the planet from global warming wasn't the reason why China adopted the policy, but had they not done so and population growth had continued as it had been before the policy was introduced their population could well have been 50% more than it currently is.

[Udayana]

Interesting point in one of the papers today.

There is a lot of concern about the willingness of China and India to engage in action to limit or reduce global warming. But the former (but not the latter) spent about 30 years with a policy which is perhaps the most important in terms of reducing emissions - limiting population growth. Without their one child policy just imaging how much worse the situation would be today if China had had exponential population growth over the past 30 years.

Saving the planet from global warming wasn't the reason why China adopted the policy, but had they not done so and population growth had continued as it had been before the policy was introduced their population could well have been 50% more than it currently is.

It might have been ... but exploring such possibilities is really complicated. Currently the Chinese population growth rate is about a third of India (.37% vs .99%) but the per capita carbon footprint is three times higher, for similar total population sizes. The US, with a quarter of India's population puts out twice as much total carbon.

Population should be managed along with everything else, but how it is managed matters a lot. 
 

[ProfessorDavey]

It might have been ... but exploring such possibilities is really complicated. Currently the Chinese population growth rate is about a third of India (.37% vs .99%) but the per capita carbon footprint is three times higher, for similar total population sizes. The US, with a quarter of India's population puts out twice as much total carbon.

Population should be managed along with everything else, but how it is managed matters a lot.

Absolutely - both population number plus carbon footprint per capita are really important. The nightmare being situations where both rise rapidly, which could be the case for India. I think my point is that there is a lot of focus on one half of the issue, footprint per capita, but far less on the 'elephant in the room' of ever increasing numbers of humans on the planet.

[Nearly Sane]

Interesting article on the perception of climate change amongst young people

https://www.wired.co.uk/article/climate-crisis-doom

[Nearly Sane]

Don't agree with all of this but it's coruscating stuff


https://archive.vn/alj7r#comments-anchor