That's a cool tidbit I didn't know.

I smell gore funding in this CIA sanctioned infomercial

George Soros siphoning tax payer money into these channels!

@@marutanray The lizard people want to brainwash the population.

@@brainretardant "I smell gore funding in this CIA sanctioned infomercial" Username checks out.

There's money for sci fi comedy and religious indoctrination.

T in high9ī ink a

I remember the story of benjamin Franklin discovering the ocean currents through basic observation while on a trip oversears. Your observations may be equally important.

Well said. A person's environmental footprint tends to be in direct proportion to income. Those with the most houses and air and road miles often do the most climate lecturing and look ridiculous when they stand for parliament on this issue. They rarely support even a tentative look at nuclear power as a possibility to avoid land grabbing solar and wind expansion or a small population agenda to reduce pressure on Australia's environment. I hope you hold out for the sake of the animals, insects and birds on your bush block.

The U.S. has more forested lands than a century ago. Spin that.

According your estimations, what could be the effects of a complete shutdown of the AMOC in the Earth’s climate? More heat waves, cold waves, droughts? It could be interesting to know that.

@@tulukdek8898 I would suggest that if AMOC completely shut down then climatic changes, however disastrous, may not be the worst of our worries. AMOC not only redistributes heat around the Earth, but also sends oxygen from the atmosphere and ocean surface layers deep into the oceans. Without that oxygen, complex life in the depths will die, and the oceans will become anoxic and euxinic, as sulphur eating bacteria generate highly toxic hydrogen sulphide. The H2S would spread throughout the oceans and eventually escape to the atmosphere, destroying the ozone layer and poisoning complex terrestrial life as well. We cannot live on a planet with a dead ocean.

@@tulukdek8898 It's just one of a number of processes so accurate predictions are nerly impossible, but taken together with all the other climatic effects, reduced albedo from lower sea ice, increased ocean temperatures, methane release from melting permafrosts in arctic regions, to name a few, my fear is eponentially worsening warming.

@@tulukdek8898 Think of Earth's oceans as our planetary heatsink, like a drink with ice in it. While there is still ice present in the water, the temp of the liquid remains stable. Once the ice has melted, every joule of heat energy then causes rapid temperature rise. We have nearly completely lost the northern ice. Not long now. Add to this all of the methane being released at the North Pole currently which is 22x more heat retaining than CO2 and it is looking like even if we had a will to stop it, we'd be shit outta luck.

Yes. WASF. Get ready for hell on earth.

@@rickalarie6215 you can't tax the planet for doing it's natural thing,you can tax the gullible inhabitants that have more money than sense though 👍

@@hoping67 👍 taxation is theft.

@@psyclepath1964 Then how do you expect govt. To function? Charity?

And scary.

@@chitsi2008 BAHAHAHAH Government DOESN'T function. It's the unnecessary middleman that steals our money.

WE ARE HAVING RECORD HI TEPMS HERE IN MCMINVILL OREGON WE HAD A DAY OF 114 BROKE RECORED BY 6 DEGRES ALL SUME 10 DEGREES ABOVE NORMAL ALL SUMMER I GUESS THE NEW NORMAL IS GOING WAY UP I HEARD THE SUN IS GETTING HOTTER

@@erdelegy 👍

Stopping the AMOC wouldn't cool any part of North America. They had to do that because U.S. movie for U.S. audience so has to be U.S. heroes/excitement. You don't watch many U.S. movies do you ? If they showed Europe then U.S.ians would be like "Britain, Europe ? Is that in the Far East near Virginia or the southern hemisphere near Texas ? Where's my Miss Teen South Carolina Global Atlas gone ?

Air drawn down from the stratosphere causes cryogenic cooling? Never mind that as air descends it heats up (see the universal gas law, a subset of which is the adiabatic lapse rate). This isn't a plot hole, it's a rewriting of the laws of physics. As far as science goes, the story is not even up to cartoon level. It's the same level as "What if you could walk through walls!" and then pretending to make real world comparisons. Don't get me wrong; I had fun with the movie! But if there were fire breathing dragons and magicians, would you seriously compare it to weather or ocean patterns on our earth?

It's a scary movie whose inaccuracies are so profound that it "innoculates" viewers against other scary stories, one of which might someday have a few accurate things to say.

What he said ^^^^

Yes!

Oh yeah influencers🙄

Todd Jones More likely 'be influenced by!"

Yes, if your agenda is to promote the appearance of warming temperatures, one would start at the coldest point (1860 conclusion of the little ice age) and proceed from there. If this was meant to be a HONEST report on changing temperatures, one would start in the middle of the medieval warm period. But if they started there, contemporary temperatures would appear COOL by comparison! Can't really promote a global warming scam admitting current temps are really not that warm.

There are a ton of comments basically trashing climate change theory or offering natural patterns...which is great but the fact that they don't attempt to show it in correlation with human history and whether it shows trends coincident with human population bottlenecks is disturbing as if we the suffering of hundreds of millions is OK!

@@jammcguire1276 idiots trying to feel better about something they don’t understand but frightens them nonetheless.

It's snowing at latitude 46N here right now May 12th so I'm shaking my fist at you with your fancy schmancy Gulf Stream showoff. Well I can make snowmen so ner.

Luck bugger. I live in the American Rockies and our weather is characteristically schizophrenic.

Well go further inland and you might find people have been experiencing more cold snaps than usual. First frost date for me is end December / start January (gardeners pay attention to stuff like that), been having frosty nights since start of November. Played havoc with my broad beans this year.

The is no confirmed collapse 😂

@@somerandomperson1825 Yes I mis-worded that and apologize. Impending collapse. I’ll edit it. Or better yet - destabilization.

"new paper only confirms and strengthens conclusions and findings of previous research papers" thank you for coming to my ted talk. lol.

@@dianac2498 I agree, it's quite concerning and let's get a current update on this destabilization that's happening 6 x faster or more than predicted.. (based on current observations)!! Plus the author of the study, Niklas Boers from the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany.. states that the Atlantic Meridional Overturning really is one of our planet's key circulation systems"...

you've been watching too many movies homie

The planet earth is spinning at around 1600 kilometers per hour. How does this factor in all of this? It seems logical that this motion must have some effect.This creates the westerly winds.

If you look at a graph of our climate over the last few million years you will see that nothing is out of the ordinary. The global warming promoters only look at the part that is rising in temperatures and ignore the fact that it will start to decline eventually just like it has throughout earths history.

@@conifergreen2 "see that nothing is out of the ordinary"?? Well here is a graph of the last 22,000 thousand years, and unless you are wilfully blind you cannot help but see that there IS "something out of the ordinary" recently. And we are its cause: static.skepticalscience.com/pics/Shakun-Marcott_Wheelchair_2016.jpg

It always amuses me that these pseudo scientists always pick 1860 as the start date for their pseudo science computer model comparisons. 1860 was the end of the 500 year 'little ice age', where temperatures had fallen by at least 2C after the 'medieval warm period', when nobody could blame 4x4's. The climate change pseudo scientists know this & always seek to make even more spurious reasons as to why the current fraud is different from previous warming periods - and it is different, nobody made appalling and fraudulent policies which tore down rainforests on previous occasions - nor did they decide that burning trees was a good way to reduce CO2...

@@Tengooda skepticalscience is nothing of the sort, it's a well-funded pseudoscience support system. Their name is a misnomer which is designed to support the other inaccuracies by deceit. I note that they aren't even remotely sceptical about the policies to burn trees to reduce CO2, even though, for example, it would need all the trees in America for just one year's worth of electricity & then at least 20 years for the regrowth of 50% of them. This is without the destruction of virgin rainforests and habitats to grow palm oil, or the fact that making ethanol from corn uses 6 times more energy than the ethanol will provide. You've fallen for it, which is sad, or maybe you're just another shill

Incredibly unlikely. For all the hype of the ocean level rise, it's only going up about an inch a decade. That's gonna take a long LONG time to swallow an entire beach. I'm calling BS.

Most likely was washed away it happens everywhere

​@@davepeterschmidt5818 ~1.6" / decade now. Some beaches have gradient as shallow as 1:100 so the shoreline for those would now be creeping in at 13 feet / decade now.

Gonna get bad real soon

@@grindupBaker thanks for this

if the atmosphere shows that sort of thing shit your pants cause I think there's a gravitational issue going on with the planet something like a black hole forming in the planet

Only problem is that such videos are "preaching to the choir" as reality denyers simply refuse to tune in to the science.

@@jimvenizelos4649 They commented above with their own reality.

there were always corrupt greedy people in charge, id argue now in the west its the best ever since we have free speech to criticize them.

In 10 years China made more pollution than the entire history of the United States...

Damn phones causing climate change...

Crying wolf, when there is none works once. No one is going to believe anything from government or corporate now.

@@jacksnyder7318 Are you saying COVID and the Global Climate Crisis is not happening?

@@DonaldWesselsJr The opposite.

@@DonaldWesselsJr Well, let's see... The two years of commie cough compliance have seen ZERO impact on cases, as well as new variants being reported almost every 3 months. Meanwhile, deaths from the flu have disappeared. Supposedly. And governments across the globe have been increasingly restricting even the freedom of SPEECH under the premise of 'fighting a pandemic.' A new solar minimum is approaching, which should last for around 15 years. One took place from the mid 60s to the mid 80s, and the usual suspects said we needed to stop using cheap (i.e. 'fossil' based) energy, lose freedoms, and cost the countryside with solar panels and paint our roofs black. This would forestall the coming 'global COOLING' disaster. A lot of big talk, all of it centered around destroying western civilization and propping up an egalitarian feudal state. But these people are as virtuous and honest as the wind-driven snow, right?

We can't wait for politicians to make the necessary changes. We have to do it. I don't mean private interests developing world saving technology. I mean replacing capitalism through the grass roots adoption of an alternative.

Maybe if he didn't claim The Day After Tomorrow was a "great action film"

BS

CO2 at 0.04% is a 2,500th of the atmosphere. That means to warm the climate by just 1"C carbon dioxide molecules must capture 2500"C of heat energy. That is bonkers. It also breaks all the laws of thermodynamics. Methane at 0.00017% is a 600,000th of the atmosphere so it's even more bonkers. However, the climate is changing. This is because of deliberate geoengineering programmes, in particular ozone thinning away from the poles. Though largely unreported ozone thinning effect is directly observable, this summer you can see a unnaturally bright sun just as we did last year. Under these conditions the pain felt when looking at the sun is not only from the increase in visible light but the much larger increase in infrared. (Look up at the sky and you will see a range of geoengineering operations in progress, these include chemtrail induced cloud or hazing, ripple patterns caused by HAARP installations, bizarre and unnatural cloud formations). Climate change is a programme to force change in accordance with the implementation of Agenda 21 /2030. Current events demonstrate this transition is well underway and will involve massive population cull through injected nanotech (re transhumanist programme). Agenda 21 also sees the permanent loss of all property rights with the introduction of universal basic income (ref NESARA/GESARA) and has/is being promoted by The World Economic Forum. 'You will own nothing and you will be happy' WEF In a depopulated world the surviving brainwashed and controlled population will be confined to mega cities. Carbon limits will be used to restrict consumption and liberty. Meanwhile the re-greened wilderness will be the exclusive playground of the ultra rich elite posing as conservationists. The CO2 hoax amounts to the theft of the world and the enslavement of humanity by a parasitic few. Welcome to the future! _________ I have included a debunking of 'accumulated heat' as it is so often used to explain how trace elements, so called 'greenhouse gasses', can warm the planet. Accumulated heat whilst sounding a reasonable explanation of how heat can build up is rather nothing more than gobbledygook. In fact it shows those using such arguments do not even understand what heat is. When we measure temperature we are measuring the heat energy a thing is losing. In short heat is a measurement of flow, the transfer of heat energy and this will always be in the direction towards the colder. For this reason a thing can never 'accumulate heat' in the way those advocating CO2 climate change describe. The temperature of a body is the measure of heat output, it can never be greater than the measure of heat input. Output = input. When a thing is warmed it is heated to an equivalent of the heat input. If this input is not maintained it will cool. Those that propose that heat can build up to be hotter than the total measure of heat input at a given time either do not understand what heat is or are being deliberately misleading. To illustrate, an object being heated by a flame can never become hotter than that flame, it's temperature cannot rise inexorably to the temperature of the sun for instance. Heat cannot be accumulated. When we think about it common sense tells us this must be the case. NASA and even Nobel Prize winning physicists have expounded 'accumulated heat' as the explanation how CO2 is able to warm the atmosphere. They claim that over hundreds of years CO2 has captured heat energy and this heat has 'accumulated' to produce a serious warming effect. As I have just explained, this is totally impossible and fundamentally violates all the laws of thermodynamics. That respected scientists should support such uneducated, unthinking nonsense is disturbing and only reflects that in terms of being able to think clearly about a subject they have no facility or inclination. These are the Dark Ages of science. Belief has outweighed logic or any critical thought. It tells us that we should not unquestioningly accept anything we are told, that experts can be fools. (NB: be aware of attempts to discard thermodynamics by talking about biology. Eg. 'It only takes a drop of arsenic to kill a person.' This would be somewhat desperate, muddled thinking. Clearly biological processes based on the reaction of a cell are not the same as the laws of physics/thermodynamics).

@@doobidoo095 Your explanation of the science of heat gain and radiation is sketchy at best and your playing of the UN card is as ridiculous as blaming Qanon or George Sotos for global warming. Even if you are a climate scientist, your explanation is contrary to the informed opinions of 97% of your peers.

@@bobyoung1698 A doubling of Co2 from 400ppm to 800ppm means almost nothing! So, do not worry. And the ocean currents wont stop until the earth stop spinning! And the sun is dark.

alas ! I don't speak English enough...

@@christopherobrien5005 Sorry but I have NO idea what you're trying to explain ... speak you English ?

@Chris Zealotes some junkie tree huggers lit those fires.

I'm not sure we even belong here anyway. The Earth hates us. Rightly so!

It's astounding to me how much liberals cry for "the Earth," yet they won't shed a tear for the million babies who are slaughtered by their mothers in the womb every year in America by abortion. 43 million babies murdered in the womb around the world every year. But hey, let's all cry for the Earth!

Edmond Pippins Wipe yourselves out with a flood of your own salty tears. Stop being led by the nose by these fake scientist like Bill Neigh, Bill Gates and Gretta.

Edmond Pippins - clearly a “glass is half empty” kind of guy... obviously an attempt at humor to one’s own detriment. Have you heard of 8 Billion Trees? kzfaq.info/get/bejne/d6ecrNiIvs-rl40.html

I wondered about that 4 years ago when I did my Arctic study. The ENSO is water piling up (as much as 4 feet high) and I wondered whether those south-west North Atlantic prevailing winds pile up much water NE Atlantic or Greenland and contribute to the pressure increase from that. I only just found out 2 weeks ago that scientists have been trying to figure that out (CLIVAR).

The effects we are seeing may not be fully understood but our impact is known and sure as hell if we don't do anything about it then we are heading towards an E.L.E.

I'm not convinced reducing our carbon commissions at this point is going to change the likelihood of a rapid reduction in the AMOC. IN fact, since I first studied this at Colorado School of Mines, I've become convinced that the slowdown is greater than we are measuring or modeling. The problem being the newness of the theory and insufficient datum from historical sources including the oceanic winds. Many of us engineering types know there is no way to model this complex of a chaotic open system in the first place and as soon as enough constraints are incorporated into the models all we have left is a graduate student exercise. Then there is the microbial load of the oceans and how much the make up of emissions of gases are changing with the chemistry of the oceans. Solar variances as well are hard to model. In summery I think the entire system has and is slowing more that modeled and the shutdown event is more on the order of decades than centuries. We are overdue by many estimates for the end of the inter-glacial period.

@Kevin Street Have you seen my sister Mary? She left and is currently ahead also. I stayed behind to correct what she could find but have no way of communicating. How are you doing it?

The only problem would be the mind set of anyone living in a land locked area of North America or Central Asia. I know that areas of Alberta, or areas of the Midwestern States of the USA, wouldn't care what's happening out in the Atlantic Ocean and therefore wouldn't be pressuring their governmental people to do anything. That is until they start suffering massive droughts and crop loss from lack of rain. But when it all reaches that level, it will be too late. As always, it isn't anyones business until it affects them directly. Personally I have more faith in the alternative energy solutions this page offers and the small or large storage of energy to push the hydrocarbon industry to a slow but gradual standstill and start the planet healing again....mind you with a lot less of us to pickup what's left.

This is not Science. It begins with a movie and uses that to focus on the AMOC. The AMOC is a miniscule part of the global climate system. .. Real Science - Heat moves from a hot place to a cold place. The system moves heat from the equator to the poles. ~66% of that heat is carried by the atmosphere, not by the ocean. Duuuuuuuhhhhhhh. .. Go back to high school.

@@bimmjim no need to be an asshole about it. And if the damned AMOC did shut down it would certainly precipitate further consequences. All systems are currently undergoing collapse. Name one that isn't.

@@dreich1000 I have multiple degrees in engineering and I've been studying Climate Science at an advanced level for 5 year. I am simply applying the scientific method to the information being presented. .. I give lectures like the one in this video. My subjects are methodology, Climate Science and Philosophy. ..

bimmjim Was he not just using a popular movie image to engage the viewer ? An unprecedented amount of fossil fuel (ie. millions of years in formulation) have been mined and burned in the last 150 yrs (most in the last 40yrs). A cursory consideration of these numbers should get anybody’s attention. It doesn’t take a great mind to understand that combined with the accelerating destruction of forests we’ve all (us lowly non degree holders and your brilliant self ) have a real life/real extinction problem.

@@martinnolan4800 Do these 36 lectures. Then we can talk: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/armlaNN1t5jHhKc.html

overpopulation will be solved through the expansion of the electrical grid. getting poor areas cheap electricity brings them out of poverty which reduces the population growth. China and India have already seen a lowering of their fertility rate due to the increase of access to cheap electricity. Insisting they build wind and solar right out of the gate is not only unfeasible but destructive to local wildlife and impossible for any 3rd world country to adhere to.

Lifetime is one word, Michael and over population is a farce. One could also make the argument that the education system, is nothing more than social conditioning. *The Secret History of Western Education* kzfaq.info/get/bejne/osqbdNiGzLnOlIU.html

So, basicly get rid of capitalism? Should be easy enough.

Yep and that doesn't even start on the limits to growth such as the fact we're running out of chromium and you can't recycle at that effectively. Also manganese and several other metals. Acromion is important because when you have no chromium you have no stainless steel. This was forecast back in the 1970s. And as they've checked up on it periodically the projections are on track. The good thing is. I'll be dead by the time it matters. My sympathies to the people who will be at the start of their lives. The only way we could remotely have a chance with Phoebe get their population rapidly below 2 billion and that is just basically impossible.

Ok Boomer

@@J_Stronsky I take offense to your "boomer" remark...."idiot" is preferred (I'm a boomer and I'm concerned) 😏

You know ocean temps have gone up 2.5 degrees in the gulf since we have lost global dimming right? Short period of time for that and it's not good.

Yes we can have economic devastation,mass unemployment,no foreign travel,shorter life expectancy and unreliable food supply as energy is unreliable thanks to high time, cloudy days and no wind. It's going to be fantastic!!.....not.

@@martinbrandom2654 there are dozens of typed of batteries that would allow for storage of energy, from literally pumping air into cavernous storage areas, holding it under high pressure, then the high pressure, when released, runs turbines that produce energy when needed. That's a very old kind of battery that can be used now, as well. Look into other typed of old batteries! Note: battery, in this usage, is not a heavy, black plastic clad box of acid you stick in your vehicle, but literally ANY method of storage of energy to be used later. Like pushing/pulling a weight up an incline when energy is available, holding potential kinetic energy in it for any sort of indefinite period of time, and it waiting there to be accessed at any future point in time. This is a description of another ancient kind of battery, in fact. There are also newer kinds of batteries being tested and created all the time. They will, eventually, be able to greatly enhance our energy storage, as well. Stop trying to pour out all of the fossil fuel industry's favorite talking points, as in how our whole world would collapse without its existence. That is pure propaganda, nothing more.

Finally..!! Yes. Someone who sees now that the "Air is Clear" Straight up dude. Nature's coming back. People are learning to live as families again. We're thinking, & coping, riding bikes, & loving it. Without drive thru's. Without truckloads of disposable plastic shite. Without traffic jams. Without going to work. Without only being valued as a consumer. Without Distraction. We are indeed, "seeing clearly now" 🎶 the rain has gone..

@@davidbeaulieu4815 You gotta source for that ? I've been waiting for that to pop up in discussion again after it went away very quickly a year after 9/11 when global stats were combed over, & this first got into my mind. I still think its good, we have to get back on the right side of this or cook ourselves.

I'm in southwest Fl. and biospheres is SPOT ON !

I lived there 20 years ago and all that stuff was normal back then. Remember walking on the beach as a kid having to avoid the disgusting piles of rotting fish, wondering why the hell people wanted to go to the beach.

@@grugnotice7746 The intensity and duration of these negative impacts are much greater now.

@@thinkabout602 No, they aren't. Went to Galveston on vacation 5 years ago and everything was about the same way I remembered it. It only looks bad when you are primed for it to look bad. Humans are easy to manipulate. You can make people see whatever you want them to see, like two different movies on the same screen. Mrs Doubtfire, the psychological horror movie.

@Jacob Zondag All life is an existential crisis. The alternatives are death or godhead.

Im have 8 kids lol

Start with yourself

@@michaeldiffey3791 Making assumptions are we?

@@anest-uk that reply made no sense at all. Definitely start with yourself.

The climate has always changed. A thousand years ago the climate of Scotland got much colder and wetter causing the destruction of the Caledonian pine forest, it should be noted this was before James Watt and Greta Thunberg.

@@iancampbell6925 I agree. However change that is so rapid it can be witnessed by a single individual is unlike previous changes. In fact you can't make any deductions about world climate from you own observations but what is again different is that worldwide people have noticed changes to their own weather patterns within their own lifetime. If you view these observations in the light of scientific study of climate patterns they can be seen as symptoms of the monumental changes that we might be going to endure if we don't control our co2 emissions.

Charles Stewart - I really enjoyed camping around the West Coast of Scotland, although the mosquitoes are rather brutal.

@@treescape7 here you, what is more likely to cause global warming... a smattering of humans or the sun which is 1 million times the mass of the earth Humans still fucked it though

@@pakistaniraveasylum1396 CO2 is an insulating material. We keep pumping it out and we are fucked sooner. We stop pumping it out we are fucked later. And get fucked less.

Exactly. People forget that often. Winters even before 1750 were often hot and cold, snow or no snow, but summers even in the Canadian north were rarely below 0 unless you are above 75 N latitude or if our orbit like it was pre-20k ago was further from the sun.

I think one meter rise would swallow most of Florida. The Seychelle islands are already going under water. It's not just the flat water level it is the storm surges that will make coastal living impossible in a lot of places.

Take all the boats out the water will lower the sea by a few mm

@@Soulvex Nonsense, we've taken most of the fish out and has that made a difference?

@@Martin-se3ij yes.

What 1 metre sea level rise is that?

great chunks of ice are breaking away from the antarctic effecting the pacific the same way.

@@bissetttom1738 - what do you know about this? Are you aware that calving of antarctic glaciers is normal? So are you trying to impress everyone that you know something?

@@tomkunich9401 I acknowledge the ice calved, it just how much, if the salt currents desalinate to much they slow down and eventually would stop. so what was your point?

This post is bull!

If the sea temperature had risen by a full degree, the polar ice caps would have melted... WTF are you even talking about? It is of course impossible for the gulf stream to "collapse". It is also impossible that human beings, who produce less CO2 than the ants, are the cause of any change in temperature... And no, Skippy, ants are not "carbon neutral", ants are animals just like all the others and they fix oxygen, liberate CO2 and there is absolutely nothing that ants do that fixes any CO2...at all whatsoever. Water vapor is the culprit, the main greenhouse gas and human beings produce absolutely zero % of atmospheric water vapor. Furthermore global CO2 levels are 40% below what is optimal for plant growth, we should by trying to produce more CO2, not less. A blue water even is inevitable because the true causes of temperature variation are cyclical in nature and cannot be stopped, particularly the passage of the solar system through galactic dust lanes which block so much sunlight that, were it not for the giants, mainly Jupiter, life on the Earth would never have occurred. Blue water in the arctic means tropical weather up to about the 35th parallel...the planet will turn into a garden paradise and remain so for tens of thousands of years. We need to stop all the fear mongering global warming lies and get on about the real business of all relatively conscious sentient beings throughout the universe... Planetary Management, mainly Desert Reclamation. This is very simple: if their lips are moving, they're lying. Do you honestly think that this clown believes the shit that he posts on this propaganda machine? The money...that's why they lie. Have a reasonable day.

@@pooltuna you use a lot of words not necessarily in the right order.

@@pooltuna excellent post ,if only this kind of logic ,the proper kind ,could penetrate the bullshit pumped out by these clowns , here’s to hoping

Yeah. When summer comes around internal combustion engines start overheating. Sounds legit.

Mix Of science with propaganda and agenda

So in other words you just don't understand what a simulation is.

Yes but I heard it's going to be renamed "The Guydrup" in honour of a "Guy McPherson" who first discovered "global dimming" and possibly first discovered the ocean. This has 2 small crucial advantages (1) It's slightly newer and (2) It's slightly easier to say.

@@grindupBaker just hope it doesn't get changed, just because its newer should have absolutely no reason or weight for change, I absolutely detest the idea of change because its new, the only reason to change anything should be, a change or correction of data, and as for ,easyer to say why not call them Bobs or Mandy's , if it offends the American ability to pronounce then tuff, learn the pronunciation don't just lazily expect to change things because you cannot be bothered.

​@@CrusaderSports250 Ah, the irony in this one... "if it offends the American ability to pronounce then tuff" Umm, Roger... "Tuff" is a type of geological mineral composite. I think you meant "tough", mate. As well, "easyer" is not a word. It is spelled "easier". I won't get into the myriad other grammatical errors you presented in your comment (of which I mostly agree!), but the Queen's English this is not. I know, who cares, right? Just this lazy, offended American who can't be bothered to pronounce words correctly, I guess. ;-) Keep calm and carry on.

What is the CO2 emissions from humans compared to natural emissions?

@@haydenjardine9178 does it matter? Carbon and CO2 are the smallest contributers to heat trapping arousals. Water vapour being the biggest makes them look miniscule in comparison so cloud cover and how it changes is the only thing that matters. CO2 and carbon cannot trap heat very well on its own.

@@Io-vz2jq If the Globe warms ie: Average Mean Temperatures rise....The Climate Changes. If the Globe Cools Down ie: Average mean temperatures lower....The Climate Changes. See how its referring to two DIFFERENT things.

Interesting!

@@keithwilson1554 You just explained the racket. There while always be a crisis because of "climate change." It will always be either too hot or too cold. We need to stop climate change. That is how the racket works. Climate change is a constant but there are groups that tell us what it is supposed to be.

B

Is it not interesting there is no more scaremongering about antarctic ice melting ? Al Gore, of course, predicted the end of all antarctic ice by 2000 and now it's growing.

Yes case closed super fantastic lol

@@cfs8118 can you support me by having a go at that warming cult member danisil at the top of comments please. Let's show them that the many people that do not support man's tiny amount of carbon causes temperatures to warm. Thank you. Good comment on your to.

Fresh water is heavier than salt water.

@@richardhines8622 Dont be stupid. The relative density of normal saltwater in the Atlantic for example is 1.023.

@Siebert McCormick there are brine pools at the bottom of the Atlantic and Pacific that are tens of thousands of years old. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brine_pool is about right.

You might research the Medieval Warming Period and the Medieval Cooling Period and at least get a clue.

The main thing that is missed is how the bible says its all going to be.

the extinction of biological diversity is the real cause of the increased co2, 10x more carbon is released from soils than is released from fossil fuels and those soil's would be a carbon sink were they farmed correctly. plant's exist to create sugars to pump those sugars deep into the soils to support the soil life, this takes many species of plants and some with very deep roots. when we grow single crops over vast areas not enough sugar goes into the soil to sustain the life below and so the lies dies and the co2 that was in that biomass released.

@@bengardener8928 you might be right. I do not have the knowledge to say either way.

@@tonysmith5812 that is an interesting thought. Are you having something particular in mind?

Actually it is less than a century old. Virtually all of the actual measurable data (that bit that is measurable, which does not mean the same as reliable) dates from the last forty years (now, I remember when it was only the last 25 years). That starting point (~1980) was picked with care because if we go a bit over five years earlier, then the Arctic ice cap in the summer resembles the modern "global warming caused" one today. Heck they cannot even keep their story straight in less than a year's time. Record breaking snowfall on Greenland increases the weight of the icepack, which then, to alleviate the stress, has a summer with faster moving glaciers (get jello, put it on a plate, press lightly, then press heavily, same mechanism) and more runoff melt. All we get to hear about is that the Greenland icepack had a record runoff, not the cause of the record snowfall and freezing. One fits AGCC the other fits actual observable and repeatable science.

@@kamaeq Thanks that's good, however, I have real data on glacier melting in the Canadian Rockies dating from 1950. What is the significance of that data in terms of Global warming? That's a good question. When the surveys were done the assumption was Solar activity was the only real cause. Why? Energy calculations of the amount of energy required versus the solar variation and the correlation seemed to fit. Now the argument of ecological degradation due to human activity has some validity. Again is it a sole cause or a contributor to the natural variation. That's the real point that ecological studies focus on. Are our overall activities skewing the natural variations? The answer seems to be in the global sense as being: maybe. Local effects can actually be readily observed. Heat domes over major urban areas is one. It is the politicisation that's skewing the science and ruining any debate.

@@malcolmwatt4866 Not much on a global scale and yes, given the "Green New Deal" and the various treaties it appears that it is all politically driven pseudoscience. Why are your actual records not relevant? Too local an area (since micro climate activity can occur even on a partial continental scale) and too short a time frame when dealing with patterns over ~1000 year scale, 70 or even 100 years aren't much, especially in a local environment. Even NASA has admitted that there has been a warming "pause" for over a decade in some documents. For me, looking at the dismissal of the best data on the planet (USA) for an extended period, when you have a massive cooling like is showing now, to get the "(one of the top) hottest EVAH!!!", I can look at the global map and see huge warming trends to make the math work... in places in the third world where they have ZERO thermometers and ZERO history of temperature records; equals marking your data to fit your curve.

@@kamaeq I couldn't agree more except the real data contained in tree rings and glacier profiles are ignored or given interruptions. From a historical view of a desire for a Biblical resolution, it makes even more sense to fudge or be creative in the science hence the political agenda of a century of technological refinements driven in the secrecy wars allow for the, hey, anything goes attitude. No doubt oil has it's problem, we know that but climate change isn't one of them.

@@kamaeq Where did you get your climatology degree? Uh huh. Pseudoscience indeed.

Yes of course it's 2.50 metres of water depth has the thermal capacity the atmosphere above it, but the atmosphere is also above land so the top 3.47 metres of ocean+sea+lakes depth has the thermal capacity of Earth's entire atmosphere. Land below 6 metres isn't involved with climate on the century time scales and that 6 metres of wet soil equals 3 metres of water depth but soil/rock land is only 25% of Earth's surface so the soil/rock land involved for Earth has the thermal capacity of the top 1.05 metres of ocean+sea+lakes depth. They aren't really quite accurate to 0.01 but more accurate than +/-0.1

@@grindupBaker thanks. A few years back the BBC weather report showed the sea depth with colour. Why didn't they show sea temperatures. Sea depth is meaningless whereas temperature isn't.

@@grindupBaker a few years back during a cold snap a lake in England froze over and three people walked on it. They walked towards the middle where the lake was deepest and therefore less frozen as the water underneath has more heat. The ice broke and two of them died.

@@alexbowman7582 figures

​@@alexbowman7582 Colour-coded and contoured vertical sections of ocean temperature & salinity for that Atlantic Ocean line WOCE Hydrographic Programme, WHP (2002): Section A16 with 272 oceanographic profiles on a north-south transect through the Atlantic and also for a Pacific Ocean WOCE 1990 composite (or it might include Wally Broecker's 1970 RV Revelle line) are readily available on the internet and I have them in my computer files since 7 years ago. For the Atlantic Ocean Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) I find the salinity section to be far clearer than the temperature section, you can really see that saltier tongue shoving south. It's a section at longtitude 25W from 53S to 63N (13,000 km long).