Also, the IPCC is usually very conservative in its estimates

Well it is their summer, and i think trump is planning on putting a golf course in. We are such a dumb species, im truly baffled by humanity and emberrassed to exist to be honest. I was unfortunate enough to realize over 43 years ago at around 8yrs old, that humanity was just plain unsane. That is a hard thing for an 8yr old to handle, with no one to talk to about it really either...😒🔫

Thanks Peter. I seem to unsuspectingly opened an unusually rich Pandora's box of misery, doom and despair this week judging by the comments I read before yours, so it's a welcome moment of respite to read your message :-) All the best. Dave

@@JustHaveaThink Don't let the paid trolls or idiots win

Cheers Ronald. I appreciate your support. I'll do my best to continue presenting in the same way. All the best. Dave

Sorry the adult talk is slanted severely to the left. C02 has been way higher in the past. So the ocean has been acidified in the past and plenty of if land has been underwater and temperature higher. All this happened before the industrial revolution. We really need him to give the whole story in relevance to the total timeline if life in earth.

@@kelvinwilling241 Whatever, we've heard it all before.

Good point sir.

Ignorant thick as pig shit fuckwit you are. Entertaining though in a 3 Stooges kind of way.

@@grindupBaker pig excreta is actually quite fluid. Surely you remember, from when you were born.

@@grindupBaker Vulgarity and insults are the tools of the ignorant. Maybe you should review your comments and reflect on whether you should be commenting on anything that includes the word "wit." Then look up the things I said in my 1st comment, and recognize why you shouldn't comment on things you know nothing about.

@Joshua Martin wake up to yourself.

@Joshua Martin Yes keep listening to the "experts" who have predicted the end of the earth, snow, the inundation of coastal areas, and the drowning of islands for decades, and have been 100% wrong in every case. Believe government scientists who change data to get funding. Because that shows critical thinking and independent thought. Because China and India are building more coal fired power plants, but these "scientists" say you need to give up freedom, security, and money to save the world, but the Chinese and India don't. You my friend are brilliant. And no, when i was in elementary school, they taught us that there was going to be another ice age. Which goes to show two things; 1) your assumptions have made an ass of you, and 2) climate scientists don't know what they are talking about.

Yes sir. Correct. Dugong are like sea cattle that graze on seagrass.

Note: as a citizen of the USA, not all of us "worship the golden cow." Please forgive us.

The Democrats did nothing to mitigate climate change. Nothing.

#TeamTrump 2020, 2024 ....

proudhon100 Democrats, republicans , they both work for the same people and it ain’t you and me . The seek to divide us and it’s working.

@Liberal Neo It *is* a joke, you idiot.

It's great you are both concerned and dedicated: pollution is a major problem. CO² is NOT.

Start by getting rid of your cellphone, there's a useful puppet!

With pleasure. Here it is www.usclimatealliance.org

except that the scale of which should be done... with the cost and energy use... make It not a very good solution.

@@shuaige3360 Why? Every city already has waste treatment plants that can be adapted for this most algae double in number every 7 days faster with the right nutrients the algae itself is an energy source that can run the system alone with the oil from it but the methane from the sewage or bio digesting the algae could power it as well. Your argument amounts to I don't want to do it will cost too much because I did not think about it.

@@Barskor1 Simple replies: 1) because waste treatment plants are already in use... to treat water in the most efficient way we know. 2) if It was a silver bullet, and if it was making very much sense in the financial term, do not worry, It will already been done... if it is not done, It is that their are many problems that you do not realize, because you and I are not expert on the subject.

@@shuaige3360 1 growing algae also treats water as it reduces nitrogen and phosphorus among other things. 2) You don't acknowledge entrenched ways of doing things even when better options are available happens all the time and this is no exception. 3)BS cite some or they don't exist.

@@Barskor1 Yes, you are 100% right, you alone figure It all how to solve at the same time the water treatment problem, the global warming problem, and let say maybe even the food production issue, all at once, with a simple idea, without any problems! Congratulation, you will get the nobel price of everything and the equivalent of the medal of honor from every single countries. Kisses :P

My thought exactly :-(

@@Jens.Krabbe welcome to the party. - It's so much fun, especially when you run into a muppet that denies the whole thing.

@@jonovens7974 the ignorance of so many has sapped away the little energy i had left, and crushed what meager faith in humanity i was holding on to. The universe doesnt make mistakes, that concept is a human perspective... humanity has proved it deserves and requires extinction. That just seems to me to be the self evident truth.

Agreed, we screwed ourselves bieng ignorant, short sighted and greedy, lazy, nimrods. Plenty of "warnings" along the way, but honestly any degree of common sense could see our way of existence is distubing self centered idiocy. Good riddance, im fine with extinction really.

We are, by charlatans preaching this nonsense.

Stop spreading fear and lies!

Hi Andy. That's great news. You have been a constant source of support (and occasional correction) over the months, and I really appreciate it. All the best. Dave

Ignorant thick as pig shit fuckwit you are. Entertaining though in a 3 Stooges kind of way.

@@grindupBaker have you checked what i wrote, it is all there online for you to see , if you can be bothered. Insulting people, doesnt do your case much good im afraid. All i said was these numbers should be openly discussed., Not an unreasonable position to take, i would suggest. www.dailysabah.com/science/2018/06/28/coldest-temperature-on-earth-recorded-in-antarctica

@@grindupBaker why do you bother with cherry picking deniers I won't even waste my time with them anymore lol

@@garethlamb4963 oooh yes, cant have any blasphemy against the othordox , appproved view. Must think the same , must think the same, no divergences of thought allowed. it goes against the doctrine. Lol

lol, at first look I thought this is satire and wanted to compliment you on it, but then I just noticed you actually do not understand the diffrence between climate and weather ... :/

No thanks fuckwit. Thanks for the handy suggestion though fuckwit.

Shameless apple polisher.

C4-plants? not so much. C3-plants maybe, but droughts, heatwaves and other extrem weather phenomena will nullify or even reverse that advantage. Read up on RuBisCO

yeah good thing we are plants..oh wait.

​@@dbrown2430 Well "Nico8847 " so who knows. I heard a lot Russian plants are joining in with drivel now (advanced horticultural technology) and also Russian plants of course.

Thanks Eric. All sorts of consequences and feedbacks are coming from all sorts of angles, that's for sure. All the best. Dave

@@philipocarroll eric got to go to save us all, i am sry eric.

@@accutus Poor old Eric. It's got so poignant that it must be Monty Python's 15 tonnes weight now. By Eric.

@Eric Patterson Well yes, you are describing the actual Inconvenient Massively Inconvenient Super Super Massively Inconvenient Truth that's obvious to those of us with functioning brains. This big negative pressure on Life of the Global Warmage set aside, the sole purpose of Life is competition to the death with all other Life. The group things co-operation is a partial truce sustained for a few billion years now and that's why it works. Whether it's NATO, the Soviet Union and the MAD control to sustain Life or the fact that microbes can't wipe out all other Life it's simply that the system works because no Life element can achieve its goal of destruction of all other Life. If it could then there'd be 1 unit of 1 species left, and then a little later zero Life. The system works because no Life element can achieve that goal, but all are pre-programmed to strive. I've found the banal Religion thingy interesting though obvious, its clubbishness and false sense of "purpose" obviously promotes greater "drive" than simply accepting reality. And so on and so on. The actual Inconvenient Massively Inconvenient Super Super Massively Inconvenient Truth. Mustn't grumble, that's Life.

that goes hand and hand with population and everyone wanting a first world lifestyle. look at china's incredible growth. they want a first world lifestyle and now they have it but at a cost. they lose billions of tons of topsoil every year. land use is only a problem because of mass farming, mass farming is a problem because of population. everything happening can be traced back to, too many people consuming.

@@dbrown2430 My hope is that we can produce enough with permaculture crops and store carbon at.the same time. A first world lifestyle need not come with the loss of a stable Gaia. I'm not sure population is the main culprit just yet, but no sense in testing the limits! The earth still has enough for every man's needs, but bioharmony must become the new way.

@@chuckkottke the world has enough if the population isnt ridiculously consumerist, which it is. We are out farming our habital land, you should watch that video on what 11 billion people means, as they use more land and water for farming animals. Its not sustainable

@@dbrown2430 I am always shocked by our modern consumeristic culture here in the US. One trip down the highway of neverending shopping, it amazes me that there is even a drop of oil left given our rate of insanely mindless consumption! But it doesn't appeal to me;. Is it really all that good for us, even psychologically? What is real wealth is enjoying the simple pleasures in life, changing mindsets, getting real again. Yes, I agree! Way too much livestock, not enough permaculture crops, a lack of complete cycle view; much has to change. I did a thought experiment to view humanity another way, asking what would we look like if we formed the human flag on Earth, standing in formation. The human flag worked out to roughly 50 miles on a side. My friend Peter (a member of Earth First) said, "now picture that mass of humanity as a giant caterpillar, munching on a leaf. That leaf is Earth.". I laughed, but he has a point, I have to admit. Still we can achieve universal prosperity for what matters most, and slow then reverse population growth, for sooner or later we will exceed carrying capacity; better safe than sorry, I agree!

The estuaries off the coast of Louisiana are being submerged by sea level rise. The other threat is that Louisiana right now is in a major drought which means that any rivers that are exiting into the Gulf of Mexico could be a record low level allowing sea water to migrate up the rivers. If there's any agriculture alongside the edge of those Rivers they will be lost due to poisoning by saltwater period of the Mississippi is a record low in saltwater is coming up and threatening the water supply for several cities

Hi Sandie. Great to hear from you. I'll definitely take a look at the Permafrost broadcast, and I'd be happy to take part in a live chat if you think it would be worthwhile :-) All the best. Dave

And it has for at least 700 million years. Search the record as much as you like and you can't find any evidence of CO2 causing warming anywhere.

CO2 is the result of a warming planet not the cause. So it has to be something else, like the sun or the fact the planet has been steadily warming for thousands of years with occasional mini cooling periods (climate change).

@@javebury We can definitely say it was warmer some time ago. Some of some Sir David Kings ancestors lived much further North than us and it was lush green. Sadly it's been cooling for a 150 million years.

Debunked. Look into this claim further. Small amounts of warming from perhaps an orbital perturbation --> a bit of warming--> release of CO2--> huge warming. That's why the apparent "lag" occurs.

@@garysheppard4028 The graph shows no release of CO2--> huge warming anywhere.

My glass has been effectively empty for the last decade - but trying to convince people for the last 4 decades and getting nowhere is the reason. Now, well ill live another 10 years at most, so F*&k you all - because you've (humans) know about the problem for 60 odd years now. I'm afraid you can't rebel against extinction.

Nothing is going to stop what is happening dont normal people get it? Even if we shut down every car plane truck bus factory power plant electrical grid on the planet, there is a lag in co2 amplification. We will hit critical mass and the feedback loops will be unstoppable. They have already started, it would take decades to slow this, we dont have that kind of time.

Then dont watch fuckhead, go piss on yourself somewhere else, WE WILL ALL BE GLAD TO SEE YOU LEAVE DIPSHIT

Climate Deception Network -We agree. Dave has done a magnificent job in educating. Bravo!

I can’t help but laugh that Greta is brought up as a credible source on anything- especially when she basically goes around on private jets and sea barges Gonna use MovieBob as a example too? Seriously AOC and Greta’s family have caused a lot of pollution which effects specifically organisms- noise pollution and especially around the sea Fun fact: the sea is a desert

@@silent_stalker3687 I thought Greta would have took the best child actor award this year.

spex357 She would... but you know how Hollywood is and they don’t want to get in trouble so no award for Greta’s acting

@@silent_stalker3687 It was crap acting anyway, over played the drama, anyone would think she was on Hollyoaks.

Sadly this is true

@peter Water vapor is heavier and more abundant than CO2 in the atmosphere. So what? Most of the geologic record has several times the present levels of CO2 in the atmosphere. The present levels are nowhere near unprecedented and/or catastrophic. We are making a slight rebound from one of the all time low atmospheric CO2 levels on the geologic record.

@Wes Baumguardner LOL, right old fuckwit you are.

@peter Your argument is a joke. The amount of heat reflected back to earth due to carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is logarithmic, not linear as you are suggesting. This means that there are diminishing returns. If you double the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere (100% increase), you only increase the amount of radiation reflected back to earth by 50 percent. That is why it took 20 times the present level of atmospheric CO2 to cause the only mass extinction linked with CO2 as a primary cause. We are talking 8,000 ppm during the end Permian extinction compared to our present 400 ppm.

@peter Btw, I am already swimming in liberal tears. Perhaps that is from where their claimed sea level rising is coming.

Yes, by all means look at reputable sources. The geologic record is a reputable source. I highly recommend anyone interested in this topic look at it and the history of atmospheric content of our planet over the entire duration instead of just the last 20,000 years. If you do so, you will find the first mass extinction event 444 million years ago in the end Ordovician period which was caused by global cooling due to newly exposed silica sucking the CO2 out of the atmosphere. We are much closer to that extinction event than the Permian extinction event which was partially caused by too much atmospheric carbon dioxide.

Vehicle sales in the US since 2014 have been at or near record highs. Not only that but light truck and SUV sales have dominated the market. Americans love their giant SUV's. 17 million vehicles, many of which are multi ton trucks sold per year. That would be one cause.

It's because it had been hoped outside the U.S. that the U.S. would take a technology leadership role and also lean on other countries (so lean on other countries for reasons completely different than that of ensuring U.S. hegemony for their oil supply and their control of trade). However, it's become evident that U.S. Americans are now about as useful to the other humans as tits on a bull. China is now the only hope for the human species and for species of Life in general. U.S. America now totally hopeless.

@@grindupBaker what country are you from?

My guess would be Zionist capitalism

@@NonDelusional74611 if nobody can give a coherent reason, I'm going to go with what my gut tells me, which is that the numbers are a lie.

He got a brief mention in my recent video about the Australian bush fires. I tend to agree with your view.

He got a brief mention in my recent video about the Australian bush fires. I tend to agree with your view.

@@JustHaveaThink thank you for replying to my comment and I did catch your bushfire comment love your channel and thanks again

50...and yes we are still digging our grave deeper, personally i think its already far too deep to ever get out. But hey thats just me, i have tried to wake people up for 43+ yrs to no avail so i give up, we deserve extinction and the universe ALWAYS gives what is deserved.

@@donfields1234 If we could blame one man and make him pay , his name would be Rupert Murdoch . But unfortunately it's the poor and the innocent that will suffer the most and will die first .

We have one of the most stable climates in the world in terms of disastrous weather and temperature variation. You'd think the world is ending when half an inch of snow falls with how everything grinds to a halt.

Hehe

@@Redsauce101 - we have had the wrong kind of snow, wrong kind of leaves - I tend to think it's wrong kind of management

Lies For MONEY Its YOUR fault ..... Pay us Corp Gov The EARTH HAS BEEN KILLED BY NUCLEAR ALREADY...... LOOK AT THE CANCER EPIDEMIC

FixItStupid ... who is asking for money?

No idea where you getting your 'facts' from...but those figures are ludicrous. In fact there have been extinction events associated with CO2 levels not far above what we have...and the highest were no more than 2000ppm.... So nice trolling...

Except we already are in the middle of an extinction event. The real danger is CO2 unleashing methane, such as in the Siberian traps, which would cause gigantic harm to the whole planet.

@Markus Antonious "No idea where you getting your 'facts' from...but those figures are ludicrous. In fact there have been extinction events associated with CO2 levels not far above what we have...and the highest were no more than 2000ppm.... So nice trolling..." I get them from the geologic record. Feel free to look at it yourself. Perhaps you do not understand the principle of causation. You should look into that as well. CO2 has been in the atmosphere for all of the extinction events, that does not make it a causal factor. The only major extinction event which had atmospheric CO2 content as a major causal factor is the End Permian extinction caused by a super-volcano erupting in Siberia which released massive amounts of sulfur dioxide, methane, and CO2 into the atmosphere. Volcanic ash blotted out the sun for a few years, killing many plants. Then the atmospheric CO2 rose to approximately 8,000 ppm or 20 times our present day level, which caused temperatures to soar, and this finished off many species already struggling to cope with the other strains caused by the volcanic eruption. The average CO2 content per the geologic record is 1,200 ppm, or 3 times the present value. During the approximately 50 million years of the Jurassic period, atmospheric carbon content was around 2,000 ppm, which is what you are claiming is extinction causing levels. No extinction event occurred at this time. In fact, life thrived. So, go ahead and tell me about your mass extinction event caused by CO2 levels of 2,000 ppm. When did it occur? Nice trolling.

@Nelafix "Except we already are in the middle of an extinction event. The real danger is CO2 unleashing methane, such as in the Siberian traps, which would cause gigantic harm to the whole planet." There are lots of organisms dying off. This is caused more by other things humans are doing than by increased atmospheric CO2 levels. We are clearing forests and rainforests to make more farmland, while plowing up the soil to leave it exposed to the sun the vast majority of the year which kills off the bacteria and fungi necessary to keep the soil healthy, then we are dumping herbicides, pesticides and fertilizers onto this land, much of which are water soluble and end up in the water that many plants and animals consume. We are covering millions of square miles with asphalt, concrete, and structures making the environment inhospitable to most organisms. We are dragging huge nets through the oceans killing pretty much anything that gets ensnared. But no, let's not pay any attention to all of this activity. Let's blame CO2 in the atmosphere.

mixing atoms and molecules? did you fail to pay attention in science class? Atomic bonds and structure are a completely different category than molecular bonds/structure....

@@adrian4276 This is called poetic license, it was meant as humor, not a lesson in physics or chemistry. I actually know a lot about molecular bonds, after all the years I spent whacking moles at Star Leisure in Bray, Ireland.

@@Chimel31 sorry, i saw the "mixing atoms and molecules thing" and pounced. I see many many sheep before a pulpit in the comments and that made me slap hehe

Phytoplankton supply's most of the Earth Oxygen. PHYTOPLANKTON needs CO² to thrive.. The Sun is the driver of Climate Change thru Particle Forcing.. The melting of the polar ice is due to the underground Volcanic activity. The Earth warms up by water molecules in the air. The IPCC models don't include Solar Forcing,but they will in the year 2022..

Big money was never going to let him be the leader. He is finished now. May 2020. Why do people still believe that our corrupt system of capitalization is going to save us. lol

@@aland5478 Sad to see Bernie Sanders leave the race after backroom deals sealed his fate. I never put faith in capitalism, as it is a form of plantation slavery, but if workers owned those businesses as no outside money could buy the plantation, adding fair guidance by honest governance, and at least for things that belong in the market there can be a good situation for all. I put faith in reform, for the moral arc of the universe is long, but not that long. Time will come soon when this whole system will be forced to change.

@@aland5478 Why do people put faith in capitalization? I think just simply faith in the familiar, and fear of the unfamiliar. As better ways are expressed, change begins to happen, spurred on by problems with the current system.

The problem with pessimism - or more to the point, fatalism, because a lot of fatalists who actually have personal issues they need to work out disguise themselves as pessimists - is that you get exactly the results you were looking for.

I am interested in seeing that show.....I have followed Jamen and he is about the most positive voice I have heard in our genre. Just do not know if these "solutions " are solutions. I am all in to learn.

@@EnvironmentalCoffeehouse check out the video introduction. It's not a way to back to busines as usual but it will offer the planet some relief. We can even do marine permaculture under the mirrors.

@@EnvironmentalCoffeehouse you should join.

Imgay Asheck I just might if they will have me💚

@@EnvironmentalCoffeehouse they definitely will :)

"My understanding is that oceans exhale CO2 when they warm and absorb it when they cool". Wrong.

@@grindupBaker is it now? Care to elaborate with some facts or is that just your opinion?

@@justingage5524 There are several mechanisms: 1. Warming or cooling leads to different distribution of CO2 ocean/air, so warmer oceans tend to release more CO2, thats correct. 2. But increasing the CO2 of the oceans doesnt lead to cooling - why should it? It only does when, as in 1), the uptake of CO2 by the oceans is ATMOSPHERIC CO2, decreasing the CO2 concentration of the atmosphere. 3. So what the bushfires did was: a) Rapidly putting CO2 in the atmosphere that was previously drawn from the atmosphere by the bush plants. Over some years, to decades. Some of the released CO2 goes into the oceans, yes, some into the atmosphere. So it has a temporary increase, albeit a very small one, in CO2 concentrations. Until new bush grrows and draws that realeased CO2 back into wood. Ofc, if net plant mass is lost on a global level, continuously, then CO2 concentrations rise. This has been measured and contributes for some percent of the total global CO2 increase. b) Temporarily in a short time frame, weeks to months to year at max, bushfires like volcanoes put aerosols in the air (until theyre washed out). These aerosols, aka dust, block some incoming solar irradiation. This has a small cooling effect.

@@hooplehead1019 thanks. I know co2 doesn't cool the ocean but a cooling ocean draws in CO2. The speaker in this video stated that the ocean was absorbing co2 from the bushfires. If it's drawing in co2 does that mean it's cooling?

@@justingage5524 Ah, now I understand you, sorry I was slow. :) No, apart from ocean temperature, what also determines if it absorbs or releases CO2 is the concentration of CO2 of the atmosphere vs the ocean. Right now, because every second tons of CO2 are added to the atmosphere the atmosphere temporarily has a higher concentration of CO2 than the oceans (cause we dont pump CO2 in the oceans, we burn fossil fuels in the air). So although the oceans are warming - they also take up CO2 to get to a distribution equilibrium. Like when you open your window after getting up in the morning and warm and cold air and oxygen and CO2 distribute to finally reach an equilibrium (I assume you close the window before it reaches that in winter...). Only in that example, its the same medium, air. And air and water, and thus different distribution values, in the case of ocean and atmosphere. (I dont know the values, you can sure find a paper to look them up.) This is a common point of misunderstanding, because in the past, without rapid CO2 concentration increases of the atmosphere by burning of fossil fuels, warming oceans indeed have RELEASED CO2. And thus amplified warming, for example in the end of the last glacials. So, many people rightfully wonder what is different now or even incorrectly assume the oceans are releasing CO2 right now. Today, we measure that the oceans currently are warming - and at the same time we measure they are taking up CO2. Because of the increasing concentration in the atmosphere. Scientists predict there will be, as always, an equlibrium when oceans will have warmed and the concentration of CO2 in the oceans will be high enough that they indeed wont take up any more CO2 from the atmosphere and even release it. For example if the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere decreases: when we take out more CO2 from the atmosphere than we emit. For this scenario they already have incorporated this effect when for example calculating the number of trees needed for X amount of atmospheric CO2 reduction - the number obviously is much larger than when neglecting this effect. Because the oceanic CO2 "substitutes" the removed CO2 in the air to again reach an equilibrium. Same as now, but vice versa.

Hi Mark. Thanks for letting me know. I'll double check them. Apologies for that. All the best. Dave

Hi Mark. The links are working now.

Thank you. I appreciate that. Just me at the moment but I get great support from comments like yours and from the channels patreon patrons. I still work full time but hopefully that will reduce this year.

Look up what heat waves and cold waves are and then look up the current waves. I thought the sky was suppose to be wine red and so was the sea- especially as books back then described it #RedTheSea Sarcasm aside

Well....it's summer in Antarctica and winter in DC. But yes, we may have to move there soon. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/l72cdcyazZfUaY0.html

Jasper Thebeau Yes the northern hemisphere goes through seasonal changes like everywhere else when the earth tilts. Hence why there are areas where you can have 30+ days of sun and night up there such as Alaska, some areas manage to have 70+ days of constant sun without it setting

Well, a lot of species went simply extinct in previous rapid climatic changes. But ofc after some hundreads of thousands of years, other species flourished again. So this is not the point. The point is not about absolute temperatures (until we get to extreme values), its about the fact that rapid changes specifically are COSTLY for a stationary infrastructure and us humans, that we have reached a very populated world.

Key point: You can quibble while living organisms at the base of the food chain fail to form calcium carbonate shells.

@@proudhon100 the misrepresentation is deliberate, using emotional appeal instead of factual information. I don't buy the points being made. Just like coral bleaching and disappearing polar bears.

@@inquirer1599 The base of the food chain going is an emotional issue. When you personally can't eat, you will get emotional. Seawater is becoming more acidic, so quit thinking you are being scientific.

@@inquirer1599 lol. What would you prefer to call it, dealkalization? You obviously missed high school chemistry. Am I right?

@@proudhon100 A reduction from 8.2 to 8.1 compared with the pre-industrial era? Given that we didn't measure pH until 1909 using a system not fully standardised until 1924, I'm rather skeptical about those 'pre-industrial' figures.

No. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/g95jpLJ-up_Pd5s.html Satisfyingly satisfying bluing of steel.

@@massimookissed1023 You have been trolled....lol...

SADLY CORRECT www.good.is/antarctica-and-los-angeles-were-pretty-much-the-same-temperatures-today-thats-not-good-news tRump should build a golf course there for his next vacation in November

Every death cult says the same thing. You'll see in 10, 20, 30, 100 years.

Science is full of contradictions, that's what makes it so fun. Antarctica we are told millions of years ago was tropical. No snow. And CO2 levels at times past there were almost twice the level of today. Yet the earth survived. Scientists for the most part tell us that in the recent past (several thousand years) the continent has been covered by ice. Yet maps dating back to the 1500's seem to imply that Antarctica was tropical. Maps accurately outline the land mass in agreement with current remote sensing of the land mass under the ice. How did people then know the shape of the continent if the place was covered with ice? So we have a conundrum. Fascinating. I wouldn't give up on the earth yet.

@@jonnyde so annoying when an article like this uses only farenheit... About a problem of global significance, but no, lets use the units 3/4 of the world won't understand

@@eric7397 Millions of years ago!!! yeah we did not exist then . The earth will be fine until the day the sun swallows it or a massive object blows it apart. The problem isnt the earth dying, the problem is all life on the earth dying. People forget man is a new species here, the dinosaurs walked the earth for 200 million years before us look what happened to them. We have brought about rapid change that nothing can adapt to in time, the dinosaurs died because of rapid change, yes there was a cataclysm but that triggered a global effect that changed the environment rapidly. We dont have time to adapt sadly.

Yes I have a few years ago now when I first noticed they were moving faster than we had seen before or even recorded. It is standard during Low Sunspot periods to have increased Volcanic and Tectonic activity, possibly due to altered magnetic levels. Extreme localised weather and Pandemics. The Umbrella effect is a good explanation for the heavy localised weather whatever it might be. Four foot of hail in Mexico was quickly ignored by the media, but it was a sign of the times. Many have studied the link but they are not allowed to speak. Oddly many are still pushing the Global warming scam whilst it's been cooling nigh on everywhere since 2016 even though the trace gas CO2 is rising. The cooling trend in some areas should be alarming but according to Sir David King a few years ago we should have already moved to the Arctic by now to get away from the heat.

spex357 thanks for your reply. The endless complexity of the Earth's weather and electrical circuits would appear almost beyond comprehension.

@@landerclifton3003 Yes it's super complicated. Many spend years in the field but would never say they have fathomed it all out. We now have computers looking into it but they can't give an accurate weeks weather forecast yet. I was stood at the Met Offices reception desk some years ago and on the wall behind was a live video display of the current local weather. It showed wall to wall sunshine but outside it had been raining heavily for an hour. On pointing this out the receptionist turned it off.

@@spex357 Climate models are not for predicting weather changes. Another common mistake made by those who listen to politics instead of science.

@@decimusrex92 they are used for many predictions/ guesses.

Global strike. If everyone were to stop fueling their car for a week, the governments would be on their knees with trillions of debt, and listen.

The world has many problems but co2 is actually a blessing. It greens the planet very fast and increases crop yields.

you cant people have zero effect on what the politicians do, they will say"we hear your concerns" then promptly walk away or change the subject. The only way to threaten a politician is to mass vote them gone.

Data proves we've never been safer, healthier or more prosperous than at any time in history.

Well yeah, what can you do when your nation isn’t the one causing the problems such as China, India and so on and he best people want to do is push to control cow farts

@@silent_stalker3687 Pretty simple, just put an embargo on China. Oh wait, no, without their sacrifice you can't make trillions $ ! Every nation that pursue Infinite Growth by usury is an accomplice to this mess. The "best" people just want to avoid guilt.

French Toad ‘The best’ The people who... pushed recycling plants around and so created more pollution than they were removing ‘Avoid guilt’ Have you seen Blizzard? Also look up at the Lobbyist and pro-regulation corporates who raise the price of your goods, making China’s much cheaper, who’s supporting China? Everyone because their goods are cheap Say you have the choice between 1.25$ fish can vs 7.50$ fish can What would you buy? Now let the regulations and the minimum wage rise and... you now have the choice of 1.25$ or 11:15$ fish can The cheaper would go to China Now who’s suffering at the cost of regulations? Small business Why? Because Amazon would suffer at 15$, but can manage 11.50$ wage however their competition will not be so lucky and may not even survive a month What does Amazon do? Ship a lot from China and through China Why not ship stuff out of Africa and so on? Oh right Tariffs Some African nations have up to 70% tariff cost and of course a debt would China would probably grease the rare minerals China really loves which means more smelting and more waste dumping Small business wouldn’t like to go to China and pay the shipping fee and tariffs Amazon would love that and could do that in mass especially when they have less competition to deal with so it’s only from them Also what fuels infinite growth? Politicians largely use votes- others use propaganda and force such as African warlords and dictators which have actually been going to China to help restrict the internet

Brian Keller ‘Rather than shift the blame to other states’ Genocides are bad and hitler is bad for enforcing it ‘Don’t shift blame to other states’ Again China is one of the biggest producer of all pollutants chemical lakes, dumping and so on. Hell read the Paris agreement: ‘we agree to continue emission until a time when it peaks and then decrease it’ Aka do nothing And then you have the top polluters all of which dump into the sea and have little in place to protect property and people living there. ‘China is cutting back’ What’s that slogan going around? China lied and people died. China lies and crunches numbers, Hell once they shut down all factories so they could have a good few pictures to promote a city

Brian Keller Oh ‘orange man bad’ got it, how about this have a policy that does something than nothing or hands the fuck off Also 0.00001% pollution You: ‘that’s too much, it’s no reason why we should cut it down further!!!!’ Last I checked it’s illegal to dump anything on anyone’s land and the ocean, not so in China And last I checked China wanted some of Taiwan, Hong Kong, Mongolia and Pakistan land along with India pushing troops around its territory near China Besides there’s the human rights abuse that China just hand waves away... something your Paris agreement buddies sure seem to ignore whenever it’s a problem; make of that as you will.

Level of ignorance 11/10

@@garysheppard4028 and you probably think CO 2 is a pollutant. It is a very tiny contributor, less than methane and far less than water vapor as a socalled greenhouse gas. The sun is King. BTW, growers pump up their greenhouses to 1000ppm CO2 and plants love it. We puny humans are at the mercy of the climate, not the other way around. Good luck

On the contrary the Annual General Meeting (AGM) was an existential threat. First Barbara complained that nobody was eating the triangle sandwiches she made, then Art said they tasted like hard tack, then it degenerated into a melee and I heard there were several fatalities. You don't get that sort of punch up out of a Krakatoa or some Italian saying"blast".

@@grindupBaker for everyone else, AGM is Anthropogenic Global Warming

@@inquirer1599 Local man knows more than the peak research organisations of every developed nation on earth. News at 11....

You certainly could. I couldn't at all because I gots no money. We want you to get started and provide regular progress reports.

@@grindupBaker Well I wish I had the money as well but I am on the lower middle end of Americas socioeconomic caste system. I give a little money to environmental causes and I give time and a little money to progressive politicians. This could probably be done the easiest and fastest using our military and scientists in collaboration with the military and scientists of the other countries I mentioned.

@@joeparreira3285 lol. I got shit and I do shit for any shit

@@NonDelusional74611 Hey is that you Willie Soon ?

@@joeparreira3285 Get your military on that ASAP will you. Our Canadian military is busy shovelling snow this winter, else they'd chip in. I think our armoured fishing boat might be in dry dock too. Cheers.

Study the sun like the Chinese have for centuries.

At the risk of plugging my own channel, jump.back to program number 1 from March 2018. I summarise the main issues there.

Your Comment is Vogon poetry to my ears. Brought tears to my eyes (because I was gnawing my leg off).

@@grindupBaker happy I could help.

"The infrared radiation penetrates but a few millimetres into the ocean. This means that the greenhouse radiation has no effect on the water just a few centimetres deep which receives none of the direct effects of the infrared thermal energy from the atmosphere. It is in the top few millimetres in which evaporation takes places. So whatever infrared energy may reach the ocean as a result of the greenhouse effect is soon dissipated. Further heat cannot flow from a cold body to a warmer body. Consequently, it is not Co2 anthropogenic or otherwise which is causing the oceans to warm". ------ Old rubbish debunked more than a decade ago. Been through this so many times but of course humans age and 9 year old children such as yourself will be endlessly showing up because you are TOO FUCKING LAZY TO STUDY A COUPLE OF HOURS BEFORE OPENING YOUR STUPID FAT MOUTH IN PRINT. It's getting tiresome though it was fun for me 7 years ago when I studied ==pretty much all== of this stuff that's relevant for 1,700 hours the 1st 2 years. ------ Anyhoo, ho hum, this one is called "cool skin effect", described well on Skeptical Science (SKS) and is simply that the decrease in temperature gradient over the top ~1 mm of ocean water caused by down-welling LWR being absorbed and heating those surface molecules (obviously you brain-dead fuckwit) reduces the rate at which heat leaves the ocean below the top ~1 mm through that top ~1 mm and gets to the surface molecules. I did the simple calculation for fun 7 years ago but old stuff isn't fun now so I'm not reviewing notes. From memory only it's quite spectacalua difference of 0.003C in the warming over the top 1.441mm of ocean causes ocean warming ------- Reference: "Cool-skin and warm-layer effects on sea surface temperature " Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans. W. Fairall, E. F. Bradley, J. S. Godfrey, G. A. Wick, J. B. Edson, G. S. Young Article first published online: 20 SEP 2012 DOI: 10.1029/95JC03190 Atmosphere Coupled Ocean-Atmosphere Response Experiment (COARE) program -----------------