- #1666972drlivingstoneMemberMember since: October 22, 2006
Replies: 34938drlivingstone February 9, 2018 at 9:37 pm
monaaisle The despots eh? How many conflicts has The USA foisted upon the world. Plenty of billions of $$$$for war and destabilising other countries eh? Where should we begin?
Peoples Republic Of Christchurch#1666974dr-whoMemberMember since: April 12, 2017
Replies: 147dr-who February 9, 2018 at 9:54 pm
Exactly Doctor. Every one of the problems we face now are a direct (and provable) result of US and UK arrogance and utter stupidity.
Self interest and greed is the only motivation of our allies.
They have never cared about justice, equity or democracy.
Greed is the creed.
I wish people would actually research what they are talking about.#1673374halcyon March 22, 2018 at 4:46 pm
According to information in relation to the case “People of California” v. British Petroleum plc et al.” an elementary error of physics has caused the global warming scare. An extract from the case reports the conclusions drawn by the scientists who discovered the error.
“Conclusion: The anthropogenic global warming we can now expect will be small, slow, harmless, and even net-beneficial. It is only going to be about 1.2 K this century, or 1.2 K per CO2 doubling. If the parties are not able to demonstrate that we are wrong, and if His Honor accepts that we have proven the result set out publicly and in detail here for the first time, then the global warming scare was indeed based on a strikingly elementary error of physics.”
I await the Judge’s decision with interest. But at least it proves that there is still room for debate amongst scientists. It is only those with vested interest who argue science is fixed.
It's ok if you disagree with me. I can't force you to be right.#1673465halcyon March 23, 2018 at 12:38 pm
Further to the last post an article reported on http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/03/san-francisco-court-room-climate-science-gets-its-day-docket gives evidence that there is still much scientific debate as to the issue of climate change. For those who claim that science has settled the facts I would suggest they follow this case.
District Court Judge William Alsup, who was appointed by Bill Clinton, is presiding. Prior to studying law due to an interest in human rights, Alsup was an engineer. He is well positioned to make a judgement on this matter.
Alsup has taken the unprecedented step of calling on the parties to present a pre-trial tutorial explaining the science that they will rely on in the case.
It's ok if you disagree with me. I can't force you to be right.#1673493Hero42 March 23, 2018 at 4:39 pm
It is a legal case so one would expect each side to get their expert witnesses, who they pay, to put up a case that supports their point of view.
As to the honesty of the case that is another matter as we know that the big oil companies have being paying their experts to deny global warming or its cause now that the actual warming can no longer be denied.
We saw the tobacco companies do the same thing about tobacco.
The second link was most informative.
Cheers 🙂#1673545halcyon March 23, 2018 at 10:49 pm
True Hero, and there are also those who use the subject of global warming to generate funds so they can continue their research. They are just as biased as those who are funded by the oil companies.
And then there are those who carry out their research as part of their education, working under the supervision of their Doctoral Supervisor. They have less of an investment in the findings of their research. Again there is differing opinions.
This, I believe demonstrates that there is still debate amongst the scientific community. It will be interesting to read the Judgement when released. But as the case is only in the preparatory stage it may be some time before we know the outcome. Until then I will keep an open mind.
Remember, one will never get the correct answer if the figures are wrongly expressed.
It's ok if you disagree with me. I can't force you to be right.#1682988Hero42 June 7, 2018 at 12:26 pm
Tropical cyclones are slowing down and dumping more rain on places they hit as a result of climate change.
The research, published today in the journal Nature, measured cyclones from 1949 to 2016 and found that the speed at which they move has slowed by 10 percent worldwide.
James Kossin’s study focuses on what’s known as translation speed, which is how quickly a storm moves over an area, such as from Vanuatu to Fiji, rather than its wind speeds.
The slower a cyclone moves over the ocean, the more moisture and intensity it gathers; the slower it moves over the land, the more time it spends drenching it.
Dr Kossin’s research showed that over the past 68 years, cyclones have slowed by 10 percent globally as the planet warms. That means, they’re sticking around for longer.
In this region, it’s been even more dramatic.
In the western north Pacific, the slowdown’s been 30 percent; in the ‘Australian’ region it’s 19 percent.
Dr Kossin said more rain was also falling during cyclones, and there was evidence that tropical cyclones were migrating more towards the poles.
That reflects what we are seeing with more cyclones or their remnants reaching NZ and bringing more rain and more floods.#1682990henriMemberMember since: April 18, 2017
Replies: 162henri June 7, 2018 at 12:54 pm
I can believe that. In the past 10 years the cost of weather events to our transport network has increased from about $20 million per year to over $90 million per year. Thats a 450% increase but inflation over the same period is only 19%
And it is the taxpayers who pay those costs or to look at it another way thats money not spent on education and health.
#1683838TedEMemberMember since: May 6, 2006
- This reply was modified 1 year ago by henri.
Replies: 2245TedE June 14, 2018 at 3:24 pm
We seem to be doing little however the Government is moving cautiously in the direction of doing something. The first move was the decision no to proceed with tendering out new exploration areas.
The announcement of the aims to be carbon neutral by 2050 are set.
Now the hard part is to set the milestones to achieve that and everyone is being consulted on that.
This means that at last we are moving in the right direction.
TedE - Papakura -#1683848Hero42 June 14, 2018 at 4:32 pm
Antarctica has lost about three trillion tonnes of ice since 1992 and scientists say the window of opportunity to prevent major meltdown of the icesheets is narrowing.
The findings show that before 2012, Antarctica lost ice at a steady rate of 76 billion tonnes per year – a 0.2mm per year contribution to sea level rise. However, since then there has been a sharp, threefold increase.
Between 2012 and 2017 the continent lost 219 billion tonnes of ice per year – a 0.6mm per year sea level contribution.
The ice loss corresponds to a sea level rise of around 8mm, according to a major climate assessment known as the Ice Sheet Mass Balance Inter-comparison Exercise, published in the journal Nature.
May not sound much but when a good storm gets to drive that extra water onshore the effects are devastating which is why we are seeing more storm damage than we used too.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.