Thursday 18th of April 2024

mister bean investigates global warming...


With global warming, how do we find and convey the truth, or is the truth still hidden, is it staring us in the face — or are we totally wrong one way or the other?

The surface of the planet is a limited system with many variable parameters making its atmosphere, its continents and oceans behave like they do: cold, hot, temperate, layered, mostly in reactivity to the energy captured from the sun. It’s a given. Like lizards in the sun, we feel it in our bones. Volcanoes and plate tectonic also provide elements of change/balance — sometimes in regard to oxidation and reduction of iron (Fe) in the subduction zones. For this, we need to be more scientific.

And there is life. Life is an amazing reactive/active component in this system. The photosynthesis of plants and the release of oxygen from oceans is phenomenal. Animals breathe, fart, belch. We consume the oxygen in the air, we exhale CO2 mixed with air — and fart (mostly) hydrogen. Plant consume CO2 mostly. 

We cannot ignore the wobbles of the orbit of the earth around the sun which so far have inducted various warm periods and ice ages on a seemingly regular basis for the last few million years. Now this is contentious. This is contentious as to the interaction between CO2 and the wobbles? 

Overall, there is an enormous amount of parameters to survey and understand how they fit into the “balance” of the system, including the influence of the sun activity... And we know there are feedback mechanisms, some of which are simple enough: Say, it’s hot, we sweat, we cool off as our sweat evaporates. Heat creates evaporation, evaporation creates cool. 

Simple? We use this process in our fridges. We pump some gas outside where it warms up and where it liquifies under pressure, we let it cool by evaporation inside a chamber made of a set of pipes that transfer the cold inside the fridge. Simple. 

We even do this with a burner outside the fridge that warms up the liquid that we then let evaporate, cooling the inside. This one is a bit trickier with the differentials. It’s the system used in "kero” fridges, now replaced by gas fridges in some camping vans and caravans. In my days in Africa, in the 1960s, we had to turn the “kero” fridge upside down at least twice a year, to “clear the pipes” from ammonia crystals that slowly clogged up the system.

And on some medium warm days, when the humidity is high, we feel uncomfortable and hot because our sweat does not evaporate due to the air being already saturated with water. On hot days with low humidity we feel reasonably okay. The temperature is 43 degrees Celsius and it’s pleasant enough. 

On a planetary scale this evaporation/heat/cool process, creates clouds, clear water vapour and ice, including sublimation of ice (ice becoming vapour without passing through the liquid stage). The melting of ice (ice warming up) cools off its surroundings. There is an exchange of energy up-to a level of balance — something we can simply observe in our whisky as the ice melts, as we sit in our lounge chair, by the fireplace that provides a red warm glow of infrared radiation. Infrared wavelength of photonic energy is usually considered as the provider of “heat”. Heat is a measurable excitement level of atoms. But other wavelength of photonic energy can provide transfer of energy, as we have in radio waves and our microwave oven. 

Since the 17th century, some of us (unfortunately there are still idiots and shock jocks out there who have no idea) have shifted from believing in fairies and started to investigate processes, including heat. This lead to the discovery of oxygen, nitrogen, hydrogen, carbon and a host of other elementary material that we could eventually combine into plastics, creating another one of our small global nightmares

The study of radiation emissions from black bodies started a whole new scientific system: quantum mechanics. We won’t go there today. I have a headache.

So, we have more ice in the fridge, but adding more ice in the whisky will dilute it more. Do we care? We’re warm and cosy, possibly getting too warm after we’ve added another log in the fireplace. 

The pipe we smoke with delight is killing us, slowly tarring our lungs, leading to cancer but who cares... We’re enjoying the moment. We are comfortable with a blanket on our knees and we read a fairy story: the Harry Potter Falls Into a Vat of… 

We could carry on analysing a few more things, because we are intelligent: burning the wood/coal (or gas of a fake fireplace) creates carbon dioxide — and carbon monoxide (CO) if the combustion is “incomplete”. CO is highly poisonous. We know this for having found old granny dead by the side of stove that was not burning efficiently in the kitchen, after the soup boiled over. We repeated the “granny experiment” with a few toads. They died. We had to understand why. We discovered we needed to let a bit of air in for better combustion, by keeping a window opened. But the cold air from outside made us add a few more logs on the fire. 

Not only CO is a poison, but the ratio of CO2 to oxygen in the air we breathe can become critical. We learned about this at school — and when we became stuck for a couple of hours in a broken-down elevator with a few too many people inside and we started to feel dizzy. Someone had to prize the doors open and let a bit of air in. But one could still feel crap inside one’s head until the rescue crew came by through the roof.

So scientists look for geo-historical and current signs written in the surface of the earth. Tree rings are a good indicator of change in the variability of seasons, from year to year, as well as season from season fluctuation. Recently, that is to say for the last 90 years, isotopic decay has provided a reasonably accurate dating of changes. We all know (we all should) about carbon-dating technology which can provide accurate date measurement up to about 14,000 years ago. So we measure things, not with sticks and stones, but with more and more precise instruments. 

The scientists are paying special attention to polar ice layers, mostly built by snow falls, that by accidental happening seem to collect various traces of gases, isotopes and air bubbles that are specific to the various climatic periods. 

It seems that all (many) of the parameters are interconnected. We once saw this with the butterfly syndrome of the Chaos theory. The Chaos theory is serious stuff. It’s the study of turbulence and unpredictability. For example it demands enormous computing power to predict the change of weather in a system of chaotic equilibrium. A butterfly fluttering in the Amazon forest can start a cascade of change — or not. That’s the theory. But we all know (we all should) that after bad weather come clear skies. The problem is to predict WHEN. 

We have satellites, weather stations (mostly) everywhere, computation of previous happenings and we still can’t predict your local weather more than one hour in advance. On a greater regional scale, we can predict up to two weeks ahead with about 70 per cent accuracy. To achieve such prediction on a THREE weeks basis, the number of observations need to go one hundred fold and the computer power needs to rise by a factor of ten. So far no bureau of meteorology can do this. And this stems mostly from the non-predictability of the water vapour behaviour in the atmosphere. BUT THE BEHAVIOUR OF THE WATER VAPOUR, despite the apparent chaos of change, TENDS TO RETURN TO AN EQUILIBRIUM in the gaseous mix of the period. 

This lead to the study and observation of the behaviour of CO2 (carbon dioxide) in regard to shifts between ice ages and warm periods, instead of water vapour. This study was done about 120 years ago by Svante Arrhenius, a Swedish scientist, who to say the least started the ball rolling. This was the clever bit. Carbon dioxide proven to be a warming gas by Tyndall in 1859, was used by Arrhenius as his measuring stick. His lengthy calculations showed that a drop of CO2 in the atmosphere of about 50 per cent could induce a cooling of about 6 degrees Celsius. This was not bad when done with a slide rule and a bit of calculus. 

More recent evaluations, computerise calculations and study of the historical record has shown that 300 ppm of CO2 leads to a warm period (planet average of 15 degrees Celsius) while 180 ppm of CO2 leads to an ice age with a temperature difference of about 10 degrees Celsius between the two. 

We know through other calculations that should there be no CO2 in the atmosphere, temperatures would plummet by about 35 degrees Celsius. So where to from here? 

The simple intuitive brain-fart would be that: “more CO2 in the atmosphere, more heat”. This is GLOBAL WARMING. Now we need to know how much CO2 creates what amount of heat. 

At this stage, because we are in a warm period of the planet, any extra CO2 should warm the atmosphere by a certain amount above that of the normal warm period. 

The figures are dire. if we go by the difference of induction, with an EXTRA 120 ppm of CO2 already in the atmosphere on top of the natural maximum — an extra which represents the variation between warm periods and ice ages, we could be contemplating an increase of present temperature in the vicinity of 10 degrees Celsius. This is not a fallacy. But WHEN? 

First, where does this scientifically measured extra CO2 comes from? I give you two guesses. The reality is that this EXTRA CO2 comes from our industrialisation and our burning of fossil fuel. Add the methane from our cattle-lots, and we add more trouble to the incoming misery. 

Some scientists are cautious. This was the case that lead to the “Climategate” controversy. They know global warming is happening but they stick exclusively to the observations and comparisons to present trends. Others scientists look at the central equation mechanism of the changes. Push this button, this will happen. Add more CO2, temperature will rise by that much in proportion — or near enough to be catastrophic.

At this stage, the parameters studied and their variations in time are important, but are we looking at all the parameters and their feedback mechanism that are possible, or have we missed other important signs. 

What I am trying to convey here is that there are now five main competing thoughts about global warming.

a) it’s not happening — complete denialism
b) It’s happening but we have nothing to do with it. It’s natural.
c) it has nothing to do with CO2 but with the sun.
d) it’s happening due to CO2 — but we need to avoid making dire prognosis.
e) our prognosis is dire. The kids are also telling us we stuffed up. Greta Thunberg is thundering about it. Is she correct?

And these views compete for your confused doubtful attention, because your arse isn’t on fire yet. Dismiss option a because it’s stupid. But a is where most of the shock jocks, the politicians, the comfortable bourgeois (most of us) and the fossil fuel industrialists reside. This represent about 70 per cent of the population of the planet — especially in greater proportion in the Western world. b and c options are ignorant as well, while trying to appear scientific, yet they feed option a with a whether it’s happening or not, it has nothing to do with us.

Option d and e are also competing with one another for your attention. They are the only proper options to analyse in order to make a prognosis for the future. Some scientists are slowly following the scent like dogs on a trail. They don’t shoot ahead. This is option d. This is where we find people like Michael Mann and many other climate scientists. Science isn’t imaginative. Extrapolation is limited to facts and figures. 

Option e is going further. This is where the kids and Mr Leonisky go to: dire predictions. Because. 

Mr Bean, at top, looks perplexed by Mrs Whistler, the artist's mother. Gus could imagine Mr Bean's thought bubbles: is she warm enough? Is she sitting near a fireplace? Is she the granny who later died of carbon monoxide poisoning in the kitchen? Should we compare this famous American painting to the frivolous one painted by Sally Swain, in which Mrs Whistler is indulging in some spying on her near naked neighbours while she is frozen and her feet rest on an old TV set?

We have not paid attention to the damage done, are doing and will do. I think the kids have the right to be angry. 

Gus Leonisky
Global warming local investigator. 

the kids are angry as they should be...

“People are suffering. People are dying. Entire ecosystems are collapsing. We are in the beginning of a mass extinction and all you can talk about is the money, and fairytales of eternal economic growth. How dare you?”


Greta Thunberg: Capitalism Is Destroying The Planet


September 23, 2019



the MMMMM is fighting dirty...

Greta Thunberg has nothing to say except what adults have taught her

By Rich Lowry

September 23, 2019 | 7:35pm | Updated

Greta Thunberg needs to get a grip.

The celebrity teen climate activist addressed the UN and accused the assembled worthies of coming “to us young people for hope. How dare you! You have stolen my dreams and my childhood with your empty words.”

Someone may have stolen her childhood, but the guilty parties can’t be found at Turtle Bay. A 16-year-old from Sweden, Thunberg thundered, “I should be back at school on the other side of the ocean,” which would have been easy enough to achieve, beginning with not taking two weeks to sail across the Atlantic last month in a jet travel-eschewing publicity stunt.

Thunberg is the leading edge of a youth movement against climate change — including a global climate strike last week — that is being promoted and celebrated by adults who find it useful for their own purposes.


Read more:


Here Rich Lowry is on slippery territory. He has nothing to say but what he has to promote on behalf of Uncle Rupe. for Murdoch, Rich Lowry's job is not to understand nor explain "what is global warming?" or why we should care but to infer that Greta knows nothing and has not done her own assessment of the problem. And whether she has or not is irrelevant. What is important is that the message is delivered, one way or the other. 


And yes, what Greta is saying is shocking. And it should be. Read from top.




This from Der Spiegel:



Climate change has taken a devastating toll on this region, and it hasn't taken long. As much as the various computer forecasts differ from one another, all come to the same conclusion about one thing: Thanks to the man-made greenhouse gas effect, nowhere on the planet are temperatures rising as quickly as they are in the Arctic.

As a rule of thumb, researchers expect temperatures to rise by about 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) per decade. In the winter, they expect temperatures to rise by as much as 3 degrees. "In order to make climate change tangible in Europe, you have to look at statistical averages," Rex says. "Up here in the Arctic, all you have to do is look out the window."

And yet it is precisely where the planet is warming most rapidly that there exists the greatest uncertainty. "Nowhere is the fickleness of the climate prognoses as striking as in the Arctic," Rex says. Will climate change warm up the polar region by 5 degrees Celsius by the turn of the century, or will it be 15 degrees? "We don't know," Rex says.

A Historic Mission

The difference between the two scenarios is enormous. But as paradoxical as it may seem, there is surprisingly little data available on this particular aspect of climate change. "The processes in winter, in particular, are practically unresearched," Rex says. That's why, eight years ago, he and a colleague decided to take a closer look at the polar night and forged plans for an ambitious research mission.

It sparked considerable interest. Colleagues from a wide range of research disciplines were eager to take part. By the time they had hashed out a formal concept for their project, which they called "Mosaic" -- Multidisciplinary drifting Observatory for the Study of Arctic Climate -- the mission had grown into a megaproject.

On Friday, Sept. 20, the Polarstern, a German research vessel, set off from Tromso, Norway, for the largest Arctic expedition of all time.

It involves research organizations from 19 different countries and some 600 scientists. These include oceanographers and marine ecologists, atmospheric physicists and biochemists, glaciologists and climate researchers.

Their measurements will supposedly help them better understand the dynamics of the widespread melting that is currently taking place at the North Pole. Year after year, scientists anxiously ask themselves the same question: How much will the ice cover shrink this time? Will the record low seen in 2012 be beaten? Or will the sea ice withstand the summer sun and greenhouse heat better this year?

A Guessing Game

This last winter, as happens every year, the ocean froze all the way to the coasts of Russia, Alaska, Canada and Greenland. In summer, the ice then retreated and polar researchers from around the world practiced predicting the extent of the meltdown.

People from the AWI are among the scientists taking part in the yearly guessing game. The climatologist Monica Ionita plays the role of admonisher. "This year, the ice will be exposed to powerful attacks from above and below," she says. Not only will warm water from the Atlantic flow far in the direction of Siberia, a heat wave in late July also melted a record amount of ice in Greenland.


Read more:

See also:so sorry, kiddies...

we muffed it...

Sir David Attenborough has slammed Prime Minister Scott Morrison's support for new coal mines and lack of action on climate change, in his most damning assessment yet of Australia's environmental record.

In an interview with Hack, the world's most renowned natural historian said previous governments had been "saying all the right things" but this had suddenly changed.

"You are the keepers of an extraordinary section of the surface of this planet, including the Barrier Reef, and what you say, what you do, really, really matters."

"And then you suddenly say, 'No it doesn't matter ... it doesn't matter how much coal we burn ... we don't give a damn what it does to the rest of the world.'"

The veteran conservationist responded to Scott Morrison bringing a lump of coal into Question Time in February 2017, when he was Treasurer.

"I don't think it was a joke," he said.

"If you weren't opening a coal mine okay I would agree, it's a joke. But you are opening a coal mine."

He also commented on the recent federal election, which Mr Morrison won with a platform of support for new coal mines, including the proposed large Adani mine in Queensland, as well as a less ambitious emissions reduction target than Labor.

Asked how politicians can carry the public with them on taking action on climate change, he said politicians had "to appeal to what people think is right."

"Do you think it's right that we go on destroying the natural world?" he said.


Read more:


Read from top.





See also:

we've had this "rational debate" for the last 40 years and...

‘Mass hysteria’: German lawmakers warn Greta Thunberg’s climate activism threatens rational debate

Greta Thunberg’s highly emotional approach to climate change activism threatens level-headed debate on the subject, German lawmakers have cautioned.

In a provocative speech at the UNGA Climate Action Summit on Monday, 16-year-old Thunberg accused world leaders of stealing her “dreams” and her “childhood” by not doing enough to combat climate change.

“We are in the beginning of a mass extinction, and all you can talk about is money and fairy tales of eternal economic growth. How dare you! she sermonized.


Read more:



The problem is that we've had this "rational debate" for the last 40 years and... well nothing much has happened. Our world emissions of CO2, methane and NOx have increased despite our windmills and solar panels. 


Australaland emission policies are in lalaland, with more coal mines in the books. Overall, transportation and deforestation policies are also pushing the increase in emissions while Scummo and his idiots muffle something about reaching targets by whenever... It's a disgrace. This is why the kids are angry about a debate at the United Nations from which America and Australia are absent.


And while the world-is-on-fire debate goes on, the Crapper-in-Chief, Donald, goes to a religious freedom debate instead. How stupid is that...


It's time to bring the big philosophical guns of our time:


From the author of multi-million bestseller, The God Delusion, an exciting, accessible argument for atheism, written for a new generation.

Should we believe in God? In this new book, written for a new generation, the brilliant science writer and author of The God Delusionexplains why we shouldn’t.

Should we believe in God? Do we need God in order to explain the existence of the universe? Do we need God in order to be good? In twelve chapters that address some of the most profound questions human beings confront, Dawkins marshals science, philosophy and comparative religion to interrogate the hypocrisies of all the religious systems and explain to readers of all ages how life emerged without a Creator, how evolution works and how our world came into being.

For anyone hoping to grapple with the meaning of life and what to believe, Outgrowing God is a challenging, thrilling and revelatory read.


Read more:


It's something we have been harping about for a long time on this non-sacred full-blown scientific website... 

As our idiots open new coal mines and the world supply of oil is threatened by war(s), it would be smarter to invest in electric vehicles powered by renewable energy — solar and wind. This would be too intelligent for the idiots leading the Australaland politics, wouldn't it? I know, for political boofheads, it's easier to dig stuff and burn it, than being smart... 

In regard to CO2 emissions, Brazil and India lead the charge of emissions per countries. China the largest emitter though it has been doing great strides in renewable energy, while Australaland is the WORST EMITTER PER CAPITA on the planet. What's wrong with us?

Read from top.



pissed off macronleon...

French President Emmanuel Macron did not hide his frustration with Greta Thunberg’s furious attack on world leaders – himself included – at the UN, displaying a change of heart since hosting her last year.

The environmental activist had a productive day at the UN on Monday, berating the delegates for “betraying young people” through their inaction in tackling the climate crisis. She also added a legal complaint to her itinerary, pressuring five countries, including France, to get back on track with the emissions goals they decided on in the 2015 Paris Agreement.


Read more:


Read from top. 


Imagine, you're a world leader with a French name (a name for Jesus Christ in Hebrew, Emmanuel), full of your own hubris, and on the same stage, there is a 16 year old "girl", with down syndrome to boot, being given the most prominent billing on the UN poster — a girl who pushes your buttons because you're a cunning glorious diplomatic banker with little to offer the future but cash for the rich people — this would piss you off, wouldn't it? 


Yes, the purpose of Greta and the kids is to antagonise your lazy thinking. Urgency beckons. 

everything is best is the best coal mine in the world...

Scott Morrison has warned against creating “needless anxiety” in children about climate change.

The Prime Minister says he always likes to make sure his own daughters, aged 10 and 12, have perspective and context on the issue.

“I think there’s a lot of disinformation out there about, frankly, what Australia is doing,” he told reporters in New York overnight.

“I want children growing up in Australia to feel positive about their future.

“And I think it’s important that we give them that confidence that they will not only have a wonderful country and pristine environment to live in but they’ll also have an economy they can live in as well.”

Youth climate activist Greta Thunberg lambasted world leaders in her address to the UN summit this week, which Mr Morrison missed while he gave a speech in Chicago.


Read more:


Dear Scummo, what you want ("children growing up in Australia to feel positive about their future") and what you do are in complete opposition. The kids are not depressed about the climate emergency but about dorks like you doing the opposite of what should be done. Your behaviour is what is depressing. Tell them that you will fix the climate problem with electric cars, windmills and solar panels, and that you will stop burning an ounce more of coal. That will cheer them up as they grow their own veggies...


Ms Thunberg did not respond to Mr Trump’s tweet directly, but instead updated her profile to include the quote “a very happy young girl looking forward to a bright and wonderful future”.

Before the change, Ms Thunberg’s bio had been “16 year old climate activist with Asperger’s”.

Read more:


Read from top.

... and not only us or you or him...

Increasingly frequent natural disasters caused by climate change could stretch the capability of the Australian Defence Force (ADF), according to a speech prepared for Defence Force Chief Angus Campbell.

Key points:
  • The Defence Chief's speech warns of the threat climate change poses to Australia's military and deployments
  • The speech was prepared for General Angus Campbell for an invitation-only event in regional NSW
  • It stated that climate change disasters have required more Australian personnel than the Afghan war


It warns of climate change prompting more disaster relief efforts, as well as more peace-keeping missions, given it says climate change has "the potential to exacerbate conflict".

The speech, obtained under freedom of information, was prepared for General Campbell to deliver to an invitation-only retreat in regional New South Wales in June for managers from government departments and agencies.

It's not clear how closely he followed it, with General Campbell characterising his presentation as "extemporaneous" but drawing on "key facts and vignettes" from the written speech.

The speech notes that Australia is in "the most natural disaster-prone region in the world" and that "climate change is predicted to make disasters more extreme and more common".

It sets out the level of commitment required from the ADF to respond to climate change-related events compared to more traditional deployments.

"Australia sent around 1,000 troops to support Operation Fiji Assist [after Cyclone Winston], about 1,600 ADF personnel assisted after Cyclone Debbie hit Queensland and earlier this year, close to 3,000 troops helped North Queensland clean up after the floods," the written speech states.

"At the height of our involvement, we had about 1,500 troops in Afghanistan.

"The number of troops deployed on disaster relief missions can, at times, be a significant commitment for Defence.

"Deploying troops on numerous disaster relief missions, at the same time, may stretch our capability and capacity."


Read more:



Read from top.

and further more...


letters SMH

I have no idea if David Sayers, from Gwandalan, is joking or not. But let's say he is not joking, he has a gall in attacking "She should not have been up there and back at school". His example of Scout craft as a Boy Scout and “doing a good turn for somebody everyday” is excellent. And this is what Greta Thunberg is doing: THE MOST IMPORTANT GOOD TURN FOR THE ENTIRE HUMANITY today, tomorrow and the next days after that…


And she is entitled to be angry because we, the adults, have failed the future of the planet big time. So she is the Krakatoa needed to shake our boots and if there is someone to blame for this eruption: it's ALL OF US, including those of us fighting to prevent global warming, because we’ve been unable to stop the morons who only think of values in term of cash and greed.

Should David Sayers be joking, he would need to flag his satire a bit more...

the IPCC brings us back to reality...

Extreme sea level events that used to occur once a century will strike every year on many coasts by 2050, no matter whether climate heating emissions are curbed or not, according to a landmark report by the world’s scientists.

The stark assessment of the climate crisis in the world’s oceans and ice caps concludes that many serious impacts are already inevitable, from more intense storms to melting permafrost and dwindling marine life.

But far worse impacts will hit without urgent action to cut fossil fuel emissions, including eventual sea level rise of more than 4 metres in the worst case, an outcome that would redraw the map of the world and harm billions of people.

The report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), and approved by its 193 member nations, says that “all people on Earth depend directly or indirectly on the ocean” and ice caps and glaciers to regulate the climate and provide water and oxygen. But it finds unprecedented and dangerous changes being driven by global heating.

Sea level rise is accelerating as losses from Greenland and Antarctica increase, and the ocean is getting hotter, more acidic and less oxygenated. All these trends will continue to the end of the century, the IPCC report said.

Half the world’s megacities, and almost 2 billion people, live on coasts. Even if heating is restricted to just 2C, scientists expect the impact of sea level rise to cause several trillion dollars of damage a year, and result in many millions of migrants.

“The future for low-lying coastal communities looks extremely bleak,” said Prof Jonathan Bamber at Bristol University in the UK, who is not one of the report’s authors. “But the consequences will be felt by all of us. There is plenty to be concerned about for the future of humanity and social order from the headlines in this report.”

The new IPCC projections of likely sea level rise by 2100 are higher than those it made in 2014, due to unexpectedly fast melting in Antarctica. Without cuts in carbon emissions, the ocean is expected to rise between 61cm and 110cm, about 10cm more than the earlier estimate. A 10cm rise means an additional 10 million people exposed to flooding, research shows.



Read more:


Read from top...


Please note that these sobering dire predictions are based on a smooth rising trend towards 2100 and beyond. Some radical scientists (2045) and Gus Leonisky (2032) have warned of major disruptions in the general climatic zoning which are likely to add extra trauma to the IPCC predictions. See, in some situations, one can be crusing on the edge of a cliff and DROP OFF suddenly... This is what we are facing: possible switches, turning points if you will that will be outside the "smooth rising trends" (see-sawing nonetheless).

How can these major disruptions occur? Good question. Some radical scientists have massive computer power that show such disruptions happening between 2040 and 2045. For Gus, the weather of global warming is likely to enter a typical Chaos theory behaviour by 2032 — when interferences, feedback mechanisms, heat and cold, will split the weather outcome into several conflicting possibilities at the same time, or within very short time span. Our "falling off the cliff moment", with extra stresses placed on temperature gradients, will induce storms that will reach super-severity followed by super-hot and near instant cooling. The "normal" convection currents of the atmosphere will become unpredictably topsy-turvy, like water approaching boiling point in a saucepan.

But I could be wrong. The IPCC is correct. Beware. READ FROM TOP.


optimist finds lost paddle at top of raging waterfall...

Still an Optimist

But some of the more ambitious projects often face delays due to financial reasons. The Outer Harbor Gateway Barrier, for instance, an eight-kilometer-long barrier that would have sealed off New York Harbor from the Atlantic, will not be realized. Instead, those who can afford to do so are resorting to self-help. Even in New York, there is a two-tiered classist system of climate protection.

The new Whitney Museum on the Hudson River, designed by the star architect Renzo Piano, is three meters above the water, but the especially expensive works of art are displayed only on the upper floors. Flood gates, 25 centimeters thick, protect all access points.

The American Copper Buildings, two luxury skyscrapers located not far from the United Nations headquarters on the East River, are likewise flood-protected and have natural gas-powered generators on the 48th floor that are not connected to the city grid. Inside, 761 apartments could remain self-sufficient even in the event of an extreme situation, meaning refrigerators and power outlets would continue to function during city-wide power outages. Meanwhile, the number of "doomsday preppers" in the U.S. continues to grow. These are people who build bunkers, for instance, to protect themselves and their loved ones from wind, weather and nuclear wars. Often, these facilities are equipped with living rooms, bars or even swimming pools.

"Climate mathematics are brutally clear: The world cannot be healed within a few years, but if we do nothing, we could fatally wound it through sheer negligence by 2020," Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, the founding director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, said back in 2017.

Nevertheless, Schellnhuber conveys a sense of optimism. The world is in an era of exponential transformation, he says. In the U.S., CO2 emissions are falling despite a growing economy. And China's voracious hunger for energy is increasingly satiated by wind and hydroelectric power. Big investors are distancing themselves from oil companies. "There will always be those who bury their heads in the sand and ignore the dangers of climate change, but a much larger number of us are determined to overcome this inertia," Schellnhuber and other climate researchers wrote in the journal Nature. Despite everything, he's still an optimist.

By Marco Evers, Bartholomäus Grill, Laura Höflinger, Katrin Kuntz, Marc Pitzke, Maximilian Popp, Mathieu von Rohr and Raphael Thelen



Read more:



Read from top.