Just came back in December 2021 to rewatch this after this week's news of the unexpectedly rapid melting of the Thwaites ice sheet and its potential of being gone within 5 years. I think an updated report on Thwaites could be very timely.
These ice shields melt 20 times faster than scientists have thought. I think the sea level rising 9 feet is imminent. And even more sea level raisings in the future. Think Mt. Arawat and Noah's Ark.
Thankfully I live 750m amsl, However, on the nearby coast the authorities have just completed a very expensive new bridge over an estuary. According to the engineers the bridge has a 100 year design life and they factored into the design a 1 m rise in sea level over that time.
@@fkindirtyhippie8853 I honestly have been thinking we are screwed at this point no matter what we do. I also wonder why they never factor in the sea level rise could also be speeding up the melt. I never hear about, the possibility of every inch of sea level rise could x10 the melt rate. I hope someone understands what I mean.
How To Live In Harmony With Nature And Reduce Pollution 1. Many Production Companies Which We Do Not Need Actually For Human Beings Has To Be Stopped We manufacture so many products and it is creating pollution. So if we minimise our products, pollution would be less. We produce so many things which we do not need, like cold drinks, leather products, potato wafers, chips, fruit juices, chocolates, biscuits, pickles, ice creams, etc. Cold drinks, fruit juices, chocolates, biscuits, pickles, ice creams, etc. should be cooked at home only. If we stopped producing this things which are not required for humans, so much pollution could be reduced. If we colour the clothes pollution occurs. So if we don't colour our clothes, the pollution resulting from colouring the clothes can be stopped. Let everything remain in white natural colour. 2. We Should Cook Foods In Its Natural Form We can cook rice and wheat in our homes and eat it. Rice and Wheat is produced in farms. Then it is packed and transported to big warehouses, then wholesalers buy from them and supply to retail shops. But if a manufacturing company makes bread from rice and wheat, then to make bread a manufacturing company has to be set up, machines and working staffs are needed. When a company is built many other things are also needed. Then at last a plastic pack is required to pack the breads. So if we start cooking eatable things in its natural form then we do not need many companies like bread manufacturing company, tomato ketchup, noodles, fruit jam, pizza, burger, etc., the things required for the company and the plastic pack, paper box pack and glass bottles. If done like this, so many companies will not be required and hence less pollution for the world. Also we could save our money like this. If you buy a packet of bread, it would cost you more money than if you cook wheat and rice in home. Previously before industrial revolution, we didn't have technology, but our foods were rich with nutrients. Now we have technology, but technology is polluting our foods and our foods are not rich with nutrients, and because of that also we have health problems. If this is done, then many jobs would be lost. For that many peoples should do farming and they should be given loans if they do not have enough money to start farming on their own. Food, Medicines, Surgeries and Education's should be made free to the world till the world settles down with farming. After that food, medicines, surgeries and education's should be stopped free to the world. Many people should study botany subject so that they have knowledge of plants and they should do farming. Is their any another solution, that humans won't lose jobs and also pollution would decrease. Humans have to take this step certainly instead of going on polluting the earth, making wildlife extinct and also mass extinctions of humans in future. 3. Electricity Pollution We create electricity from many types of sources like coal, water, etc., but it creates pollution. If electricity created from windmill and solar energy then no pollution occurs in the creation process. But still to manufacture windmill and solar machines pollution would occur. As I previously said that if we shut down many manufacturing companies which are producing things which are not needed for humans, then the world would not require so much electricity. If less electricity required, then less pollution generated. 4. Could We Stop Drinking Cow's and Buffalo's Milk Whatever vitamins and nutrients we get from milk, if we can get it from other eatable things, then we can stop drinking cow's and buffalo's milk. As milk has to be packed in glass bottles and plastic packs and then transported to places. All of this can be stopped. For infants whose mother's have died or mother's who cannot breast feed their infants, only for them cow's and buffalo's milk should be given. We use milk in tea and coffee. Instead of milk we must use lime with tea and coffee or just plain tea and coffee. A lime should be cut into a few pieces and cooked with tea and coffee or something else can be used instead of lime. 5. How Much Should Be The World's Population Every place should have a single house. No buildings, everything ground floor. If we do this and the whole lands of our planet earth would be occupied one day with homes, farms, forests, schools, hospitals, etc., then we would come to know how much our planet earth can have maximum population. Once the population is determined, then we have to maintain that population. For example if our earth can have a population of 10 billion peoples, then when the population reaches 10 billion, then everyone should have only one child till the population reaches 9 billion peoples. As if we have only one child then the population decreases. When population is 9 billion peoples, then everyone should have 2 children's till the population reaches 10 billion peoples. After that again we should have only one child. In this way population can be maintained.
I heard a rumour that Covid-19 can't infect you if you're immersed a few metres down in salty ocean water so this might be a +ve cheery thing. Mind you it might just be a variant of the old Bath hot springs cures gout, warts, indigestion & chronic stupidity thing.
A bunch of know nothings telling you about an oversimplified spook story is hardly the worst thing you ever have to endure. The scary part is that there are idiots that believe this silliness with the faith of a cloistered nun.
@JZ's Best Friend not with the next new GM covid strains! But we do have about 10 or more Vaccines to try out.. I'm sure one will work, the way our Saviour bill gates!
there is a proven hole in the ozone layer over south pole since 70's - satellites proved it; reduced levels of CFCs worldwide have helped ---- nothing is impossible
No, it isn't ludacris, it's a fact of objective reality. You denying something you have no understanding of and thinking that will make it not happen, is ludacris. You're clearly not a smart person.
@@pjo2386 I think you need to do better research. The government site says it won't be fully repaired till 2050. The ozone layer was not discovered until 1974. So they have no prior record of it, to compare any changes prior. And they do state that certain weather condition can effect it. Also in the 70's the experts were telling us that we were heading towards a small ice age. Then in the 80's global warming. Go figure.
@@fallof67 yep, i should have checked before I wrote, the hole didnt heal, but did reduce some years ago: HOWEVER. THE WHOLE of the WORLDS GOVTS TOOK ACTION. which proves there is the unity to work together. Banning CFC's helped; CFCs isnt the only cause. Sea, land, air temps are rising sharply - thats proven by world amateur meteorologists - no conspiracy Mans sin is a greater evil than burning carbon.
That's like saying, "I'm glad I bought a third-class ticket to the Titanic instead of wasting money on a first-class ticket like those elitists." It's bad for everyone everywhere. Their insurance claim on their summer home might not be as important as securing fresh drinking water or relocating the farms that produce nearly a third of the world's food.
People are just ignorant and listen to political lies then use their politics as a substitute for actual science. The ocean level has not risen to any significant degree, but the tidal motions have changed a bit which is an entirely different cause and effect. BTW, insurance premiums on those ocean front properties is not rising beyond inflation and the rest of the goods and services sold. That tells me everything I need to know.
@@mobrule8219 Tornadoes in Kentucky and Michigan in December and January weren't sent by George Soros. I don't want to be right here and say I told you so, but I am. It's not political.
It's a well-known fact I recently heard on TwitFace that immersion in salt water renders a person immune to Covid-19 so this melting of Antarctica couldn't have come at a better time.
@@grindupBaker Ahh yes, these well known facts re;Covid-19 are so jolly useful, aren't they. I just heard some guy tell a group of people that some guy told him that blow drying the inside of your nose with a hair dryer would kill the virus. As long as you can get the temperature up 158 F. So yeah, err.., that's good.
@@gazmasonik2411 Well, apparently windmills cause cancer. I mean, wow. If I hadn't heard the US president say it, I'd have never have heard it or believed it but, well, y'know. He's the POTUS and he wouldn't make up stuff now, would he?
When I was very young I can remember smog in London in the winter it could be so thick as to be almost impossible to go anywhere . It was caused by London’s population burning coal in their homes . As the sixties dawned and coal fires were done away with the famous London pea soupers went as well . So from my point of view the air in the city is cleaner than its ever been . But saying that I’ve watched wildlife like birds and butterflies disappear in large numbers every year . In fact the London sparrow which thrived through the murky industrial revolution have more or less gone they started in the 80s to go and by 2005 it was gone . It was so prolific it was called the cockney sparrow ,,, I lived next to a park in central London and a population of parakeets that that have thrived since the release of a couple of pairs now are in the thousands . I wondered if some of this was related to disasters like Chernobyl which we didn’t find out till years later spread a cloud of waste all over Europe . Jump forward I now live in an area of southern France in an area who’s farming methods haven’t changed for two hundred years basically sheep in natural meadow no chemicals . And over the last fifteen years I’ve witnessed the loss of wildlife . I don’t see that as being caused by a slight increase in temperature. .. plus a German study found a huge decrease in insects .
Pesticides the war on nature which is an undeclared war on ourselves is doing its job it should be stopped and a truce and then Peace declared and a new Balance with Nature Declaration
That glacier going out now would be better than later. IT would save the world. Yes, people would die and land would be lost, but I'd like to see politicians talk their way out of that.
I didn’t (couldn’t) go the full distance but I don’t think there was any mention of the volcanic activity in the area. 138 volcanoes must be having an effect, yeah?
"Gosh!! That's an impressive train you have here! Must be a hundred cars on that train! What's in all those boxcars?" Well, the first car here is the Data car, and the next four are the Data Adjustment Cars. Then we have five Tank cars for the glitter and confetti, then the flat car there is for Celebrity Endorsements, then the Make-up and wardrobe cars, Camera cars, Audio Dubbing cars, Lights and Sound equipment, Three soundstage cars for sets and studios, the Animation cars - - - - - - "What's that thumping sound?" Oh, That? That's the drums in the Mother Gaia car. "What are those darkened cars?" Oh, pay no attention to those. "But that is a major part of the train, must be half of the cars on the train!! Why are there Peace Signs and Hammer & Sickles plastered all over them? They smell like a San Francisco bus station! Why do you have engines at both ends of the train?" So we can change direction more easily. We do a lot of backing up. "Where are the Scientists?" Oh, there around here somewhere. Probably in Make up.
Very good presentation, great graphics. In connection with rising sea levels, in addition to more frequent storm surges you should also mention that for every metre of sea level rise there may be roughly 100 m of landward incursion of the sea, and of course much accelerated coastal erosion. Just try and visualise coastal urban areas if all properties within 100m of the high tide level - houses, commercial buildings, roads, railways, waste treatment plants - became unusable/uninsurable through a combination of higher tide levels every day and more frequent storm damage!
Not sure how to imagine that however the earth goes through stages on its own there's proof of that from ruins being miles out in the ocean underwater how did they get there why would they be there and they are ruins that are thousands of years old so that with the mini ice age that happened during George Washington's day up to the Risen see Waters of the 1930s in the 1800's another time. I don't under percent believe in global warming I think the globe does it anyway and it's just on a path that is irreversible I mean think about it when the dinosaurs ruled the Earth the whole world was tropical then we went in Ice Age we came out of the Ice Age we've had many ice ages since small ones not as hardcore people if you ask me this is a lot of this is propaganda just to scare you into doing things they want you to do it's something that's going to happen regardless here it's irreversible and it will freeze over again one day it's just how it works
I cannot garner about 30% of great information that you have worked so hard to provide. At times your presentation occurs as a low hum sans desernable articulation.
@@BigBirdy100 High tide here in N.Y. is exactly where it's been for the last hundred years. Maybe, instead of listening to your bluetooth speaker, you should go outside and look for yourself.
@@johnburakowski61 That must a VERY general statement or one based your own faulty visual, although i doubt you are 100 years old. But FYI, per NASA scientists, sea level has risen 6-8 inches in the last 100 years. I just love armchair quarterbacks.
50cm sea level rise means NO FRESH WATER from rivers and lakes near the coast. Everglades in Florida will disappear. Fresh water will become more expensive then printer ink.
@@optimisticfuture6808 Yeah i live in Wales and February was a record rain fall month a foot of rain fell made us the wettest part of the UK, water dearer than printer ink, you gotta laugh.
While you may be right about the Everglades, but unless you think Florida is an island somewhere in the Caribbean, your waaaaayyy off on the price of fresh water. While desalinization is expensive, it's not anything like that, and you'll always be able to buy bottled spring water, although to paraphrase Lewis Black, that shits not really "spring" water, it's just an old couple in Pittsburgh that sits in their bathtub, and fills these fuckers up ;?)
@Gardum , I'm sorry. I wish my country hadn't elected the Orange Moron. I do hope the virus gets him, but we won't likely be that lucky, and beyond that, even if we can replace the Very Stable Genius on this election cycle, he's done so damned much damage, I don't think we'll ever recover. And I'm sorry, too, that we take the whole world with us. United Statesians don't pay for our mistakes--yet. We fob off most of it on the countries victimized by our imperialism.
@@bertieschitz-peas429 Read up on Low Sunspot periods, localised extreme weather of any sort caused by excited Galactic rays, which are here because our shields are low. . Four foot of hail in Mexico 2 inches of rain in Wales in ten minutes. It's all par for the course.Read up on the Umbrella effect, it's very enlightening. Low Sunspot periods are also responsible for Plagues of rats, Mice, Locusts and Pandemics. Unluckily Nasa said the warm period we have been in since 1750 ended in 2016. By my reckoning if a warm period has ended then we are in a cold period? Locusts, Mice and Rats along with many other things like Pandemics love cool periods and have for centuries. It's been cooling for 6000 years and CO2 has fallen from 7000 ppm to 400 ppm. The King has no clothes on.
I remember in the early 90's when they were saying the Thames flood barrier would fail by 2015 and by 2020 London would have a sub Siberian climate and the Maldives would be gone by 2010. Aahhh those were the days.
@@remkovdb the Kiribati Islands are still there. What about the east island that re formed after hurricane walaka?. Years of phosphate mining and no natural fresh water source means yes they have to depend on de sal machines. So far no one has been relocated as it is a proposed plan should the islands disappear over the next 80 years.
In a February 13 * article, the newspaper "The Guardian" announced that the temperature had reached 20.75 ° C on Seymour Island (north of the Antarctic Peninsula) on February 9 at 1:00 p.m., thus establishing a new absolute heat record for Antarctica. The news was immediately picked up by all the media (national and international) and widely disseminated in all media and on social networks. The British newspaper, undoubtedly in need of scoops, once again demonstrated manifest disinformation by not verifying its sources or by deliberately (or "involuntarily" omitting to insist on the incompetence of its journalists) an technical detail, which for once is not one! No doubt he even felt compelled to adorn himself with a certain credibility by announcing a temperature to two decimal places and by presenting a temperature curve which omits to specify that it is the result of a set of data from 2 different sensors. In short, after checking with the official weather services (thank you Max!), There is actually no Brazilian station on Seymour Island, but only the Marambio base (managed by the Argentinian weather services) where the temperature has not officially exceeded 15.5 ° C on February 9, after a maximum of 15.8 ° C reached three days earlier (on 6)! However, a temperature of more than 20 ° C was recorded on February 9 by Brazilian scientists near the Marambio base as part of geological research, but from a sensor placed 1 m above the ground , i.e. under conditions of measurement that do not comply with international WMO standards (the sensor must be placed inside a shelter at a minimum standard height of 1.5 m above the ground). Unfortunately, the denial of the newspaper (and of all the press in general) will not come (as always) and even if it were to come, the evil has already spread in the collective conscience ... It is therefore worth remembering that the absolute heat record for the Antarctic is still 19.8 ° C recorded on January 30, 1982 on Signy Island in the South Orkney archipelago (located 650 km to the east-northeast of the northern tip of the Antarctic Peninsula). On the other hand, this should not minimize the extremely hot episode which has touched in recent days the northern end of the Antarctic peninsula: the maximum temperature of 18.4 ° C recorded on February 9, 2020 on the Esperanza base (Argentine station) constitutes the highest temperature ever recorded in Antarctica for a month of February (previous record: 16.2 ° C on February 26, 1974 on Signy Island) and an absolute record of heat for continental Antarctica, that is to say - say off Signy Island. In addition, the temperature did not drop below 7.6 ° C over a 24 hour period on February 10 at the Marambio base (2nd highest minimum temperature ever recorded in Antarctica) and 6.1 ° C on 7 February at Esperanza base (3rd highest Tmin in Antarctica). In addition, the temperature did not drop below 0 ° C for 6.5 days in Marambio (from February 6 to 12) and more than 8 days in Esperanza since February 6 (series still in progress)! www.accuweather.com/en/aq/vostok-station/2273742/february-weather/2273742 [* Https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2020/feb/13/antarctic-temperature-rises-above-20c-first-time-record?CMP=share_btn_tw&__twitter_impression=true&fbclid=IwAR3yBY3x2T3DSOaA01x5qeKb_r5UChBkgYyki9HjimtnjoHwAcHo3oc3OXQ
Why would you say something like; the evil has already spread, cos the sensor was one metre not one and a half metres, are you commited to getting information out or just being a white anter
Seems the apology from the lie pushers didnt get through. Not surprised they werent front page if at all. Tucked away at the back.-"ERROR IN TEMP DATA. ARGENTINE WEATHER STATION HADNT NOTIFIED AUTHORS OF REPORT STATING RECORD ANTARCTIC RISE! THE MEASURMENT SHOWING INCREASE FROM BALOON NOT LAND. The high was unagreed altitude above that agreed in any terrestrial based data..nothing can be inferred from this data relative to temperatures on ground stations. Apologies to readers..haha..told you so?..Not me!! Remember! The media lies. Lies often and loud when it suits them, especialy main sdream.
@@gazmasonik2411 inclined to agree! ‘Error in temp data’ sounds more accurate, because 21’C is VERY warm for an ice continent, I can’t see how that kind of temperature can occur given the continents albedo
2014, the Institute for Geophysics, University of Texas , announces the results of their study, find the warming the the sea temperature under the Thwaites Glacier due to geothermal heat, not "global warming". Please do better and more accurate research next time.
Given the coeffecient of thermal expansion of rock, how much internal heat does it take to increase the size of the earth a 100 feet, as it's 8,000 miles across ? Or, how much has the earth actually shrunk or expanded since satellites could make accurate earth size measurements ? Or, what do we use as a standard for the height of the surface of the earth ? We say techtonic plates move around, but never talk about vertical movement. We just mention mountains are formed by plate collisions. Do mountains have a solid base that extends down into the molten core to hold them up ? If gravity is a function of masses, then there is no gravity at the center of the earth. ? So many unanswered questions, and so many democrats that want to make up answers, for a small fee, of course.
@Tom Musial Ah, it a study goes against the "Global Warming" (yes, I know, you've changed the name to climate change to confuse people) then some global oil company must have paid for the study and told the researchers what to report. By your reasoning, only those studies that support global warming are impartial and those that do not must have been "paid" for by evil oil companies. Please, tell your conspiracy theories to someone who will believe them.
Thank you, thank you. I posted this in response to your agriculture post but it got lost there... please forgive for reposting. Want to add that people get fixated on carbon in the soil - if we build diversity this locks up carbon too in the mass of every living thing, which eats and poos converting other living things into soil and so on. The more diversity you have the more carbon mass we build. This factor is totally missing in monocultures and shouldn't be underestimated.. Without a healthy soil biome you don't get a healthy invertebrate population, and that's where it all starts going wrong. I've been campaigning for the urgent need for radical changes in food production to be made blindingly obvious, utterly pressing, irrefutable and impossible to ignore. Farming is the ONLY sector that can reliably put carbon back into the ground. We need to hear more about the key role farming should play in sequestering carbon - that there is categorically, without any need for debate, a global emergency and that we urgently need farmers to step up to the plate - we need to honour and reward them for making these changes, it should not involve sacrifice on their part. I’d like to hear how we can plan to facilitate this. We should all hear from Ed Revill - Expert in Biochar, he said soil carbon in Wales tends to plateau at 9%, his soil is at 30% (so far), he didn’t have to water at all in severe drought. His 5 acres provided a large veg box per week to 100 Swansea families, by horse drawn cart, of top quality, highly nutritious, regeneratively grown food without any external inputs at all. Ed and I are the only people I know harnessing the full benefits of Biochar cooking and heating our homes and water, burning the wood gasses, using the char to supercharge our soils... instead of making it in retorts wasting the heat and releasing GHG by-products into the atmosphere. The Chinese are make hundreds of thousands of tonnes from rice husks... so it can be made from 'waste' products. Imagine if we produced all our energy whilst retaining the carbon to improve our soils? A neighbouring CSA drawing substantial amounts of Government money put Ed out of business. I’d like an acknowledgement of the harm that Government grants, subsidies and payments have done in the past, and that these are often counterproductive, and overcomplicate a really very simple issue; All any farmer I have spoken to has ever asked for is a level playing field. We cannot achieve this with systems that reward some and not others... we can however achieve this with a true cost economy, by making agrochemicals prohibitively expensive - then all farmers will have to learn to produce food in way that does not harm, but protects the environment, and food produced this way will become the cheaper, healthier option to produce and to buy, which benefits everybody. If the Government insists on giving hand-outs - make sure the poorest can afford sustainable local healthy food, making sure those farmers are paid a fair price. The Beetroot Bond sounds like an idea. Addressing the notion of providing ‘healthy food’ - everybody knows we need to eat more healthily - but we are largely unaware (farmers too!) of the health disaster directly being caused by the way our food is grown. The damage that artificial fertilizers do to the soil biome and the damage that food grown this way does to our own gut biomes which are central to our own health. Unfortunately ‘Big and Fat’ is the bench mark in farming - it doesn’t mean healthy, and sure doesn’t mean resilient. The agrochemicals used ensure ill health in plants and animals and a lack of resilience that ensures continued dependence on yet more agrochemicals - the same applies in the humans that eat them, and the excreted pharmaceuticals and agrochemical run-off go on to cause problems in the wider environment. Tillage also destroys the soil biome, and farming in monocultures, without resilience, eggs-in-one-basket is just asking for trouble in an uncertain climate. Farming also has a fundamental responsibility to US ALL in water management and purity - drainage channels and maintaining soil carbon play a direct role - retaining water, capturing it for slow release, reducing both the impacts of flood and drought, which cannot be done by bare soils or soils so lacking that water just falls straight through. It even has implications for weather and rain patterns. Agrochemical run-off damaging aquatic life and drinking water. Key findings from publications such as ‘The Call of the Reed Warbler’ - Charles Massy and ‘The Living Soil’ - E Balfour need to be conveyed. The reality of climate change - at the SFT/NFU conference Gail Bradbrook was invited to talk and told the audience 'We are fucked' The acronym WASF is used in my circles, I would go further to say 'We Are SO Fucked' The TRUTH has got to be told - there is no time left for pussy-footing around. Back to ‘everyone knows about ‘healthy food’... I have realised we need to put this more simply; It is not sufficient to eat healthy food in order to be healthy, WE HAVE TO STOP EATING THE STUFF THAT IS MAKING US SICK... There is NO BETTER reason to stop using agrochemicals, tilling and farming in monocultures that could not survive without continued chemical manipulation, and that cannot survive the weather extremes they are directly causing in many instances. You can’t separate the way our food is grown from our health, or the health of the planet. We need to see that the same applies to us. So many of us are dependent on continued chemical input for our survival... such as anaphylactics, asthmatics, diabetics, and in thyroidism, anxiety, depression, mental illness and cancer... the list goes on and on... so much suffering, people are dying. Friends and family are dying. It is time to stop. NOW. I tell the story about my daughter - for twenty years now the whole family has been wheat and dairy free. We did an exclusion diet, she had eczema and continues to go red when we get it wrong. So I know down to the fluoride in the toothpaste, precisely what made her ill. I had a traffic light in the family, the tiniest quantity of wheat or dairy would create a lasting response. I normally save this speech for people I see suffering debilitating illness. The usual response is ‘I’m sorry your daughter had eczema, I’m really pleased you found out what caused it, but it has nothing to do with me’. Latterly I found out glyphosates were used routinely as a ripening agent on wheat harvests... grains are fed to dairy herds - even broken biscuits... it was the first realisation that our ‘food intolerances’ were specifically caused by the way they the food we ate was grown. Then having given this speech to an organic farmer whose wife was in a wheelchair, he lent us ‘The Living Soil’ by E Balfour and I finally understood the connection between healthy soil biomes and the healthy gut biomes which we depend upon for health. I was embarrassed to ask - but I had to know... why is your wife suffering from inflammatory disease if you know this?? It is NOT sufficient to eat ‘healthy food’... until we grow ALL our food respecting the soil biome, we will continue to be ill, right up until the day, not long from now, when the planet finishes punishing us for being so monumentally stupid. The message we need to be giving is not ‘Eat Less Meat’ it needs to be ‘Stop eating intensively farmed and mass-produced food’ and ‘Support your local regenerative growers’ because when weather extremes really kick in, affecting global food supply chains, we will starve without them. Can I ask for 'Just have a think' to do 'Biochar' (fantastic for soil biomes) and more on health in relation to soil too? Happy to provide more info. Well done that man. They should give you a prime time slot on TV. Thanks, Cheryl Hillier, singer/songwriter, health and climate campaigner and Biochar Lady
Cheryl.. keep strumming that that keyboard and guitar and keep singing your song. There's so much brilliance going on here and there that I feel that the royal collective 'we' might wake up. We must all live our lives to create love and peace and even unity and hope... IMHO
I read 'BURN:Using Fire to Cool the Earth' by Albert Bates and Kathleen Draper a couple of weeks ago. At least one JHAT video about Biochar is coming this year. Possibly more. :-)
Great! You got it all in a nutshell. I am not as far on as you appear to be but am realising how right you are. I have for the last few years made some of the changes in my diet that you talk about and in my mid fifties feel healthier than I have done for much of my adult life. I have also discovered no dig methods of gardening and the results have been great. However trying to inform local people/farmers of what the possible benefits could mean to them is an up hill battle, more like a vertical cliff . Well said, I think your message is just about the most important message of these crazy times.
@@JustHaveaThink"Documented positive responses to biochar supplementation include improved growth performance, blood profiles, egg yield, ability to resist pathogens including gut pathogenic bacteria and a reduction of methane production by ruminant animals." What is Biochar? Pyrolysed organic matter - to give you an idea first time I made it from mince pies I had burnt... the picture shows how you can innoculate it by weeing on it or adding flour or manure - just gets it going, but if you feed it raw to your animals it benefits them and then they poop it out ready to work miracles on your soil biome... sequestering that carbon permanently... it doesn't break down. Look into Alley Cropping... Coppiced for Biochar hedgerows send beneficial root exudates into a growing area between... Digging in Biochar with spuds on a 5 or 7 year rotation... Ed Revill said carbon in the soil tends to plateau at about 9% - his was up to 30% - I wondered if you could speed up transition away from artificial fertilizers by feeding animals with it?? The only snag is making the stuff - you can get energy burning the wood gasses given off - you mustn't waste the energy, the gas or the heat, mustn't cut down trees just to make it, although coppicing is OK... Best to use waste products - hedge trimmings or other waste streams - I fantasize about all our packaging being Biochar friendly since waste is the one thing we are really good at... I converted our stove by removing the grate and putting one bar across to support logs - as they become pyrolysed they lose their integrity and fall through into the ash can - hearing them drop I shovel it out and quench in a bucket kept in the warming drawer - we can cook, heating radiators and hot water whilst sequestering more carbon than we burn. www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10643389.2020.1721980?fbclid=IwAR2d1VVhMDCsD2GuivkvgRxslS36cbMlTn5eAgXJCmCbNt7xPSyuECeTK8g
I lived on Kwajalein Island in 1958-'59. Most of the Marshall Islands are hardly more than 3' above sea level, at the most. The sea level rise caused by the collapse of Thwaite's Glacier will make the vast majority of those islands uninhabitable. That's some 59,000 people who will be displaced and will have to learn entirely new lifestyles.
Hi John! So true!!! I was staying 21 days in a motel in 2010 near me while my apt bldg was getting new plumbing. The lady who would clean my room said she was from a tiny island in the South Pacific pop 12,000. She said then, now 12 yrs ago, they all had to move because of sea level rise. She moved to Guam and married a sailor stationed there. He was head of maintenance for the bldg. She said Australia took 75 people, and New Zealand a few, but that's it and not sure where the others moved to. Very sad. She spoke the native language of her island. I can't imagine all the change and upheaval she'd been through and having to do motel room cleaning to survive.
Human moon and mars missions are ludicrous. If we don‘t achieve sustainable human colonisation on earth, a planet that comprehensively serves our biological needs, we are not going to achieve it anywhere else. Basta.
@@achenarmyst2156 you're completely missing the point, smfh. The idea is that IN CASE OF SOME CATASTROPHIC EVENT, like a nuclear war, global doomsday pandemic or killer asteroid, the last of which IS A CERTAINTY, the human race will survive!!! YES, scientists absolutely KNOW that at some point in the future, could be tomorrow or a thousand years from now, but there is an end-of-life-as-we-know-it killer asteroid somewhere out there in space that WILL HIT THE EARTH, just like they've done throughout the entire existence of our planet. AND IF HUMANS AREN'T ESTABLISHED ON SOME OTHER PLANET THAN EARTH WHEN THAT HAPPENS, THEN WE WILL CEASE TO EXIST AND ALL EVIDENCE, ALL ART, LITERATURE, ARCHITECTURE AND THE SUM KNOWLEDGE OF THE ENTIRE HUMAN RACE WILL BE OBLITERATED AS IF WE'D NEVER EXISTED. SO, as I always have to explain to your type, there's a fucking good reason for getting off this planet and establishing ourselves on other planets/moons, so quit bitching about those who are at least willing to try.
Just like we will someday soon have bases on the Moon, and then colonies, where people will live in enclosed domes or in underground cities, so the same will happen on Mars, although it'll be a few more decades down the road. So the "weather" won't matter because you can't go "outside" without a protective suit anyway. There is the potential to terraform Mars, but that effort will be hundreds of years in the making, but we will do it because we are humans, and we can do whatever we put our minds and will to accomplish. Whether it's now of a hundred years in the future when the Earth's population has reached 12 billion and mass starvation, pandemics and constant war is the norm, we as a species MUST GET OFF THIS PLANET or perish. There's really no other options, and we have or will create the technology to do so.
Surely the change in the sea temperature must have been triggered by something in the past since the sea “cycle” takes I think you said 1,000 years. Correct?
I think you're asking about the deep ocean current "conveyor belt" cycle taking 1000 years, yes? (I haven't rewatched the video and now it's months later.) The 1000 years is the amount of time it takes for a theoretical "piece" of water to move from one point, through the entire conveyor belt, back to that same point, so it's not a matter of heating up the entire "belt". No more than a literal conveyor belt would need something to change the entire thing at once in order to affect the way it moves--if you stab a knife through the rubber-fabric of a conveyor belt and jam the whole thing up that way, the un-stabbed regions won't continue to move, even though they're still in perfectly good shape. What's changing is the "motor" for the conveyor belt. The things that drive the motion of water from the surface to the depths, and then the depths to the surface again, are density, temperature, salinity, and something I know has a name but I don't know what it is: the "suck" of water at the top of the system being pulled away from an area by wind, evaporation, and/or interactions with the slope of a continent. Water sinks when it's colder, right up until it freezes, because ice is weird and floats. Water with more salt in it sinks. Warmer water floats; water with less salt in it floats. And when ice forms, most of the salt in it doesn't get stuck in the ice, so the water around the ice gets more salty. All that means that water at the poles gets colder: saltier: more dense; and it sinks. When that cold, salty, dense water sinks, it starts the conveyor belt in motion. There are a couple places it comes up again, 1000 years later--think of them as booster motors--but the main motor is this sinking cold water. So if you screw with that motor, that's the knife through the conveyor belt. You can screw it up in a short period of time by changing the temperature and the salt-content, and the drag down into the depths loses its power. Does that help answer the question of how a 1000 year-long cycle can be impacted by something that happened in the past 50 years?
Just one small correction: many bases are run all year round. For example Amundsen Scott, which is smack on the south pole. There are many other so called "permanent" bases, although they are not the mayority.
Yet on 3 Jan 2020, summit camp in Greenland recorded its coldest ever temperature at -86.8 F. So on average for the Earth what does that mean? Cold temperatures don’t make news in a ‘warmist world’.
A single measurement, hot or cold, is not that meaningful. A ten year average is more informative. A running average too. If there is a non linear trend in an average, that is more concerning.
it should be clear to everyone who has witnessed the response to this pandemic, Governments will not act with any seriousness until its too late.. many will argue it already is
Trump locked down the economy because he was told by scientists that there would be one to two million deaths due to the crown disease. two weeks later it was down to 100 to 200 thousand. Two weeks later it was down to 60 k. Not because of the lock-down, but because of new information. As of this writing it's drifted back up to 80k deaths projected this year. So, tell me again why we should believe scientists with an agenda? I say this with a degree in physics; the math isn't there for the disease. Is it there for the climate? maybe, but don't go drawing false comparisons.
@@geraldfrost4710 - Agreed. And, No.. they're not correct about the climate either. It's less than comforting how far off the mark the "experts" are on these and many other issues.
@@geraldfrost4710First, epidemiology is not climate science. 2. You using a cell phone or puter on a network to post on a platform seen worldwide? You use cars? You take medicine? Who gave you to you? Scientists using science and scientific method..
A decrease in global dimming could be a huge factor this year, make this even worse. After September 11, 2001, all aircraft over the US were grounded, and there was an unexpected spike in temperature. With more research, they realized that the effect of global warming has been slightly mitigated by the constant reflectivity of airplane contrails. We're currently dropping air travel rates worldwide, due to the COVID-19 virus. Will it be enough of a decrease to remove a significant amount of the masking effect of global dimming? I'm waiting to find out. Unlike the majority of warming effects, dropping out aircraft from our global equation has an instantaneous effect. it wouldn't surprise me if we end up with an insanely warm spring and summer, a real spike that surprises everyone in the scientific community. Brace yourselves ...
On top of that we could be facing another El Nino. That could also add to atmospheric heating. 20/20 is sure shaping up to be an interesting year. Near Term Human Extinction is looking more ...
So, in a sense we've been accidentally geoengineering for decades. A spike in temperature would be a bit of good news oddly: wake up denialists and giving a green light to deliberate geoengineering.
What a wonderful video. Absolutely alarming contents but honest contained within but bad news doesn't mean good work. It's sometimes the best kind of work.
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 2,500"C of heat energy. That is impossible. It also breaks the fundamental laws of thermodynamics. Methane at 0.00017% is a 600,000th of the atmosphere so it's even more impossible. 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).
Continued... There are also many other basic contradictions in the CO2 climate hoax (eg that CO2 is highly soluble and is washed out extremely quickly in rainfall; that CO2 levels fluctuate drastically seasonally showing on earth with its high rainfall CO2 is not a gas that accumulates; that climate change models deliberately ignore infrared in direct sunlight were they to do so the whole hypothesis falls apart as it means 50% incoming heat energy captured by CO2 will be lost (radiated) back out to space; that the anything that captures energy from direct sunlight will reduce surface temps - this is why clouds immediately reduce surface temps; that the earth loses heat extremely quickly as shown by the fact nights are always colder; that heat cannot be trapped in oceans as described as they are more 'energy dense' than the adjacent air, rather if oceans are becoming warmer it can only be from direct sunlight; that increasing biomass increases CO2 because it increases the carbon in cycle; that correlation is not causation, otherwise it could be said daisies cause hot temperatures because there are more daisies when it is warm; that there is extremely dodgy Victorian science/politics behind Ice Ages which is never questioned or examined - eg mammoths despite claims otherwise are not adapted to cold but rather appear to be cold temperate animals similar to highland cattle, their blood is not antifreeze as claimed, they have no sebaceous glands, hair is long but sparse - even yaks being hairier, mammoth remains as far south as Mexico; that Milankovitch Cycles mean that the Southern Hemisphere is currently in the middle of it's Great Ice Age; that the hypothesis that burning of forest subsequent to Ice Ages resulted in warming is logically inconsistent as 'no new carbon' has been introduced into cycle this all being carbon already in cycle and in any case would be washed out almost immediately; that CO2 levels are at a geological low; that the oxygen cycle is intertwined with the carbon cycle and dependent on it; that life is carbon based and CO2 is essential; that a halving of CO2 levels would result in the extinction of nearly all plant species - problematic as it in turn means theorised measures of atmospheric CO2 during Ice Ages are unlikely to be correct - contrary there was a proliferation of megafauna; that alarmingly, plants already struggle to get enough CO2 for growth which is why farmers will often increase CO2 in greenhouses to promote yields; that the so called 'proofs' showing CO2 is able to capture radiant heat energy only prove the opposite and how very minor this is - that atmospheric concentrations of 0.04% CO2 thermal effect would be far too fractional to even be measured; that comparisons to other planets eg Venus/Mars prove CO2 does not capture the proportion of energy claimed and maybe this is why these comparisons are done less and less; that in order to explain vastly higher concentrations of CO2 in the geological past the sun is deemed to have increased its output this despite losing solar mass (gravitational mass) as fuel, this in turn meaning that the orbits of all the planets are all moving away from the sun - such hypothesis where solar activity is used to exactly compensate for holes in the CO2 climate theory is to ignore other evidential explanations of stars such as the 'electric universe theory'; that the geological archive shows periods of millions of years when CO2 and temperature were heading in opposite directions... etc). The green industry is extremely big business pushed by the same multinationals involved in fossil fuels. In that respect their so called 'opposition' is a theatrical pretence for public consumption. Indeed if the petrochemical industry wanted to debunk CO2 climate change they could very easily pointing out that such narratives are in direct violation of the established laws of thermodynamics or basic common sense... yet they do not. It should be pointed out that the green agenda is the mainstream - promoted by media and corporate interest, Extinction Rebellion an elaborate Deep State psyop funded by George Soros and founded by Gail Bradbrook a corporate/Deep State stooge who previously liaised with the UK cabinet to push 5G with local authorities. Green policies are a method to promote 'hyper capitalism', taxes, insane industries (eg electric cars, wind farms, carbon capture etc) and the confiscation of basic freedoms. Dependent on rare earth metals that are incredibly destructive to the environment and polluting these 'green' industries/electric vehicles and energy production actually are far worse than fossil fuels. THERE IS NO SAVING IN CO2 PRODUCTION. Neither are these rare earth materials present in sufficient quantities to mean anything other than rationing of the services associated with their use and necessitate vastly reduced human population (ref Iron Mountain Report, Agenda21, Wildlands Project, WEF Great Reset etc). In short the green revolution/sustainability represents the exact opposite, it is the accelerated trashing of the planet for corporate greed and corporations have been very successful in mobilizing the public behind this scam. The carbon hoax is the theft of the world by an hyper wealthy elite who care very little about the environment and see the human race as idiots to be kept in ignorance and contained. The damaging effects of green energy were highlighted by Ukcolumn news service on 25th Jan 2021 (see UKcolumn dot org). I am aware that this information will be hard to assimilate. Nobody likes to think they are being duped and led into supporting the destruction of the very things they care about. The figures quoted in this comment are all checkable so please do check. ____________ Please be aware of organized attempts to dismiss this comment including: - Irrelevant questions and attempts to confuse. - Closing-down questions and thought by deferring to 'experts'. - Counter accusation. - Contradictory statements that are not supported. - Condescension, abuse and accusation. I have put out this information because it is important. I am aware most will choose to dismiss it. I have no interest in arguing online. All the necessary info is there in my comment for others to confirm or reject. Thinking is difficult, it requires effort.
How To Live In Harmony With Nature And Reduce Pollution 1. Many Production Companies Which We Do Not Need Actually For Human Beings Has To Be Stopped We manufacture so many products and it is creating pollution. So if we minimise our products, pollution would be less. We produce so many things which we do not need, like cold drinks, leather products, potato wafers, chips, fruit juices, chocolates, biscuits, pickles, ice creams, etc. Cold drinks, fruit juices, chocolates, biscuits, pickles, ice creams, etc. should be cooked at home only. If we stopped producing this things which are not required for humans, so much pollution could be reduced. If we colour the clothes pollution occurs. So if we don't colour our clothes, the pollution resulting from colouring the clothes can be stopped. Let everything remain in white natural colour. 2. We Should Cook Foods In Its Natural Form We can cook rice and wheat in our homes and eat it. Rice and Wheat is produced in farms. Then it is packed and transported to big warehouses, then wholesalers buy from them and supply to retail shops. But if a manufacturing company makes bread from rice and wheat, then to make bread a manufacturing company has to be set up, machines and working staffs are needed. When a company is built many other things are also needed. Then at last a plastic pack is required to pack the breads. So if we start cooking eatable things in its natural form then we do not need many companies like bread manufacturing company, tomato ketchup, noodles, fruit jam, pizza, burger, etc., the things required for the company and the plastic pack, paper box pack and glass bottles. If done like this, so many companies will not be required and hence less pollution for the world. Also we could save our money like this. If you buy a packet of bread, it would cost you more money than if you cook wheat and rice in home. Previously before industrial revolution, we didn't have technology, but our foods were rich with nutrients. Now we have technology, but technology is polluting our foods and our foods are not rich with nutrients, and because of that also we have health problems. If this is done, then many jobs would be lost. For that many peoples should do farming and they should be given loans if they do not have enough money to start farming on their own. Food, Medicines, Surgeries and Education's should be made free to the world till the world settles down with farming. After that food, medicines, surgeries and education's should be stopped free to the world. Many people should study botany subject so that they have knowledge of plants and they should do farming. Is their any another solution, that humans won't lose jobs and also pollution would decrease. Humans have to take this step certainly instead of going on polluting the earth, making wildlife extinct and also mass extinctions of humans in future. 3. Electricity Pollution We create electricity from many types of sources like coal, water, etc., but it creates pollution. If electricity created from windmill and solar energy then no pollution occurs in the creation process. But still to manufacture windmill and solar machines pollution would occur. As I previously said that if we shut down many manufacturing companies which are producing things which are not needed for humans, then the world would not require so much electricity. If less electricity required, then less pollution generated. 4. Could We Stop Drinking Cow's and Buffalo's Milk Whatever vitamins and nutrients we get from milk, if we can get it from other eatable things, then we can stop drinking cow's and buffalo's milk. As milk has to be packed in glass bottles and plastic packs and then transported to places. All of this can be stopped. For infants whose mother's have died or mother's who cannot breast feed their infants, only for them cow's and buffalo's milk should be given. We use milk in tea and coffee. Instead of milk we must use lime with tea and coffee or just plain tea and coffee. A lime should be cut into a few pieces and cooked with tea and coffee or something else can be used instead of lime. 5. How Much Should Be The World's Population Every place should have a single house. No buildings, everything ground floor. If we do this and the whole lands of our planet earth would be occupied one day with homes, farms, forests, schools, hospitals, etc., then we would come to know how much our planet earth can have maximum population. Once the population is determined, then we have to maintain that population. For example if our earth can have a population of 10 billion peoples, then when the population reaches 10 billion, then everyone should have only one child till the population reaches 9 billion peoples. As if we have only one child then the population decreases. When population is 9 billion peoples, then everyone should have 2 children's till the population reaches 10 billion peoples. After that again we should have only one child. In this way population can be maintained.
Climate change doesn't end. It's a constant cycle. People have to adapt or they die trying. You can't change or control the weather. No point in worrying about what it hasn't done or what it will do unless a tornado or flood will take out your house in the coming week.
Thanks for covering this important topic. In addition to Western Antarctica and Thwaites glacier, melting of Eastern Antarctica has greatly accelerated as well - which has not only surprised glaciologists, but threatens a much greater and faster rise in sea level. Oh,... there is also an active volcano under Thwaites glacier!!
With many volcanoes being inactive/ asleep that are slowly being awakened through the behaviour of mankind ,take a look @ * dutchsinse * a dedicated follower of all activities & reports made, only his observations are out there for others to take notice of while governmental departments aren’t saying much; little warning & downgrading of sizes .
Oh, a volcano. And that is being controlled by humans how? Mother Nature at work, all Mother Nature.. Nothing man can do affects climate enough to be concerned. Nothing we can do, just sit back and enjoy the trip.
Please don't make fun of us. I live on the edge of the Earth and do you know how many cats I have lost? I now put Velcro on them as soon as they are past the cute kitten stage. I make lots of money on Instagram with my adorable kitten photos, but nobody wants a Velcroed Cat photo. It is hard for them to play the piano with that Velcro. So please, compassion, mate.
I am surprised that there are so many darn delicate positive feedback cycles. The climate should have gone haywire with the natural occurrences that have happened in the last 20 thousand years. We are soooooo lucky arent we?
We are at the moment, but you're forgetting the mini-ice age, the dry medieval period, the wet pre-medieval peroid, the drying out of the Sahara basin, climate change destroying the fertile crescent and the Indus valley civilization, the Mayans, the Japanese pre-edo period deforestation.
On the NASA Earth Sciences web site it shows the Arctic loosing and the Antarctic gaming surface ice. This is from 1979 to 2020. I’m going to buy another diesel truck. That makes 3. CO2 makes my garden greener. Lack of CO2 is not green. That’s plant food
Dundoril probably true. But CO2 is historically low. Plants die at 250ppm. CO2 has been as high as 5-6k ppm. Also plants are more drought tolerant when CO2 is higher. Another the earth has been cooler than now with a higher CO2 count. The earth is also becoming greener in recent times. I doubt AOC’s climate knowledge learned at a bar is what we should be placing policy on
And yet the tech cheerleaders are all about founding an independent civilization on Mars which is far more inhospitable to humans than Antarctica ever will be.
So? Its been "above average" several other years as well. Do you understand the word average? That in no way supports your argument whatsoever dimwit. Btw... its 300+ gigatons not 500. Why exaggerate?
I like how people feel the need to insult one's intelligence when they share facts that others don't want to hear. Born Villain, if snowfall is above average, then it can not also be at an all time low. More snow is generally associated with lower temperatures, so "global warming" or "climate change" as its referred to these days is complete horse shite. Not sure how old or informed you are, but in the 80's, "experts" said an ice age was coming in the 90's, but that never happened. In the late 90's "experts" said the polar ice caps would be completely melted, polar bears would drown (even though they're perfectly adapted to swim long distances) and coastal cities around the globe would be under water by 2011, but that never happened. They still say it's happening, but the beaches still look exactly the same way they did almost 35 years ago. "Experts" also said over 2 million people would die from Covid in the US by now even with lockdowns, but that never happened. Have you ever wondered why "experts" always seem to be 0% right 100% of the time when the "fate of humanity" is at stake?
@@evolspeed4862 No sir horse shite is what comprises the majority of your brain matter and idc when you dimwitted little cringe bots "feel" insulted. Your feelings have no impact on reality. David Swenson, first off - who said snowfall was at record lows? Answer: nobody, you made it up. If it was in this video and I somehow missed it then it still doesn't matter since this video is about Antarctica. Context is everything. Fun fact: Atmosphere can hold 4% more moisture for every 1° F increase in temperature. So, as long as it does not warm above freezing, the result is a greater dump of snow. Now you know. Sit tf down and stfu.
@@bornvillain6819, there's obviously no sense in attempting a rational/respectful debate with you about "climate change". But I do appreciate your tireless effort to prove my point about insulting the intelligence of those who disagree with you👍🏻 Also, when did anyone say their feelings were hurt? I simply stated what my own observations have been, along with expert claims of what the planets future held, which never came true. You sir are the only one getting emo about anything 😘
David Swenson its well known that warmer air holds more moisture. This means more intense storms, higher storm surges during hurricanes, and flooding, oh, and eventually noticeable sea level rise. New York city flooded for almost a week a few years ago. Miami now floods on a regular basis. Also, im 50 and ive never heard cities would be flooded bu 2011. Maybe you should maybe rethink where you get you information. Loud mouth know nothings on the AM dial aren’t serving you well.
I didn't hear what effect the volcanoes have on all this: Scientists discover 91 volcanoes below Antarctic ice sheet ...www.theguardian.com › world › aug › scientists-discov... Aug 12, 2017 - Scientists have uncovered the largest volcanic region on Earth - two kilometres below the surface of the vast ice sheet that covers west Antarctica ...
Damn I been pointing people to that one for years. However several hundred of the most respected people in the community swore blind that witchcraft was real during the Salem trials. Gotta love those learned folk, they're never wrong... Now I'm off to roll some coal. Cheerio!
That's because under sea volcanoes in proximity of the Antarctic sea ice shelfs do not support the climate change/global warming is man made propaganda.
B.s.! Not like that big bright thing in the sky has any affect on the climate, right? Nor the volcano under Antartica, right? Get a clue. Remove the CO2 and we all die, plants live on it to produce O2. Geez man
@@ChipmunkRapidsMadMan1869 The geologic warm periods had the lowest biodiversity. It is the ice ages with it's interglacial periods that have the greatest biodiversity. Part of this is because warmer waters hold less oxygen, even warmer air holds less oxygen.
The predictions that the ice flowing into the ocean will raise sea levels seems flawed. Here is why: Consider an ice cube in a glass of water. How much of the ice cube is above the water level in the glass, and how much of the ice cube is below the water? Well, almost all of it is below the water level, and only the tiniest amount of the ice cube is above the water, sticking out. The situation is approximately the same for the doomsday glacier. While ocean water has increased buoyancy due to salt content, the effect is minimal. If you doubt this, add salt to your glass of water and see how much the ice raises out of the water. Virtually the entire ice cube remains underwater. Now, the important factor here is that the ice is melting not only at the top, but also below the water. The video said that the water temperature below the ice is about 2 Celsius, while above the ice is -2 Celsius. This means the bottom of the ice, below the water, is 4 degrees warmer than the ice above the water. Additionally, the surface area of the ice below the water is far, far greater than the surface area above the water. The end result is that ice below the water is melting orders of magnitude faster than the ice above the water. So, why is it important which part of the ice melts faster? It is important because melting ice below the water line has an effect on water level that is in competition with the effect of water above the water level. To understand this, ask yourself what happens if you place a bottle of water in the freezer? The water expands as it freezes, it takes up more space. If the bottle is plastic, it will expand; If it is something that cannot expand, such as a glass bottle, it will break. When the ice in the plastic bottle melts again, it returns to its previous density meaning it takes up less space again. Now, here is where the competing effects come in: The ice above the water that melts and flows into the ocean raises the level of the ocean water, which is the basis of the video calling it a doomsday glacier. But, at the same time, the ice below the water level is melting much faster, and it is decreasing in volume as it melts. As this ice below the water decreases in volume, the water level of the ocean decreases, it gets lower. So, on the one hand you have melting ice that raises the water level when it flows into the ocean, and on the other hand, you have melting ice that decreases the water level. Because the amount of ice below the water level is enormous as compared to the amount of ice above the water level, the result is that the water level of the ocean goes down very much faster than it goes up. Instead of shorelines and islands disappearing beneath the sea, you actually get the oposite; new shoreline appears, and new islands too, and probably a new isthmus or three as well. If you doubt the validity of this analysis, it is easy to test. Get a tall glass of water, and add some ice to it but dont let the ice rest on the bottom of the glass, it has to be floating just like the glacier is floating in the ocean. Now, after the ice is floating in the water, use a sharpie or crayon to mark the glass at the level of the top of the water. Next, leave the glass alone so that the ice melts. After the ice has melted, compare the new water level to what it was before the ice melted. It should have gone down, and this proves that the so-called doomsday glacier that is supposed to swallow up dry land on earth will instead uncover land that until now has been underwater. This is not to say that climate change is not real, but just that not every maker of youtube videos is telling the truth.
ryan Hull Since I completed a bachelor's in dual-major biology and analytical chemistry Summa Cum Laude, a Master's in organic chemistry with honors, and a doctoral in inorganic chemistry, and I have numerous peer reviewed publications including JACS and Nature, I think I might qualify as being a real scientist. What puzzles me, is why you would reply to something that you admit to not having read first? As for real scientists, isn't that what they said about Nabiru, the end of the world on Y2K, and every other doomsday prediction that never came to pass? They always say the scientists say... or there is research showing that... and time always proves it to be false. Now, I am not denying climate change, which is a real thing; I am only denying that the situation with this glacier is anything like what is being claimed. But why should I say more, since you presumably would not read this either...? Take an interest in facts over dogma and politics. Let the facts guide your politics, and not the reverse.
@@eynkeehoohoohaechad4997 Fine I tried to read all that and ya you sound smart but until what your saying matters against the real facts that thousands of scientist agree on and studied before they each agreed then all your long msg is useless... go be a climate scientist tell them your thoughts and they will tell you thoughts that turned to facts because so many people and country's studied it over many years..
Thermal expansion is caused when seawater expands because of the higher temperature of the water. Since the oceans absorb heat from the atmosphere, when the atmosphere becomes warmer so will the oceans. ... The increased volume will cause the level of the water in the oceans to rise. Hopefully this answers anymore of your questions about why your wrong
ryan Hull Again, just saying that thousands of scientists agree that this is a doomsday glacier does not mean that there truly are thousands of scientists that agree that this is a doomsday glacier. Perhaps there are a few but, truth be told, there are always some scientists that are right and some that are wrong. Some scientists are devout Christians, some are Muslims or buddhists, and some are atheists. Are they all right? Science is based on a hypothesis, which is basically a theory derived from empirical observations, and experiments which produce results that either support or disprove that hypothesis. In the case of the so-called doomsday glacier, the hypothesis (that this glacier will cause a doomsday scenario) is not based on the empirical observation that other glaciers have caused a doomsday scenario or even flooded the earth to any degree whatsoever, even a small amount, by melting and raising the level of the oceans. There also are no experiments which have tested the hypothesis. Ocean tides, caused by gravitational pull from the moon and other celestial bodies, raise and lower the sea levels two times every day, and the net change in sea levels from the twice daily tides is far greater than what could be produced by all the glaciers on earth. The video talks about a few inches, but tidal changes are measured in feet, not inches. In short, do not believe everything you read or see in a RUclips video. On the other hand, there is abundant evidence that pollution, especially from fossil fuels but from other sources too, causes severe health and climate problems and needs to be addressed. But this doomsday glacier stuff, well, its not credible.
@@bongobrandy6297 You are correct yet the exponential behaviour of climate change,the unknown stuff happening like who would have thought that Corona virus could have spread and like wise dots connecting each other makes me feel uneasy.
If you research the impact of global dimming--a minor but important reduction in warming due to our constant air travel--and think about how that's being reduced by the coronavirus, it could be even more radical than everyone already expects.
Thank you for all the good information you provide...hopefully us humans don't fail. But after COVID-19, my faith in humanity's co-operation skills has been really tested.
I'm glad I started paying attention to melting glaciers years ago and moved away from the coast while I could. Im in the Blue Ridge Mtns now, safe from the sloshing waters of the Atlantic when the solar nova shifts the planet and the oceans push inland hundred perhaps thousands of miles per ben Davidsons research. If you live along the coast or low lying areas, please consider moving now before everyone else notices and prices climb out of your reach, and you're stuck.
I did the same, lived the first 25 years of my life on the coast not much above sea level and following, seeing constant flooding, global warming and glacial melt concerns. I moved inland about 20 miles to 120 meters above sea level about 12 years ago. The worlds coastlines will change in dramatically.
Yes, they calve off 2,200 billion tonnes / year of ice. The assessment is that each one will increase its flow & calving by 6 times to 7 times the present amount after the ice shelf is gone (this has happened the last 2 decades for some small ones) so the increase is approximately 5.5 * 2,200 = 12,100 billion tonnes / year of ice into the ocean which would cause 33.6 mm / year of globally-averaged sea level rise (SLR) and this is the potential end game for Antarctica over the next couple of centuries if humans should so choose. Pretty damn simple.
When global warming started to get some traction in 2000, I did my own calculations of a worst case scenario of all ice melting just by calculating (according to wikipedia) how much ice is on land and how much water that will produce (90%). Ice on water is not a direct problem, since it won´t raise the sea level. I calculated a max rise in sea level of 7 meters. I live in the Netherlands, so I bought my house accordingly at 8 meters above sea level. And now I am moving to 55 meters above sea level, because I realise it´s not just the rising of the water that is a problem for survival. Also I am now thinking of building underground to negate the temperatures that are becoming not very pleasant in summer. We will have to start building our houses differently, with the intention of keeping them cool, rather than keeping as much of the sun´s energy in, like in earth ships and such. Those will get mighty warm in coming years. At the very least you should have a good strategy for keeping excessive heat out. Going underground seems to be the easiest and cheapest way to get some real insulation and thermal mass around you.
The thing is, there is a lot of ice in the Antarctic. So although it might eventually all melt, this will take a long time. Like 1,000 years or so. Most forecasts are for 1m+ rise of average sea level at the end of this century so although it doesn't hurt I don't think you need to be worried about the elevation of your house in your lifetime if you moved up 7 meters. Of course the oceans will also expand in volume as the average temperature rises. but this lies within a similar magnitude as the rise from melting ice on land, at least for this century. I would rather concentrate on reducing your carbon footprint and investing in renewabels.
Once the next solar cycle starts up the jetstream will return to a more normal pattern and they wont get these random warming temperatures any longer and the data will start reading colder.
the solar cycle has been trying to cool the earth for the last decade, yet the earth has continued warming, the next phase of the solar cycle is to increase warming even further
What happens to the ph balance of the ocean when you increase the depth of the ocean by 10'? Seems like there could be other side effects more drastic causing chain reactions
Good question about the pH. Over the long term, the pH of the ocean has been about 8.2, which is mildly alkaline. That's why, if you get past the salty taste of ocean water, it's a bit bitter as well. (I know this from boogie-boarding as a kid and having waves shoot seawater up my nose, and then spending the next couple of hours with it draining out of my sinuses and down my throat as I make revolting snot-noises.) Carbon dioxide dissolving into the ocean from the atmosphere increases the pH, because CO2 in water forms a weak acid, carbonic acid. That's neutralized by calcium, which ultimately is supplied by erosion from the land. Then there's water, with a pH of 7, or "neutral." What you're talking about is adding a whole lot of that neutral fresh water, and because fresh water is less dense than salt water, it floats, and takes some time to mix into the background. For the past 20 million years, 8.2 pH is the sum total of the three different chemical factors, water, CO2, and calcium. When you add more water overall, you're going to add more "neutral," which means the average pH will be pulled toward 7, more acidic, even though the water itself is not acidic and the seawater will stay on the alkaline side of the equation. However, water isn't the main game-changer for the ocean as a whole, the earth-wide system. Only about 2% of the water on Earth is in land-ice / glaciers, so even with 10 feet of fresh water floating on top of the denser salt water, it's not the number one effect on pH. I think the biggest impacts would be near the poles, where glaciers are melting and the fresh water hasn't mixed in yet. Since most of the calcium-shelled animals live in reefs near the equator, they won't experience that fresh water. The depth of the water will change where they live, but not how they grow. To visualize that, imagine pouring a teaspoon of Drano into a gallon of water. Now add 2% more water. Whatever the pH was, it's not changed drastically, even if you did make the gallon jug overflow a little bit. Still, what matters is that the dilution effect of fresh water WON'T help correct the acidity problem we're creating. The impact of the huge amount of carbonic acid being generated by the excess CO2 we've added to the atmosphere, 30% of which dissolves into seawater. With all that extra acidity in the water, the pH of sea water has increased by 30%. (Numbers in the pH scale are logarithmic, and I have forgotten my log scales but the point of it is that a 0.1 change isn't a small change.) Instead of the long-standing pH of 8.2 that all sea life has evolved with, it's now up to 8.1, and already it's making shelled animals struggle to grow their shells. Oyster farmers have been going out of business because their oysters can't grow. How crazy is that? The fact that this CO2-caused destruction is hitting already, at the start of an accelerating curve, means that it is indeed going to have a lot of unforseen knock-on effects. At some point, the higher acidity of the ocean will turn it into a wasteland, where the calcium-based corals that form reefs will no longer grow, but instead will slowly erode away. Most of the life in the ocean either lives in or reproduces in those reefs. The end of the food chain in the ocean? If we did nothing else with all of our technological f'kery, that would probably be the end of us.
Interesting summary of your understanding there ! As you’ve said we are having troubles down Under with the deterioration of the GREAT BARRIER REEF off Queensland Australia. With all the other Global concerns & ongoing costs, it’s seeming * Too little To LATE * for an Australian Federal Government taking IMMEDIATE RESPONSIBLE ACTION !! This Great wonder of the World is fading into the back ground. Programs showing this much like Sir Attenborough s have before & after affects , a dying coral due to warming. Apart from a shipping lane cut across it to export coal from inland , many protest against this mining company that doesn’t have good media coverage - even world updated news ! Weather clothed shades on connected & inserted poles placed around & over this wonder could aide it from sun damage for a starter……………..**BETTER IDEAS PLEASE LET QUEENSLAND PREMIER , - BRISBANE 4000 Australia KNOW !! ***
@@pennyoflaherty1345 it's beyond tragic, what's happening to the Great Barrier Reef. Something I've been saying for a few years now is that Sir Attenborough is someone I would love to have around for a long time, but it would be better for his soul if he did not outlive the Great Barrier Reef. He's already outlived too many natural wonders. I will never get to see that beautiful reef-world, so my sense of its loss will not be so intimate, but to know that this marvel of marvels and source of ocean-wide life is currently in its death throes is ... horrific, heart-stopping, indescribable. All things bad.
Roger Barton the warm salty water cools as it goes north especially when it melts the ice. So it is no longer warm it has cooled and that’s why it sinks
So here we are one year after this aired and it’s even more dire. Could break off in 5 years. What frightens me is that previous predictions were wrong and in that it’s happening much faster than they predicted
And now the annual Antarctic deep freeze has begun. Every part of the world has heat waves. There is no doomsday glacial event occurring in Antarctica.
This man frequently presents the content of a whole 5th grade presentation and sells it as an intro. Marvelous! This dude is well worth a million subscribers.
@@charlesbartlett2569 Yes I did thank you, but I thought I would just add my comment. The more I see and hear about man made climate change the more sceptical I become. Some of the leading proponents are little more than scammers looking for funding, academic status and Nobel prizes. A Disgrace to the Profession is a book well worth reading. The big players were not present at Cop 26 which tells me they're are not taken in by the junk science we're bombarded with and are not going to allow their economies to be ruined by so called green solutions that will achieve little or nothing. What we need is a modern day King Canute who can demonstrate to all that we are not as clever or powerful as we think we are.
@@mpaul4584 There is no doubt that politics has invaded every facet of our lives including science. I have always believed that the arguments against fossil fuel use have been misguided. It should be less about climate change and more about breathing clean air versus sucking on the poisonous gases of a tail pipe. People would understand the suicide argument.
It’s (climate change) affecting my pay packet already. I work outdoors at heights. The amount of windy days, although something that isn’t thought about by the masses, is something that decides whether we can work or not. And have noticed a considerable increase in frequency and intensity.
It hadn’t occurred to me either. I am very conscious of climate change and the threat it poses to humanity, shortage of food, water and so on but never counted in the inability to work. So a good point but what else are we missing ?
How To Live In Harmony With Nature And Reduce Pollution 1. Many Production Companies Which We Do Not Need Actually For Human Beings Has To Be Stopped We manufacture so many products and it is creating pollution. So if we minimise our products, pollution would be less. We produce so many things which we do not need, like cold drinks, leather products, potato wafers, chips, fruit juices, chocolates, biscuits, pickles, ice creams, etc. Cold drinks, fruit juices, chocolates, biscuits, pickles, ice creams, etc. should be cooked at home only. If we stopped producing this things which are not required for humans, so much pollution could be reduced. If we colour the clothes pollution occurs. So if we don't colour our clothes, the pollution resulting from colouring the clothes can be stopped. Let everything remain in white natural colour. 2. We Should Cook Foods In Its Natural Form We can cook rice and wheat in our homes and eat it. Rice and Wheat is produced in farms. Then it is packed and transported to big warehouses, then wholesalers buy from them and supply to retail shops. But if a manufacturing company makes bread from rice and wheat, then to make bread a manufacturing company has to be set up, machines and working staffs are needed. When a company is built many other things are also needed. Then at last a plastic pack is required to pack the breads. So if we start cooking eatable things in its natural form then we do not need many companies like bread manufacturing company, tomato ketchup, noodles, fruit jam, pizza, burger, etc., the things required for the company and the plastic pack, paper box pack and glass bottles. If done like this, so many companies will not be required and hence less pollution for the world. Also we could save our money like this. If you buy a packet of bread, it would cost you more money than if you cook wheat and rice in home. Previously before industrial revolution, we didn't have technology, but our foods were rich with nutrients. Now we have technology, but technology is polluting our foods and our foods are not rich with nutrients, and because of that also we have health problems. If this is done, then many jobs would be lost. For that many peoples should do farming and they should be given loans if they do not have enough money to start farming on their own. Food, Medicines, Surgeries and Education's should be made free to the world till the world settles down with farming. After that food, medicines, surgeries and education's should be stopped free to the world. Many people should study botany subject so that they have knowledge of plants and they should do farming. Is their any another solution, that humans won't lose jobs and also pollution would decrease. Humans have to take this step certainly instead of going on polluting the earth, making wildlife extinct and also mass extinctions of humans in future. 3. Electricity Pollution We create electricity from many types of sources like coal, water, etc., but it creates pollution. If electricity created from windmill and solar energy then no pollution occurs in the creation process. But still to manufacture windmill and solar machines pollution would occur. As I previously said that if we shut down many manufacturing companies which are producing things which are not needed for humans, then the world would not require so much electricity. If less electricity required, then less pollution generated. 4. Could We Stop Drinking Cow's and Buffalo's Milk Whatever vitamins and nutrients we get from milk, if we can get it from other eatable things, then we can stop drinking cow's and buffalo's milk. As milk has to be packed in glass bottles and plastic packs and then transported to places. All of this can be stopped. For infants whose mother's have died or mother's who cannot breast feed their infants, only for them cow's and buffalo's milk should be given. We use milk in tea and coffee. Instead of milk we must use lime with tea and coffee or just plain tea and coffee. A lime should be cut into a few pieces and cooked with tea and coffee or something else can be used instead of lime. 5. How Much Should Be The World's Population Every place should have a single house. No buildings, everything ground floor. If we do this and the whole lands of our planet earth would be occupied one day with homes, farms, forests, schools, hospitals, etc., then we would come to know how much our planet earth can have maximum population. Once the population is determined, then we have to maintain that population. For example if our earth can have a population of 10 billion peoples, then when the population reaches 10 billion, then everyone should have only one child till the population reaches 9 billion peoples. As if we have only one child then the population decreases. When population is 9 billion peoples, then everyone should have 2 children's till the population reaches 10 billion peoples. After that again we should have only one child. In this way population can be maintained.
@Euro Wars However these " decent " people ARE prone to paranoia, racism and a paralyzing fear of " Globalism " that breeds rampant and dangerous Nationalism, not at all unlike the Nazi regime of the late 1930's ... so much for " Decency " ... so much for " common Sense " - a commodity that is in short supply in modern-day America !
@DylPickle The " Riots " are happening because the Cops are behaving like Nazi Brown Shirts. Americans like YOU have gotten so fat and happy, that they can't recognize the signs of impending tyranny. You are SO PROUD of your " Free Country ", but you fail to notice that it doesn't always work so well for every citizen. If you TRULY love the United States, you will have to do more than just wave a flag and salute the National Anthem. America has the POTENTIAL to be a Great Nation, but it isn't yet - and Trump will NOT make it one by uttering empty slogans !
So what I've learned from this video. is Florida and the UK are similar in size. Jk. What I've learned is we are completely screwed because of our reactionary nature. Gotta laugh or you'll cry.
[Current Day] Sane Person with a Basic Understanding of Science 1: "Wow, there are a lot of cynical morons that would rather debate a flat earth than hold polluting businesses accountable. Maybe some of us haven't changed much since being a caveman 10,000 years ago."
The temperature has been slowly rising for 12,000+ yrs, what caused it before the industrial revolution? Also why through all of history the rise of CO2 has always followed the rise in temperature by as much as 200 yrs and its allegedly now the opposite. Can anyone explain this? I'm so confused.
The sun cycle has more to do with climate change than humans. The pole shift and the reduction of our magnet field is allowing more radiation to reach earth. Once the ocean conveyer system stops we will go into the next ice age.
The Milankovitch cycles triggered a warming of 4°C between 20000-10000 years ago sending us into an inter-glacial period. Then the temperature stabilized and remained pretty stable for the past 10000 years, even showed a small downward trend. We reversed that and it's going up rapidly. Consider that naturally a 4°C change took 10k years, so 2500 years per 1 degree change. Then consider that in the past century we recorded a 1 degree increase. That's 25 times faster than natural change, and we're still speeding up.
You say that because you have been fooled to believe that a few extra million parts of an important nourishment for plants are the cause of us finally being able to get out of "The Little Ice Age" !
@@tomrogerlilleby2890 G'day Tom I'm a bit slow mate. Maybe cause I live Downunder in the Land of Oz. Anyhow pour y'self a tot a rum lad and pass me the bottle Cheers Gray
In the last six months Antarctica has logged the coldest temperatures on record (according to CNN and the Washington post) but what do you hear from these guys? Not a peep. What about an update? What about a statement that says wow maybe we were wrong about Antarctica, maybe we’re just guessing, maybe our models are wrong.
Presumably West Antartica is roughly logitudinally aligned with the Western nations. 0º runs from the North through UK to South. So I would guess West Antarica is West of that line.
I am having difficulty coming to grips with the threat, because of the physics of water. It reaches maximum density at 4°C , then expands as it freezes. Ice is 8% less dense than water, which is why an ice cube floats in your drink. So when the ice melts, the water level would be unaffected, or might drop. What am I missing?
We're talking about taking a glass of water filled to the brim then dropping a handful of ice into it. Jason is absolutely correct that it's not floating ice yet and thus isn't currently contributing to the ocean levels today. They didn't even mention the consequence of adding that much freshwater to the ocean "conveyor belt". Yikes.
@@jasonlacroix6083 What is an ice shelf? Ice shelves are permanent floating sheets of ice that connect to a landmass. That shelf is on the water and supported by it. Thus it is floating ice.
When water freezes it expands. When it thaws it contracts. Has anyone studying this glacier given that any consideration. When ice melts in a glass of water the water level in the glass does not rise. If anything it falls because the frozen water has now contracted and is occupying a much smaller volume of the glass. I think this should apply to glaciers as well.
Thanks for the video, I live in the Caribbean and no one here is discussing this topic, can anyone provide a break down on when our islands are due to feel this substantial sea rise since I've seen 3 yr, 5 yr etc. Should we be looking for another country to live? Thanks
A few reasons, one is that ice floats and sea ice melting will actually lower sea level because ice occupies more space than liquid water. Water is a metal and solid water is what we call ice. Ice is a crystal configuration of water and as such water molecules locked in crystal form is bigger than the same exact volume of water molecules in liquid form. This is why water is poured into drill holes in a stone quarry and allowed to freeze , water turns to ice, it expands and splits the solid rock quite easily. Thus sea ice melting make zero volume increase. Talking of Glaciers, we have a different set of parameters. Glaciers only push their way out to sea and calve when there is sufficient snowfall upstream to then compress and work the glacier forward to the sea. Again we have to remember that the snow came from somewhere such as the worlds oceans evaporate which then forms clouds and eventually drops either rain or snow. The earths hydrological cycle is a closed loop system. So when glaciers are calving X mount of ice to the sea, it was very likely that that X amount of ice volume originated from , you guessed it, the sea. Again zero net gain or loss to sea level . The question becomes: In what scenario does sea level rise of any real significance actually occur? The short answer is the end of an ice age. Technically speaking , though the earth has enjoyed a nice interstadial epoch for 12,600 years, that is the last great Ice Age ended 12,600 years ago +/- and we have had a warm global climate comparatively, we are still in an ice age. When both poles of the earth have ice all year 'round , we have an ice age. Now then, what needs to happen for sea level to catastrophically rise is that one or both polar regions completely melt away and there have been ages like this, some of the most life abundant ages mind you. So why would there be ages of warm and ages of ice? The short answer is this thing we call the sun which is a variable star ( i suggest all stars are variable) and that the sun and it's relative distance to earth are the main reasons for the global climate of the earth. As for where are we now and what is happening? I suggest you look into the solar cycles and a well documented ( the Chinese have documented solar cycles for about 8 thousand years) modulation of our star Sol, of Grand Solar Maximums ( earth gets warmer) followed by Grand Solar Minimums ( earth gets colder). We are now at the beginning of a Grand Solar Minimum and indeed the sun has gone quiet, Grand Solar Minimums have seen the fall of civilizations many times due to crop failure and wild weather and earth quakes and volcanoes and rapidly changing climate to ice age conditions. Sometimes severe and sometimes less severe and sometimes the sun goes quiet for hundreds of thousands of years in which case we see extremely low sea levels and lots of ice miles high on the continents with habitable zones in places that are below sea level today.
@@soner818 Hi Soner, Liquid is a state of of matter. Water is classed as a metal according to ancient Chinese scientists in classification. I think this is true today as well in modern science. There are 3 states of water: Liquid = water , Solid = water ice , Gas = water as vapor (i.e. steam or clouds ) - Water behaves much like metals in this respect as most metals share the same three states. Water as a pure thing , strictly H2O - that is 2 hydrogen ions bonded to 1 oxygen atom, does not naturally exit, one must use extreme filtering and/or distilling processes to even approach a pure volume of pure H2O. Most metals share this trait of having three states of matter, solid, liquid, gas and have melting points and points of gasification. Water can go from solid (ice) to gas (vapor) in a process called sublimation, that can happen when it is so cold that wind will pick off water molecules directly from an ice field, which is fascinating. Anyway, water is a truly magical thing!
I live in newfoundland Canada at absolute sea level my entire life there is no measurable rise in sea level this is just nonsense propaganda that the leftists have been pushing for 40 years the glaciers are growing and that is why they calve they must think we are not paying attention. storm surge and erosion have been happening for 4.5 billion years fanatics worry about their funding.
You're preaching to the choir. Even if the US alone went to 0 carbon, it would only reduce the world carbon footprint by 15%. Talk to China and the other high polluters like India, SE Asia, and the middle east. Talk to Brazil about deforestation of the Amazon.
Look up: cumulative CO2 emmision. . USA = nr 1. ourworldindata.org/contributed-most-global-co2 , ourworldindata.org/grapher/cumulative-co-emissions?tab=chart&time=earliest..2017&country=NLD~GBR~USA~CHN
@Peter Breis If the west manufactured all their produce at home their emissions would be huge...its easy to outsource manufacturing to china india etc and then blame them.
Have you calculated the cooling effect of the cyclic, lack of sunspots Maunder Miniumum, which we are currently experiencing, against the warming, green house effect?
Food for thought? How many holes have been drilled down into the ice allowing air in places that have not had air in a million years? Have the scientists taken the effect the holes might have in Antarctica ice melting? Actions have consequences.
Just came back in December 2021 to rewatch this after this week's news of the unexpectedly rapid melting of the Thwaites ice sheet and its potential of being gone within 5 years. I think an updated report on Thwaites could be very timely.
These ice shields melt 20 times faster than scientists have thought. I think the sea level rising 9 feet is imminent. And even more sea level raisings in the future. Think Mt. Arawat and Noah's Ark.
Comeback again next year summer, it probably melting even faster. Scary times ahead.
Thankfully I live 750m amsl,
However, on the nearby coast the authorities have just completed a very expensive new bridge over an estuary. According to the engineers the bridge has a 100 year design life and they factored into the design a 1 m rise in sea level over that time.
Every news show always says it’s not too late to act, we can stop this. The truth might be that nothing we do is going to stop this.
@@fkindirtyhippie8853 I honestly have been thinking we are screwed at this point no matter what we do. I also wonder why they never factor in the sea level rise could also be speeding up the melt. I never hear about, the possibility of every inch of sea level rise could x10 the melt rate. I hope someone understands what I mean.
If they think the Antarctica is inhospitable, wait till they colonize mars. lmao
Let's get things sorted on Earth before we go f*ucking up another planet.
@@johnray5568 funny thing is the things that we f****** here on our planet is the things that make Mars better. Lol
not going to happen
How To Live In Harmony With Nature And Reduce Pollution
1. Many Production Companies Which We Do Not Need Actually For Human Beings Has To Be Stopped
We manufacture so many products and it is creating pollution. So if we minimise our products, pollution would be less.
We produce so many things which we do not need, like cold drinks, leather products, potato wafers, chips, fruit juices, chocolates, biscuits, pickles, ice creams, etc.
Cold drinks, fruit juices, chocolates, biscuits, pickles, ice creams, etc. should be cooked at home only. If we stopped producing this things which are not required for humans, so much pollution could be reduced.
If we colour the clothes pollution occurs. So if we don't colour our clothes, the pollution resulting from colouring the clothes can be stopped. Let everything remain in white natural colour.
2. We Should Cook Foods In Its Natural Form
We can cook rice and wheat in our homes and eat it. Rice and Wheat is produced in farms. Then it is packed and transported to big warehouses, then wholesalers buy from them and supply to retail shops.
But if a manufacturing company makes bread from rice and wheat, then to make bread a manufacturing company has to be set up, machines and working staffs are needed. When a company is built many other things are also needed. Then at last a plastic pack is required to pack the breads.
So if we start cooking eatable things in its natural form then we do not need many companies like bread manufacturing company, tomato ketchup, noodles, fruit jam, pizza, burger, etc., the things required for the company and the plastic pack, paper box pack and glass bottles. If done like this, so many companies will not be required and hence less pollution for the world.
Also we could save our money like this. If you buy a packet of bread, it would cost you more money than if you cook wheat and rice in home.
Previously before industrial revolution, we didn't have technology, but our foods were rich with nutrients. Now we have technology, but technology is polluting our foods and our foods are not rich with nutrients, and because of that also we have health problems.
If this is done, then many jobs would be lost. For that many peoples should do farming and they should be given loans if they do not have enough money to start farming on their own.
Food, Medicines, Surgeries and Education's should be made free to the world till the world settles down with farming. After that food, medicines, surgeries and education's should be stopped free to the world.
Many people should study botany subject so that they have knowledge of plants and they should do farming.
Is their any another solution, that humans won't lose jobs and also pollution would decrease. Humans have to take this step certainly instead of going on polluting the earth, making wildlife extinct and also mass extinctions of humans in future.
3. Electricity Pollution
We create electricity from many types of sources like coal, water, etc., but it creates pollution. If electricity created from windmill and solar energy then no pollution occurs in the creation process. But still to manufacture windmill and solar machines pollution would occur.
As I previously said that if we shut down many manufacturing companies which are producing things which are not needed for humans, then the world would not require so much electricity. If less electricity required, then less pollution generated.
4. Could We Stop Drinking Cow's and Buffalo's Milk
Whatever vitamins and nutrients we get from milk, if we can get it from other eatable things, then we can stop drinking cow's and buffalo's milk. As milk has to be packed in glass bottles and plastic packs and then transported to places. All of this can be stopped.
For infants whose mother's have died or mother's who cannot breast feed their infants, only for them cow's and buffalo's milk should be given. We use milk in tea and coffee. Instead of milk we must use lime with tea and coffee or just plain tea and coffee. A lime should be cut into a few pieces and cooked with tea and coffee or something else can be used instead of lime.
5. How Much Should Be The World's Population
Every place should have a single house. No buildings, everything ground floor. If we do this and the whole lands of our planet earth would be occupied one day with homes, farms, forests, schools, hospitals, etc., then we would come to know how much our planet earth can have maximum population.
Once the population is determined, then we have to maintain that population. For example if our earth can have a population of 10 billion peoples, then when the population reaches 10 billion, then everyone should have only one child till the population reaches 9 billion peoples. As if we have only one child then the population decreases. When population is 9 billion peoples, then everyone should have 2 children's till the population reaches 10 billion peoples. After that again we should have only one child. In this way population can be maintained.
😎👍...they want to go to Mars so they can have all new things to complain about
Just the news I needed to cheer me up in these hard times
I heard a rumour that Covid-19 can't infect you if you're immersed a few metres down in salty ocean water so this might be a +ve cheery thing. Mind you it might just be a variant of the old Bath hot springs cures gout, warts, indigestion & chronic stupidity thing.
Just think of all the coral reefs that will grow in submerged cities. And all the landfill trash that will float around.
A bunch of know nothings telling you about an oversimplified spook story is hardly the worst thing you ever have to endure.
The scary part is that there are idiots that believe this silliness with the faith of a cloistered nun.
Can't wait hope the Arks built in time 😂🤣😂
@JZ's Best Friend not with the next new GM covid strains!
But we do have about 10 or more Vaccines to try out.. I'm sure one will work, the way our Saviour bill gates!
The earth has always evolved and never stayed the same. To think we can change it or keep it from changing is ludacrise.
there is a proven hole in the ozone layer over south pole since 70's - satellites proved it; reduced levels of CFCs worldwide have helped ---- nothing is impossible
No, it isn't ludacris, it's a fact of objective reality.
You denying something you have no understanding of and thinking that will make it not happen, is ludacris.
You're clearly not a smart person.
@@pjo2386 I think you need to do better research. The government site says it won't be fully repaired till 2050. The ozone layer was not discovered until 1974. So they have no prior record of it, to compare any changes prior. And they do state that certain weather condition can effect it. Also in the 70's the experts were telling us that we were heading towards a small ice age. Then in the 80's global warming. Go figure.
@@fallof67 🪵
I didn't insult you.
@@fallof67 yep, i should have checked before I wrote, the hole didnt heal, but did reduce some years ago:
HOWEVER. THE WHOLE of the WORLDS GOVTS TOOK ACTION. which proves there is the unity to work together. Banning CFC's helped; CFCs isnt the only cause.
Sea, land, air temps are rising sharply - thats proven by world amateur meteorologists - no conspiracy
Mans sin is a greater evil than burning carbon.
First time I’ve ever come across this channel , clear and concise , great stuff ✌🏻
It seems that human's inability to comprehend human extinction will lead to human extinction.
Man, I'm glad I'm not an elitist who bought an oceanfront mansion.
LOL, they are not interested in selling them, continue to build more. Are they stupid or are those who listen to alarmists?
That's like saying, "I'm glad I bought a third-class ticket to the Titanic instead of wasting money on a first-class ticket like those elitists." It's bad for everyone everywhere. Their insurance claim on their summer home might not be as important as securing fresh drinking water or relocating the farms that produce nearly a third of the world's food.
People are just ignorant and listen to political lies then use their politics as a substitute for actual science. The ocean level has not risen to any significant degree, but the tidal motions have changed a bit which is an entirely different cause and effect. BTW, insurance premiums on those ocean front properties is not rising beyond inflation and the rest of the goods and services sold. That tells me everything I need to know.
@@mobrule8219 Tornadoes in Kentucky and Michigan in December and January weren't sent by George Soros. I don't want to be right here and say I told you so, but I am. It's not political.
Absolutely love your series. Your team's work is incredible 👏 thank you. Mp
aaahh finally some good news in these harsh times
Lol 😂
It's a well-known fact I recently heard on TwitFace that immersion in salt water renders a person immune to Covid-19 so this melting of Antarctica couldn't have come at a better time.
@@grindupBaker
Ahh yes, these well known facts re;Covid-19 are so jolly useful, aren't they. I just heard some guy tell a group of people that some guy told him that blow drying the inside of your nose with a hair dryer would kill the virus. As long as you can get the temperature up 158 F. So yeah, err.., that's good.
@@SueMead wow..thanks for that. Who would have considered such bizarre antics saves entire world eventualy. Ill spread the good nose..erm news lol
@@gazmasonik2411
Well, apparently windmills cause cancer. I mean, wow. If I hadn't heard the US president say it, I'd have never have heard it or believed it but, well, y'know. He's the POTUS and he wouldn't make up stuff now, would he?
When I was very young I can remember smog in London in the winter it could be so thick as to be almost impossible to go anywhere . It was caused by London’s population burning coal in their homes . As the sixties dawned and coal fires were done away with the famous London pea soupers went as well . So from my point of view the air in the city is cleaner than its ever been . But saying that I’ve watched wildlife like birds and butterflies disappear in large numbers every year . In fact the London sparrow which thrived through the murky industrial revolution have more or less gone they started in the 80s to go and by 2005 it was gone . It was so prolific it was called the cockney sparrow ,,, I lived next to a park in central London and a population of parakeets that that have thrived since the release of a couple of pairs now are in the thousands . I wondered if some of this was related to disasters like Chernobyl which we didn’t find out till years later spread a cloud of waste all over Europe . Jump forward I now live in an area of southern France in an area who’s farming methods haven’t changed for two hundred years basically sheep in natural meadow no chemicals . And over the last fifteen years I’ve witnessed the loss of wildlife . I don’t see that as being caused by a slight increase in temperature. .. plus a German study found a huge decrease in insects .
Pesticides the war on nature which is an undeclared war on ourselves is doing its job it should be stopped and a truce and then Peace declared and a new Balance with Nature Declaration
lead in that smog got into your brain mate
Sherlock Holmes was live back then
First time watching one of your videos and I am totally impressed, thanks Liked n' Subscribed.Cheers
That glacier going out now would be better than later. IT would save the world. Yes, people would die and land would be lost, but I'd like to see politicians talk their way out of that.
I didn’t (couldn’t) go the full distance but I don’t think there was any mention of the volcanic activity in the area. 138 volcanoes must be having an effect, yeah?
Very true that is another real factor!
Oh haven’t you heard. Volcanos don’t cause any problems with the atmosphere. It’s all man made
And solar flares or other ejections from the sun are seldom, if ever, mentioned by the environmental wackos.
Volcanic activity is at low levels
@@draggy6544 you forgot the earthquakes at low low low levels
"Gosh!! That's an impressive train you have here!
Must be a hundred cars on that train!
What's in all those boxcars?"
Well, the first car here is the Data car, and the next four are the Data Adjustment Cars.
Then we have five Tank cars for the glitter and confetti, then the flat car there is for Celebrity Endorsements, then the Make-up and wardrobe cars, Camera cars, Audio Dubbing cars, Lights and Sound equipment, Three soundstage cars for sets and studios, the Animation cars - - - - - -
"What's that thumping sound?"
Oh, That? That's the drums in the Mother Gaia car.
"What are those darkened cars?"
Oh, pay no attention to those.
"But that is a major part of the train, must be half of the cars on the train!! Why are there Peace Signs and Hammer & Sickles plastered all over them? They smell like a San Francisco bus station!
Why do you have engines at both ends of the train?"
So we can change direction more easily. We do a lot of backing up.
"Where are the Scientists?"
Oh, there around here somewhere. Probably in Make up.
Best comment I've seen today!
Very good presentation, great graphics. In connection with rising sea levels, in addition to more frequent storm surges you should also mention that for every metre of sea level rise there may be roughly 100 m of landward incursion of the sea, and of course much accelerated coastal erosion. Just try and visualise coastal urban areas if all properties within 100m of the high tide level - houses, commercial buildings, roads, railways, waste treatment plants - became unusable/uninsurable through a combination of higher tide levels every day and more frequent storm damage!
Not sure how to imagine that however the earth goes through stages on its own there's proof of that from ruins being miles out in the ocean underwater how did they get there why would they be there and they are ruins that are thousands of years old so that with the mini ice age that happened during George Washington's day up to the Risen see Waters of the 1930s in the 1800's another time. I don't under percent believe in global warming I think the globe does it anyway and it's just on a path that is irreversible I mean think about it when the dinosaurs ruled the Earth the whole world was tropical then we went in Ice Age we came out of the Ice Age we've had many ice ages since small ones not as hardcore people if you ask me this is a lot of this is propaganda just to scare you into doing things they want you to do it's something that's going to happen regardless here it's irreversible and it will freeze over again one day it's just how it works
I cannot garner about 30% of great information that you have worked so hard to provide. At times your presentation occurs as a low hum sans desernable articulation.
You need a bluetooth speaker. 😉 Then you could hear EVERYTHING and not just what your impaired ear hairs blocked out..
@@BigBirdy100 High tide here in N.Y. is exactly where it's been for the last hundred years. Maybe, instead of listening to your bluetooth speaker, you should go outside and look for yourself.
@@johnburakowski61 That must a VERY general statement or one based your own faulty visual, although i doubt you are 100 years old. But FYI, per NASA scientists, sea level has risen 6-8 inches in the last 100 years. I just love armchair quarterbacks.
50cm sea level rise means NO FRESH WATER from rivers and lakes near the coast. Everglades in Florida will disappear. Fresh water will become more expensive then printer ink.
Bruges Manioracci were drowning in it where I live. 1020’ ASL. And no person in their right mind would want to live here
@@optimisticfuture6808 Yeah i live in Wales and February was a record rain fall month a foot of rain fell made us the wettest part of the UK, water dearer than printer ink, you gotta laugh.
While you may be right about the Everglades, but unless you think Florida is an island somewhere in the Caribbean, your waaaaayyy off on the price of fresh water. While desalinization is expensive, it's not anything like that, and you'll always be able to buy bottled spring water, although to paraphrase Lewis Black, that shits not really "spring" water, it's just an old couple in Pittsburgh that sits in their bathtub, and fills these fuckers up ;?)
@Gardum , I'm sorry. I wish my country hadn't elected the Orange Moron. I do hope the virus gets him, but we won't likely be that lucky, and beyond that, even if we can replace the Very Stable Genius on this election cycle, he's done so damned much damage, I don't think we'll ever recover. And I'm sorry, too, that we take the whole world with us. United Statesians don't pay for our mistakes--yet. We fob off most of it on the countries victimized by our imperialism.
@@bertieschitz-peas429 Read up on Low Sunspot periods, localised extreme weather of any sort caused by excited Galactic rays, which are here because our shields are low.
. Four foot of hail in Mexico 2 inches of rain in Wales in ten minutes. It's all par for the course.Read up on the Umbrella effect, it's very enlightening.
Low Sunspot periods are also responsible for Plagues of rats, Mice, Locusts and Pandemics.
Unluckily Nasa said the warm period we have been in since 1750 ended in 2016. By my reckoning if a warm period has ended then we are in a cold period?
Locusts, Mice and Rats along with many other things like Pandemics love cool periods and have for centuries.
It's been cooling for 6000 years and CO2 has fallen from 7000 ppm to 400 ppm.
The King has no clothes on.
Great graphics. Very Professional. Thanks for uploading.
Yet another well researched, well presented, quality video. Thank you for all your work.
Cheers Tim. Much appreciated.
Its been 1 year. now its starting to breaking up already.
I remember in the early 90's when they were saying the Thames flood barrier would fail by 2015 and by 2020 London would have a sub Siberian climate and the Maldives would be gone by 2010. Aahhh those were the days.
kiribati is the first island group to disapear.. they don have any fresh water and relocate to new zealand
@@remkovdb the Kiribati Islands are still there. What about the east island that re formed after hurricane walaka?. Years of phosphate mining and no natural fresh water source means yes they have to depend on de sal machines. So far no one has been relocated as it is a proposed plan should the islands disappear over the next 80 years.
Not where I studied earth science. It’s accelerating faster than we predicted.. The warming that is.
@@boathemian7694 see you in 10 years time for a pint. Let's see what has changed then.
@@jimjones1586 Sure. I’m betting it’ll be more of the same.
In a February 13 * article, the newspaper "The Guardian" announced that the temperature had reached 20.75 ° C on Seymour Island (north of the Antarctic Peninsula) on February 9 at 1:00 p.m., thus establishing a new absolute heat record for Antarctica. The news was immediately picked up by all the media (national and international) and widely disseminated in all media and on social networks.
The British newspaper, undoubtedly in need of scoops, once again demonstrated manifest disinformation by not verifying its sources or by deliberately (or "involuntarily" omitting to insist on the incompetence of its journalists) an technical detail, which for once is not one! No doubt he even felt compelled to adorn himself with a certain credibility by announcing a temperature to two decimal places and by presenting a temperature curve which omits to specify that it is the result of a set of data from 2 different sensors.
In short, after checking with the official weather services (thank you Max!), There is actually no Brazilian station on Seymour Island, but only the Marambio base (managed by the Argentinian weather services) where the temperature has not officially exceeded 15.5 ° C on February 9, after a maximum of 15.8 ° C reached three days earlier (on 6)! However, a temperature of more than 20 ° C was recorded on February 9 by Brazilian scientists near the Marambio base as part of geological research, but from a sensor placed 1 m above the ground , i.e. under conditions of measurement that do not comply with international WMO standards (the sensor must be placed inside a shelter at a minimum standard height of 1.5 m above the ground).
Unfortunately, the denial of the newspaper (and of all the press in general) will not come (as always) and even if it were to come, the evil has already spread in the collective conscience ...
It is therefore worth remembering that the absolute heat record for the Antarctic is still 19.8 ° C recorded on January 30, 1982 on Signy Island in the South Orkney archipelago (located 650 km to the east-northeast of the northern tip of the Antarctic Peninsula).
On the other hand, this should not minimize the extremely hot episode which has touched in recent days the northern end of the Antarctic peninsula: the maximum temperature of 18.4 ° C recorded on February 9, 2020 on the Esperanza base (Argentine station) constitutes the highest temperature ever recorded in Antarctica for a month of February (previous record: 16.2 ° C on February 26, 1974 on Signy Island) and an absolute record of heat for continental Antarctica, that is to say - say off Signy Island. In addition, the temperature did not drop below 7.6 ° C over a 24 hour period on February 10 at the Marambio base (2nd highest minimum temperature ever recorded in Antarctica) and 6.1 ° C on 7 February at Esperanza base (3rd highest Tmin in Antarctica). In addition, the temperature did not drop below 0 ° C for 6.5 days in Marambio (from February 6 to 12) and more than 8 days in Esperanza since February 6 (series still in progress)!
www.accuweather.com/en/aq/vostok-station/2273742/february-weather/2273742
[* Https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2020/feb/13/antarctic-temperature-rises-above-20c-first-time-record?CMP=share_btn_tw&__twitter_impression=true&fbclid=IwAR3yBY3x2T3DSOaA01x5qeKb_r5UChBkgYyki9HjimtnjoHwAcHo3oc3OXQ
Why would you say something like; the evil has already spread, cos the sensor was one metre not one and a half metres, are you commited to getting information out or just being a white anter
@@williamgoode9114 What ?????
@@williamgoode9114 Can you please speak English????
Very interesting. Thank you for sharing
Thanks...an objective viewpoint.
Holy shit! 21’C recorded in Antarctica? That temperature is considered a very pleasant late Spring/early Summer day in the UK!
Well it's an Indian Summer in Antarctica.
A couple of thousand miles away from the pole. That's like the Shetland Islands being called the north pole.
Gaz Masonik That kind of temperature ANYWHERE in Antarctica is remarkable! There is a reason that that continent is covered in ice...
Seems the apology from the lie pushers didnt get through. Not surprised they werent front page if at all. Tucked away at the back.-"ERROR IN TEMP DATA. ARGENTINE WEATHER STATION HADNT NOTIFIED AUTHORS OF REPORT STATING RECORD ANTARCTIC RISE! THE MEASURMENT SHOWING INCREASE FROM BALOON NOT LAND. The high was unagreed altitude above that agreed in any terrestrial based data..nothing can be inferred from this data relative to temperatures on ground stations. Apologies to readers..haha..told you so?..Not me!! Remember! The media lies. Lies often and loud when it suits them, especialy main sdream.
@@gazmasonik2411 inclined to agree! ‘Error in temp data’ sounds more accurate, because 21’C is VERY warm for an ice continent, I can’t see how that kind of temperature can occur given the continents albedo
2014, the Institute for Geophysics, University of Texas , announces the results of their study, find the warming the the sea temperature under the Thwaites Glacier due to geothermal heat, not "global warming". Please do better and more accurate research next time.
Yes, indeed. A fact conveniently ignored by many, that along with the GSM now well inbound.
Given the coeffecient of thermal expansion of rock, how much internal heat does it take to increase the size of the earth a 100 feet, as it's 8,000 miles across ? Or, how much has the earth actually shrunk or expanded since satellites could make accurate earth size measurements ? Or, what do we use as a standard for the height of the surface of the earth ? We say techtonic plates move around, but never talk about vertical movement. We just mention mountains are formed by plate collisions. Do mountains have a solid base that extends down into the molten core to hold them up ? If gravity is a function of masses, then there is no gravity at the center of the earth. ? So many unanswered questions, and so many democrats that want to make up answers, for a small fee, of course.
Socialists and the committed ignore reality and fact
@Tom Musial Ah, it a study goes against the "Global Warming" (yes, I know, you've changed the name to climate change to confuse people) then some global oil company must have paid for the study and told the researchers what to report. By your reasoning, only those studies that support global warming are impartial and those that do not must have been "paid" for by evil oil companies. Please, tell your conspiracy theories to someone who will believe them.
These dream science opinion documentaries get on my nerves. They forget the earth is mostly lava, and the sun is super fucking hot every day.
I’m poor now and I’ll be poor when water levels rise 4ft
When the ice melts just move to antarctica problem solved !!
Good thing 91 volcanoes under the ice have nothing to do with ice melting.
mic pic Of course they do. The human habitat could be facing disaster anyway. It’s still a good thing to try to prevent it happening.
Thank you, thank you. I posted this in response to your agriculture post but it got lost there... please forgive for reposting.
Want to add that people get fixated on carbon in the soil - if we build diversity this locks up carbon too in the mass of every living thing, which eats and poos converting other living things into soil and so on. The more diversity you have the more carbon mass we build. This factor is totally missing in monocultures and shouldn't be underestimated.. Without a healthy soil biome you don't get a healthy invertebrate population, and that's where it all starts going wrong.
I've been campaigning for the urgent need for radical changes in food production to be made blindingly obvious, utterly pressing, irrefutable and impossible to ignore.
Farming is the ONLY sector that can reliably put carbon back into the ground.
We need to hear more about the key role farming should play in sequestering carbon - that there is categorically, without any need for debate, a global emergency and that we urgently need farmers to step up to the plate - we need to honour and reward them for making these changes, it should not involve sacrifice on their part.
I’d like to hear how we can plan to facilitate this.
We should all hear from Ed Revill - Expert in Biochar, he said soil carbon in Wales tends to plateau at 9%, his soil is at 30% (so far), he didn’t have to water at all in severe drought. His 5 acres provided a large veg box per week to 100 Swansea families, by horse drawn cart, of top quality, highly nutritious, regeneratively grown food without any external inputs at all.
Ed and I are the only people I know harnessing the full benefits of Biochar cooking and heating our homes and water, burning the wood gasses, using the char to supercharge our soils... instead of making it in retorts wasting the heat and releasing GHG by-products into the atmosphere. The Chinese are make hundreds of thousands of tonnes from rice husks... so it can be made from 'waste' products. Imagine if we produced all our energy whilst retaining the carbon to improve our soils?
A neighbouring CSA drawing substantial amounts of Government money put Ed out of business.
I’d like an acknowledgement of the harm that Government grants, subsidies and payments have done in the past, and that these are often counterproductive, and overcomplicate a really very simple issue;
All any farmer I have spoken to has ever asked for is a level playing field. We cannot achieve this with systems that reward some and not others... we can however achieve this with a true cost economy, by making agrochemicals prohibitively expensive - then all farmers will have to learn to produce food in way that does not harm, but protects the environment, and food produced this way will become the cheaper, healthier option to produce and to buy, which benefits everybody.
If the Government insists on giving hand-outs - make sure the poorest can afford sustainable local healthy food, making sure those farmers are paid a fair price. The Beetroot Bond sounds like an idea.
Addressing the notion of providing ‘healthy food’ - everybody knows we need to eat more healthily - but we are largely unaware (farmers too!) of the health disaster directly being caused by the way our food is grown. The damage that artificial fertilizers do to the soil biome and the damage that food grown this way does to our own gut biomes which are central to our own health. Unfortunately ‘Big and Fat’ is the bench mark in farming - it doesn’t mean healthy, and sure doesn’t mean resilient. The agrochemicals used ensure ill health in plants and animals and a lack of resilience that ensures continued dependence on yet more agrochemicals - the same applies in the humans that eat them, and the excreted pharmaceuticals and agrochemical run-off go on to cause problems in the wider environment. Tillage also destroys the soil biome, and farming in monocultures, without resilience, eggs-in-one-basket is just asking for trouble in an uncertain climate.
Farming also has a fundamental responsibility to US ALL in water management and purity - drainage channels and maintaining soil carbon play a direct role - retaining water, capturing it for slow release, reducing both the impacts of flood and drought, which cannot be done by bare soils or soils so lacking that water just falls straight through. It even has implications for weather and rain patterns. Agrochemical run-off damaging aquatic life and drinking water.
Key findings from publications such as ‘The Call of the Reed Warbler’ - Charles Massy and ‘The Living Soil’ - E Balfour need to be conveyed.
The reality of climate change - at the SFT/NFU conference Gail Bradbrook was invited to talk and told the audience 'We are fucked' The acronym WASF is used in my circles, I would go further to say 'We Are SO Fucked' The TRUTH has got to be told - there is no time left for pussy-footing around.
Back to ‘everyone knows about ‘healthy food’... I have realised we need to put this more simply;
It is not sufficient to eat healthy food in order to be healthy, WE HAVE TO STOP EATING THE STUFF THAT IS MAKING US SICK... There is NO BETTER reason to stop using agrochemicals, tilling and farming in monocultures that could not survive without continued chemical manipulation, and that cannot survive the weather extremes they are directly causing in many instances. You can’t separate the way our food is grown from our health, or the health of the planet. We need to see that the same applies to us. So many of us are dependent on continued chemical input for our survival... such as anaphylactics, asthmatics, diabetics, and in thyroidism, anxiety, depression, mental illness and cancer... the list goes on and on... so much suffering, people are dying. Friends and family are dying. It is time to stop. NOW.
I tell the story about my daughter - for twenty years now the whole family has been wheat and dairy free. We did an exclusion diet, she had eczema and continues to go red when we get it wrong. So I know down to the fluoride in the toothpaste, precisely what made her ill. I had a traffic light in the family, the tiniest quantity of wheat or dairy would create a lasting response.
I normally save this speech for people I see suffering debilitating illness. The usual response is ‘I’m sorry your daughter had eczema, I’m really pleased you found out what caused it, but it has nothing to do with me’.
Latterly I found out glyphosates were used routinely as a ripening agent on wheat harvests... grains are fed to dairy herds - even broken biscuits... it was the first realisation that our ‘food intolerances’ were specifically caused by the way they the food we ate was grown.
Then having given this speech to an organic farmer whose wife was in a wheelchair, he lent us ‘The Living Soil’ by E Balfour and I finally understood the connection between healthy soil biomes and the healthy gut biomes which we depend upon for health. I was embarrassed to ask - but I had to know... why is your wife suffering from inflammatory disease if you know this??
It is NOT sufficient to eat ‘healthy food’... until we grow ALL our food respecting the soil biome, we will continue to be ill, right up until the day, not long from now, when the planet finishes punishing us for being so monumentally stupid.
The message we need to be giving is not ‘Eat Less Meat’ it needs to be ‘Stop eating intensively farmed and mass-produced food’ and ‘Support your local regenerative growers’ because when weather extremes really kick in, affecting global food supply chains, we will starve without them.
Can I ask for 'Just have a think' to do 'Biochar' (fantastic for soil biomes) and more on health in relation to soil too?
Happy to provide more info.
Well done that man. They should give you a prime time slot on TV.
Thanks, Cheryl Hillier, singer/songwriter, health and climate campaigner and Biochar Lady
Cheryl.. keep strumming that that keyboard and guitar and keep singing your song. There's so much brilliance going on here and there that I feel that the royal collective 'we' might wake up. We must all live our lives to create love and peace and even unity and hope... IMHO
I read 'BURN:Using Fire to Cool the Earth' by Albert Bates and Kathleen Draper a couple of weeks ago. At least one JHAT video about Biochar is coming this year. Possibly more. :-)
Great! You got it all in a nutshell. I am not as far on as you appear to be but am realising how right you are. I have for the last few years made some of the changes in my diet that you talk about and in my mid fifties feel healthier than I have done for much of my adult life. I have also discovered no dig methods of gardening and the results have been great. However trying to inform local people/farmers of what the possible benefits could mean to them is an up hill battle, more like a vertical cliff . Well said, I think your message is just about the most important message of these crazy times.
@@JustHaveaThink"Documented positive responses to biochar supplementation include improved growth performance, blood profiles, egg yield, ability to resist pathogens including gut pathogenic bacteria and a reduction of methane production by ruminant animals."
What is Biochar?
Pyrolysed organic matter - to give you an idea first time I made it from mince pies I had burnt... the picture shows how you can innoculate it by weeing on it or adding flour or manure - just gets it going, but if you feed it raw to your animals it benefits them and then they poop it out ready to work miracles on your soil biome... sequestering that carbon permanently... it doesn't break down. Look into Alley Cropping... Coppiced for Biochar hedgerows send beneficial root exudates into a growing area between... Digging in Biochar with spuds on a 5 or 7 year rotation... Ed Revill said carbon in the soil tends to plateau at about 9% - his was up to 30% - I wondered if you could speed up transition away from artificial fertilizers by feeding animals with it??
The only snag is making the stuff - you can get energy burning the wood gasses given off - you mustn't waste the energy, the gas or the heat, mustn't cut down trees just to make it, although coppicing is OK... Best to use waste products - hedge trimmings or other waste streams - I fantasize about all our packaging being Biochar friendly since waste is the one thing we are really good at...
I converted our stove by removing the grate and putting one bar across to support logs - as they become pyrolysed they lose their integrity and fall through into the ash can - hearing them drop I shovel it out and quench in a bucket kept in the warming drawer - we can cook, heating radiators and hot water whilst sequestering more carbon than we burn. www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10643389.2020.1721980?fbclid=IwAR2d1VVhMDCsD2GuivkvgRxslS36cbMlTn5eAgXJCmCbNt7xPSyuECeTK8g
🌺 wow you are 100% beautiful
I lived on Kwajalein Island in 1958-'59. Most of the Marshall Islands are hardly more than 3' above sea level, at the most. The sea level rise caused by the collapse of Thwaite's Glacier will make the vast majority of those islands uninhabitable. That's some 59,000 people who will be displaced and will have to learn entirely new lifestyles.
Hi John! So true!!! I was staying 21 days in a motel in 2010 near me while my apt bldg was getting new plumbing. The lady who would clean my room said she was from a tiny island in the South Pacific pop 12,000. She said then, now 12 yrs ago, they all had to move because of sea level rise. She moved to Guam and married a sailor stationed there. He was head of maintenance for the bldg. She said Australia took 75 people, and New Zealand a few, but that's it and not sure where the others moved to. Very sad. She spoke the native language of her island. I can't imagine all the change and upheaval she'd been through and having to do motel room cleaning to survive.
Thank you for a very lucid and concerned explanation.
Shut up!
We can't live one full year in Antarctica but we want to colonize the Moon and Mars. Something is off here...
Human moon and mars missions are ludicrous. If we don‘t achieve sustainable human colonisation on earth, a planet that comprehensively serves our biological needs, we are not going to achieve it anywhere else. Basta.
There's a lot more weather in Antarctica than either of those places.
@@MrGonzonator also a lot more air 😆😆😆
@@achenarmyst2156 you're completely missing the point, smfh. The idea is that IN CASE OF SOME CATASTROPHIC EVENT, like a nuclear war, global doomsday pandemic or killer asteroid, the last of which IS A CERTAINTY, the human race will survive!!! YES, scientists absolutely KNOW that at some point in the future, could be tomorrow or a thousand years from now, but there is an end-of-life-as-we-know-it killer asteroid somewhere out there in space that WILL HIT THE EARTH, just like they've done throughout the entire existence of our planet.
AND IF HUMANS AREN'T ESTABLISHED ON SOME OTHER PLANET THAN EARTH WHEN THAT HAPPENS, THEN WE WILL CEASE TO EXIST AND ALL EVIDENCE, ALL ART, LITERATURE, ARCHITECTURE AND THE SUM KNOWLEDGE OF THE ENTIRE HUMAN RACE WILL BE OBLITERATED AS IF WE'D NEVER EXISTED. SO, as I always have to explain to your type, there's a fucking good reason for getting off this planet and establishing ourselves on other planets/moons, so quit bitching about those who are at least willing to try.
Just like we will someday soon have bases on the Moon, and then colonies, where people will live in enclosed domes or in underground cities, so the same will happen on Mars, although it'll be a few more decades down the road. So the "weather" won't matter because you can't go "outside" without a protective suit anyway.
There is the potential to terraform Mars, but that effort will be hundreds of years in the making, but we will do it because we are humans, and we can do whatever we put our minds and will to accomplish. Whether it's now of a hundred years in the future when the Earth's population has reached 12 billion and mass starvation, pandemics and constant war is the norm, we as a species MUST GET OFF THIS PLANET or perish. There's really no other options, and we have or will create the technology to do so.
Surely the change in the sea temperature must have been triggered by something in the past since the sea “cycle” takes I think you said 1,000 years. Correct?
MWP -- Medieval Warm Period (1000CE - 1250CE). That was the time when Greenland got its name. At the MWP end, it become more of a Groanland.
dumbo7429 why?
I think you're asking about the deep ocean current "conveyor belt" cycle taking 1000 years, yes? (I haven't rewatched the video and now it's months later.) The 1000 years is the amount of time it takes for a theoretical "piece" of water to move from one point, through the entire conveyor belt, back to that same point, so it's not a matter of heating up the entire "belt". No more than a literal conveyor belt would need something to change the entire thing at once in order to affect the way it moves--if you stab a knife through the rubber-fabric of a conveyor belt and jam the whole thing up that way, the un-stabbed regions won't continue to move, even though they're still in perfectly good shape.
What's changing is the "motor" for the conveyor belt. The things that drive the motion of water from the surface to the depths, and then the depths to the surface again, are density, temperature, salinity, and something I know has a name but I don't know what it is: the "suck" of water at the top of the system being pulled away from an area by wind, evaporation, and/or interactions with the slope of a continent.
Water sinks when it's colder, right up until it freezes, because ice is weird and floats. Water with more salt in it sinks. Warmer water floats; water with less salt in it floats. And when ice forms, most of the salt in it doesn't get stuck in the ice, so the water around the ice gets more salty. All that means that water at the poles gets colder: saltier: more dense; and it sinks.
When that cold, salty, dense water sinks, it starts the conveyor belt in motion. There are a couple places it comes up again, 1000 years later--think of them as booster motors--but the main motor is this sinking cold water. So if you screw with that motor, that's the knife through the conveyor belt. You can screw it up in a short period of time by changing the temperature and the salt-content, and the drag down into the depths loses its power.
Does that help answer the question of how a 1000 year-long cycle can be impacted by something that happened in the past 50 years?
We are getting more rain, and more snow even above Antarctica.
Just one small correction: many bases are run all year round. For example Amundsen Scott, which is smack on the south pole. There are many other so called "permanent" bases, although they are not the mayority.
Plague,famine,ice caps melting whats next a meteor: bring it on !!!!
No. Just the return of our savior. Be ready
What about a roaming magnetar?
@@WyrdBlogger01 true.....true......
Nope. Locusts are scheduled for later this summer.
Aliens no doubt 🤔
Yet on 3 Jan 2020, summit camp in Greenland recorded its coldest ever temperature at -86.8 F. So on average for the Earth what does that mean? Cold temperatures don’t make news in a ‘warmist world’.
A single measurement, hot or cold, is not that meaningful. A ten year average is more informative. A running average too. If there is a non linear trend in an average, that is more concerning.
One data point doesn't change a scientific consensus,yeah?!? Naah,yeah,mate.
Lets us not forget Antarctica has just had its coldest ever winter in 2021.....the ice is getting thicker and not melting...
it should be clear to everyone who has witnessed the response to this pandemic, Governments will not act with any seriousness until its too late.. many will argue it already is
Stay armed. Governments can't protect you.
Trump locked down the economy because he was told by scientists that there would be one to two million deaths due to the crown disease. two weeks later it was down to 100 to 200 thousand. Two weeks later it was down to 60 k. Not because of the lock-down, but because of new information. As of this writing it's drifted back up to 80k deaths projected this year.
So, tell me again why we should believe scientists with an agenda? I say this with a degree in physics; the math isn't there for the disease. Is it there for the climate? maybe, but don't go drawing false comparisons.
@@geraldfrost4710 - Agreed. And, No.. they're not correct about the climate either. It's less than comforting how far off the mark the "experts" are on these and many other issues.
@@geraldfrost4710 Without a lockdown we'd be in the millions. Our economic collapse would be much muchworse.
@@geraldfrost4710First, epidemiology is not climate science. 2. You using a cell phone or puter on a network to post on a platform seen worldwide? You use cars? You take medicine? Who gave you to you? Scientists using science and scientific method..
A decrease in global dimming could be a huge factor this year, make this even worse. After September 11, 2001, all aircraft over the US were grounded, and there was an unexpected spike in temperature. With more research, they realized that the effect of global warming has been slightly mitigated by the constant reflectivity of airplane contrails.
We're currently dropping air travel rates worldwide, due to the COVID-19 virus. Will it be enough of a decrease to remove a significant amount of the masking effect of global dimming? I'm waiting to find out. Unlike the majority of warming effects, dropping out aircraft from our global equation has an instantaneous effect. it wouldn't surprise me if we end up with an insanely warm spring and summer, a real spike that surprises everyone in the scientific community. Brace yourselves ...
On top of that we could be facing another El Nino. That could also add to atmospheric heating. 20/20 is sure shaping up to be an interesting year. Near Term Human Extinction is looking more ...
So, in a sense we've been accidentally geoengineering for decades. A spike in temperature would be a bit of good news oddly: wake up denialists and giving a green light to deliberate geoengineering.
When they grounded all aircraft in the US after 9/11 for just 4-5 days, the air cleared and the average temps over the US went up by 1.1oC...!!!!
Yeah, right. Provide source paper, smartypants.
@@whatsupbudbud you can find it if you look yourself.
What a wonderful video. Absolutely alarming contents but honest contained within but bad news doesn't mean good work. It's sometimes the best kind of work.
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 2,500"C of heat energy. That is impossible. It also breaks the fundamental laws of thermodynamics.
Methane at 0.00017% is a 600,000th of the atmosphere so it's even more impossible.
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).
Continued...
There are also many other basic contradictions in the CO2 climate hoax (eg that CO2 is highly soluble and is washed out extremely quickly in rainfall; that CO2 levels fluctuate drastically seasonally showing on earth with its high rainfall CO2 is not a gas that accumulates; that climate change models deliberately ignore infrared in direct sunlight were they to do so the whole hypothesis falls apart as it means 50% incoming heat energy captured by CO2 will be lost (radiated) back out to space; that the anything that captures energy from direct sunlight will reduce surface temps - this is why clouds immediately reduce surface temps; that the earth loses heat extremely quickly as shown by the fact nights are always colder; that heat cannot be trapped in oceans as described as they are more 'energy dense' than the adjacent air, rather if oceans are becoming warmer it can only be from direct sunlight; that increasing biomass increases CO2 because it increases the carbon in cycle; that correlation is not causation, otherwise it could be said daisies cause hot temperatures because there are more daisies when it is warm; that there is extremely dodgy Victorian science/politics behind Ice Ages which is never questioned or examined - eg mammoths despite claims otherwise are not adapted to cold but rather appear to be cold temperate animals similar to highland cattle, their blood is not antifreeze as claimed, they have no sebaceous glands, hair is long but sparse - even yaks being hairier, mammoth remains as far south as Mexico; that Milankovitch Cycles mean that the Southern Hemisphere is currently in the middle of it's Great Ice Age; that the hypothesis that burning of forest subsequent to Ice Ages resulted in warming is logically inconsistent as 'no new carbon' has been introduced into cycle this all being carbon already in cycle and in any case would be washed out almost immediately; that CO2 levels are at a geological low; that the oxygen cycle is intertwined with the carbon cycle and dependent on it; that life is carbon based and CO2 is essential; that a halving of CO2 levels would result in the extinction of nearly all plant species - problematic as it in turn means theorised measures of atmospheric CO2 during Ice Ages are unlikely to be correct - contrary there was a proliferation of megafauna; that alarmingly, plants already struggle to get enough CO2 for growth which is why farmers will often increase CO2 in greenhouses to promote yields; that the so called 'proofs' showing CO2 is able to capture radiant heat energy only prove the opposite and how very minor this is - that atmospheric concentrations of 0.04% CO2 thermal effect would be far too fractional to even be measured; that comparisons to other planets eg Venus/Mars prove CO2 does not capture the proportion of energy claimed and maybe this is why these comparisons are done less and less; that in order to explain vastly higher concentrations of CO2 in the geological past the sun is deemed to have increased its output this despite losing solar mass (gravitational mass) as fuel, this in turn meaning that the orbits of all the planets are all moving away from the sun - such hypothesis where solar activity is used to exactly compensate for holes in the CO2 climate theory is to ignore other evidential explanations of stars such as the 'electric universe theory'; that the geological archive shows periods of millions of years when CO2 and temperature were heading in opposite directions... etc).
The green industry is extremely big business pushed by the same multinationals involved in fossil fuels. In that respect their so called 'opposition' is a theatrical pretence for public consumption. Indeed if the petrochemical industry wanted to debunk CO2 climate change they could very easily pointing out that such narratives are in direct violation of the established laws of thermodynamics or basic common sense... yet they do not. It should be pointed out that the green agenda is the mainstream - promoted by media and corporate interest, Extinction Rebellion an elaborate Deep State psyop funded by George Soros and founded by Gail Bradbrook a corporate/Deep State stooge who previously liaised with the UK cabinet to push 5G with local authorities.
Green policies are a method to promote 'hyper capitalism', taxes, insane industries (eg electric cars, wind farms, carbon capture etc) and the confiscation of basic freedoms. Dependent on rare earth metals that are incredibly destructive to the environment and polluting these 'green' industries/electric vehicles and energy production actually are far worse than fossil fuels. THERE IS NO SAVING IN CO2 PRODUCTION. Neither are these rare earth materials present in sufficient quantities to mean anything other than rationing of the services associated with their use and necessitate vastly reduced human population (ref Iron Mountain Report, Agenda21, Wildlands Project, WEF Great Reset etc). In short the green revolution/sustainability represents the exact opposite, it is the accelerated trashing of the planet for corporate greed and corporations have been very successful in mobilizing the public behind this scam.
The carbon hoax is the theft of the world by an hyper wealthy elite who care very little about the environment and see the human race as idiots to be kept in ignorance and contained.
The damaging effects of green energy were highlighted by Ukcolumn news service on 25th Jan 2021 (see UKcolumn dot org).
I am aware that this information will be hard to assimilate. Nobody likes to think they are being duped and led into supporting the destruction of the very things they care about.
The figures quoted in this comment are all checkable so please do check.
____________
Please be aware of organized attempts to dismiss this comment including:
- Irrelevant questions and attempts to confuse.
- Closing-down questions and thought by deferring to 'experts'.
- Counter accusation.
- Contradictory statements that are not supported.
- Condescension, abuse and accusation.
I have put out this information because it is important. I am aware most will choose to dismiss it. I have no interest in arguing online. All the necessary info is there in my comment for others to confirm or reject.
Thinking is difficult, it requires effort.
@@doobidoo095 And you're a puppet of a republican party that denies climate change because they don't want big government and to keep power cheap.
How To Live In Harmony With Nature And Reduce Pollution
1. Many Production Companies Which We Do Not Need Actually For Human Beings Has To Be Stopped
We manufacture so many products and it is creating pollution. So if we minimise our products, pollution would be less.
We produce so many things which we do not need, like cold drinks, leather products, potato wafers, chips, fruit juices, chocolates, biscuits, pickles, ice creams, etc.
Cold drinks, fruit juices, chocolates, biscuits, pickles, ice creams, etc. should be cooked at home only. If we stopped producing this things which are not required for humans, so much pollution could be reduced.
If we colour the clothes pollution occurs. So if we don't colour our clothes, the pollution resulting from colouring the clothes can be stopped. Let everything remain in white natural colour.
2. We Should Cook Foods In Its Natural Form
We can cook rice and wheat in our homes and eat it. Rice and Wheat is produced in farms. Then it is packed and transported to big warehouses, then wholesalers buy from them and supply to retail shops.
But if a manufacturing company makes bread from rice and wheat, then to make bread a manufacturing company has to be set up, machines and working staffs are needed. When a company is built many other things are also needed. Then at last a plastic pack is required to pack the breads.
So if we start cooking eatable things in its natural form then we do not need many companies like bread manufacturing company, tomato ketchup, noodles, fruit jam, pizza, burger, etc., the things required for the company and the plastic pack, paper box pack and glass bottles. If done like this, so many companies will not be required and hence less pollution for the world.
Also we could save our money like this. If you buy a packet of bread, it would cost you more money than if you cook wheat and rice in home.
Previously before industrial revolution, we didn't have technology, but our foods were rich with nutrients. Now we have technology, but technology is polluting our foods and our foods are not rich with nutrients, and because of that also we have health problems.
If this is done, then many jobs would be lost. For that many peoples should do farming and they should be given loans if they do not have enough money to start farming on their own.
Food, Medicines, Surgeries and Education's should be made free to the world till the world settles down with farming. After that food, medicines, surgeries and education's should be stopped free to the world.
Many people should study botany subject so that they have knowledge of plants and they should do farming.
Is their any another solution, that humans won't lose jobs and also pollution would decrease. Humans have to take this step certainly instead of going on polluting the earth, making wildlife extinct and also mass extinctions of humans in future.
3. Electricity Pollution
We create electricity from many types of sources like coal, water, etc., but it creates pollution. If electricity created from windmill and solar energy then no pollution occurs in the creation process. But still to manufacture windmill and solar machines pollution would occur.
As I previously said that if we shut down many manufacturing companies which are producing things which are not needed for humans, then the world would not require so much electricity. If less electricity required, then less pollution generated.
4. Could We Stop Drinking Cow's and Buffalo's Milk
Whatever vitamins and nutrients we get from milk, if we can get it from other eatable things, then we can stop drinking cow's and buffalo's milk. As milk has to be packed in glass bottles and plastic packs and then transported to places. All of this can be stopped.
For infants whose mother's have died or mother's who cannot breast feed their infants, only for them cow's and buffalo's milk should be given. We use milk in tea and coffee. Instead of milk we must use lime with tea and coffee or just plain tea and coffee. A lime should be cut into a few pieces and cooked with tea and coffee or something else can be used instead of lime.
5. How Much Should Be The World's Population
Every place should have a single house. No buildings, everything ground floor. If we do this and the whole lands of our planet earth would be occupied one day with homes, farms, forests, schools, hospitals, etc., then we would come to know how much our planet earth can have maximum population.
Once the population is determined, then we have to maintain that population. For example if our earth can have a population of 10 billion peoples, then when the population reaches 10 billion, then everyone should have only one child till the population reaches 9 billion peoples. As if we have only one child then the population decreases. When population is 9 billion peoples, then everyone should have 2 children's till the population reaches 10 billion peoples. After that again we should have only one child. In this way population can be maintained.
@@doobidoo095 That CO2 is a greenhouse gas was already proven by Eunice Foote in 1856.
I'm a sceptic but you DO get your points across calmly, that's important if you want to TURN a sceptic, they can't handle calm lol
And yet nothing changes. The question is NOT will we survive? It’s WHEN will it end?
We will end when the post-rational, neo-Marxist get the power they are so desperately seeking. The Earth is fine. Save yourself!
Climate change doesn't end. It's a constant cycle. People have to adapt or they die trying. You can't change or control the weather. No point in worrying about what it hasn't done or what it will do unless a tornado or flood will take out your house in the coming week.
Thanks for covering this important topic. In addition to Western Antarctica and Thwaites glacier, melting of Eastern Antarctica has greatly accelerated as well - which has not only surprised glaciologists, but threatens a much greater and faster rise in sea level. Oh,... there is also an active volcano under Thwaites glacier!!
With many volcanoes being inactive/ asleep that are slowly being awakened through the behaviour of mankind ,take a look @ * dutchsinse * a dedicated follower of all activities & reports made, only his observations are out there for others to take notice of while governmental departments aren’t saying much; little warning & downgrading of sizes .
@@pennyoflaherty1345 Penny, where do you get whatever you are on? How big are the pieces of sky that are falling in your yard?
Oh, a volcano. And that is being controlled by humans how? Mother Nature at work, all Mother Nature.. Nothing man can do affects climate enough to be concerned. Nothing we can do, just sit back and enjoy the trip.
According to the flat earthers their fantasy ice wall (that nobody has ever seen) will keep all the ice intact...so no worries.
Please don't make fun of us. I live on the edge of the Earth and do you know how many cats I have lost? I now put Velcro on them as soon as they are past the cute kitten stage. I make lots of money on Instagram with my adorable kitten photos, but nobody wants a Velcroed Cat photo. It is hard for them to play the piano with that Velcro. So please, compassion, mate.
flatbrainers.
I was just thinking that as well. I think Scot died all those years ago because he hit the wall.. A bad Mike?
8 inch per mile sq
that is all i need to say
@@ogasi1798 LMFAO...that's a parabola dipshit. A dome and an ice wall for flat earth to be real...now THAT'S all I need to say.
I can't wait till I can move to Antarctica. Thats why I keep my truck running all the time.
The news just announced that the doomsday glacier will collapse in 3 to 5 years!!
Great presentation, fabulous visuals - thanks!
Lol
I am surprised that there are so many darn delicate positive feedback cycles. The climate should have gone haywire with the natural occurrences that have happened in the last 20 thousand years. We are soooooo lucky arent we?
We are at the moment, but you're forgetting the mini-ice age, the dry medieval period, the wet pre-medieval peroid, the drying out of the Sahara basin, climate change destroying the fertile crescent and the Indus valley civilization, the Mayans, the Japanese pre-edo period deforestation.
@@tauIrrydah Exactly. Climate change happens all the time, and it cant be explained solely on CO2
On the NASA Earth Sciences web site it shows the Arctic loosing and the Antarctic gaming surface ice. This is from 1979 to 2020. I’m going to buy another diesel truck. That makes 3. CO2 makes my garden greener. Lack of CO2 is not green. That’s plant food
@@kevennye937 except the net flux is negative... Do we are loosing ice overall
Dundoril probably true. But CO2 is historically low. Plants die at 250ppm. CO2 has been as high as 5-6k ppm. Also plants are more drought tolerant when CO2 is higher. Another the earth has been cooler than now with a higher CO2 count. The earth is also becoming greener in recent times. I doubt AOC’s climate knowledge learned at a bar is what we should be placing policy on
Well, nice upbeat video before bed.
And yet the tech cheerleaders are all about founding an independent civilization on Mars which is far more inhospitable to humans than Antarctica ever will be.
It's not like that is a binary choice. We could prevent the worst of climate change and golf on Mars. We just need get our heads out of our bums.
This season’s Total Snow Mass for the Northern Hemisphere is tracking at some 500+ Gigatons above the 1982-2012 average:

So? Its been "above average" several other years as well. Do you understand the word average? That in no way supports your argument whatsoever dimwit. Btw... its 300+ gigatons not 500. Why exaggerate?
I like how people feel the need to insult one's intelligence when they share facts that others don't want to hear. Born Villain, if snowfall is above average, then it can not also be at an all time low. More snow is generally associated with lower temperatures, so "global warming" or "climate change" as its referred to these days is complete horse shite.
Not sure how old or informed you are, but in the 80's, "experts" said an ice age was coming in the 90's, but that never happened. In the late 90's "experts" said the polar ice caps would be completely melted, polar bears would drown (even though they're perfectly adapted to swim long distances) and coastal cities around the globe would be under water by 2011, but that never happened. They still say it's happening, but the beaches still look exactly the same way they did almost 35 years ago.
"Experts" also said over 2 million people would die from Covid in the US by now even with lockdowns, but that never happened. Have you ever wondered why "experts" always seem to be 0% right 100% of the time when the "fate of humanity" is at stake?
@@evolspeed4862
No sir horse shite is what comprises the majority of your brain matter and idc when you dimwitted little cringe bots "feel" insulted. Your feelings have no impact on reality.
David Swenson, first off - who said snowfall was at record lows? Answer: nobody, you made it up. If it was in this video and I somehow missed it then it still doesn't matter since this video is about Antarctica. Context is everything.
Fun fact: Atmosphere can hold 4% more moisture for every 1° F increase in temperature. So, as long as it does not warm above freezing, the result is a greater dump of snow. Now you know. Sit tf down and stfu.
@@bornvillain6819, there's obviously no sense in attempting a rational/respectful debate with you about "climate change". But I do appreciate your tireless effort to prove my point about insulting the intelligence of those who disagree with you👍🏻
Also, when did anyone say their feelings were hurt? I simply stated what my own observations have been, along with expert claims of what the planets future held, which never came true. You sir are the only one getting emo about anything 😘
David Swenson its well known that warmer air holds more moisture. This means more intense storms, higher storm surges during hurricanes, and flooding, oh, and eventually noticeable sea level rise. New York city flooded for almost a week a few years ago. Miami now floods on a regular basis. Also, im 50 and ive never heard cities would be flooded bu 2011. Maybe you should maybe rethink where you get you information. Loud mouth know nothings on the AM dial aren’t serving you well.
I didn't hear what effect the volcanoes have on all this:
Scientists discover 91 volcanoes below Antarctic ice sheet ...www.theguardian.com › world › aug › scientists-discov...
Aug 12, 2017 - Scientists have uncovered the largest volcanic region on Earth - two kilometres below the surface of the vast ice sheet that covers west Antarctica ...
my thoughts exactly
Imagine that wouldn’t have anything to do with the
Melting
Damn I been pointing people to that one for years.
However several hundred of the most respected people in the community swore blind that witchcraft was real during the Salem trials. Gotta love those learned folk, they're never wrong... Now I'm off to roll some coal. Cheerio!
Nope must be my diesel mercedes and its 200 litres per month of emmissions melting the poles
That's because under sea volcanoes in proximity of the Antarctic sea ice shelfs do not support the climate change/global warming is man made propaganda.
I like when they say no civilization have explored and then they show scientists mini town buildings
Forget terraforming mars we’re going to need to terraform our own planet, and not by carbon emissions that’s already worked WONDERS haha
Why? If we are warming, it is a historic boon for life on earth.
It's when the planet gets colder that you should be concerned.
B.s.! Not like that big bright thing in the sky has any affect on the climate, right? Nor the volcano under Antartica, right? Get a clue.
Remove the CO2 and we all die, plants live on it to produce O2.
Geez man
@Bee Kay glad you volunteered
The good thing is that even a devastated Earth would be the easiest planet to terraform in this solar system.
@@ChipmunkRapidsMadMan1869 The geologic warm periods had the lowest biodiversity. It is the ice ages with it's interglacial periods that have the greatest biodiversity. Part of this is because warmer waters hold less oxygen, even warmer air holds less oxygen.
Finally! Warm it up so we can plant some palm trees down there!
The predictions that the ice flowing into the ocean will raise sea levels seems flawed. Here is why:
Consider an ice cube in a glass of water. How much of the ice cube is above the water level in the glass, and how much of the ice cube is below the water? Well, almost all of it is below the water level, and only the tiniest amount of the ice cube is above the water, sticking out. The situation is approximately the same for the doomsday glacier. While ocean water has increased buoyancy due to salt content, the effect is minimal. If you doubt this, add salt to your glass of water and see how much the ice raises out of the water. Virtually the entire ice cube remains underwater.
Now, the important factor here is that the ice is melting not only at the top, but also below the water. The video said that the water temperature below the ice is about 2 Celsius, while above the ice is -2 Celsius. This means the bottom of the ice, below the water, is 4 degrees warmer than the ice above the water. Additionally, the surface area of the ice below the water is far, far greater than the surface area above the water. The end result is that ice below the water is melting orders of magnitude faster than the ice above the water.
So, why is it important which part of the ice melts faster? It is important because melting ice below the water line has an effect on water level that is in competition with the effect of water above the water level.
To understand this, ask yourself what happens if you place a bottle of water in the freezer? The water expands as it freezes, it takes up more space. If the bottle is plastic, it will expand; If it is something that cannot expand, such as a glass bottle, it will break. When the ice in the plastic bottle melts again, it returns to its previous density meaning it takes up less space again.
Now, here is where the competing effects come in: The ice above the water that melts and flows into the ocean raises the level of the ocean water, which is the basis of the video calling it a doomsday glacier. But, at the same time, the ice below the water level is melting much faster, and it is decreasing in volume as it melts. As this ice below the water decreases in volume, the water level of the ocean decreases, it gets lower. So, on the one hand you have melting ice that raises the water level when it flows into the ocean, and on the other hand, you have melting ice that decreases the water level. Because the amount of ice below the water level is enormous as compared to the amount of ice above the water level, the result is that the water level of the ocean goes down very much faster than it goes up. Instead of shorelines and islands disappearing beneath the sea, you actually get the oposite; new shoreline appears, and new islands too, and probably a new isthmus or three as well.
If you doubt the validity of this analysis, it is easy to test. Get a tall glass of water, and add some ice to it but dont let the ice rest on the bottom of the glass, it has to be floating just like the glacier is floating in the ocean. Now, after the ice is floating in the water, use a sharpie or crayon to mark the glass at the level of the top of the water. Next, leave the glass alone so that the ice melts. After the ice has melted, compare the new water level to what it was before the ice melted. It should have gone down, and this proves that the so-called doomsday glacier that is supposed to swallow up dry land on earth will instead uncover land that until now has been underwater.
This is not to say that climate change is not real, but just that not every maker of youtube videos is telling the truth.
These are facts from real scientists i dont even have to read what u said
ryan Hull
Since I completed a bachelor's in dual-major biology and analytical chemistry Summa Cum Laude, a Master's in organic chemistry with honors, and a doctoral in inorganic chemistry, and I have numerous peer reviewed publications including JACS and Nature, I think I might qualify as being a real scientist. What puzzles me, is why you would reply to something that you admit to not having read first?
As for real scientists, isn't that what they said about Nabiru, the end of the world on Y2K, and every other doomsday prediction that never came to pass? They always say the scientists say... or there is research showing that... and time always proves it to be false. Now, I am not denying climate change, which is a real thing; I am only denying that the situation with this glacier is anything like what is being claimed.
But why should I say more, since you presumably would not read this either...?
Take an interest in facts over dogma and politics. Let the facts guide your politics, and not the reverse.
@@eynkeehoohoohaechad4997 Fine I tried to read all that and ya you sound smart but until what your saying matters against the real facts that thousands of scientist agree on and studied before they each agreed then all your long msg is useless... go be a climate scientist tell them your thoughts and they will tell you thoughts that turned to facts because so many people and country's studied it over many years..
Thermal expansion is caused when seawater expands because of the higher temperature of the water. Since the oceans absorb heat from the atmosphere, when the atmosphere becomes warmer so will the oceans. ... The increased volume will cause the level of the water in the oceans to rise. Hopefully this answers anymore of your questions about why your wrong
ryan Hull
Again, just saying that thousands of scientists agree that this is a doomsday glacier does not mean that there truly are thousands of scientists that agree that this is a doomsday glacier.
Perhaps there are a few but, truth be told, there are always some scientists that are right and some that are wrong. Some scientists are devout Christians, some are Muslims or buddhists, and some are atheists. Are they all right?
Science is based on a hypothesis, which is basically a theory derived from empirical observations, and experiments which produce results that either support or disprove that hypothesis. In the case of the so-called doomsday glacier, the hypothesis (that this glacier will cause a doomsday scenario) is not based on the empirical observation that other glaciers have caused a doomsday scenario or even flooded the earth to any degree whatsoever, even a small amount, by melting and raising the level of the oceans. There also are no experiments which have tested the hypothesis. Ocean tides, caused by gravitational pull from the moon and other celestial bodies, raise and lower the sea levels two times every day, and the net change in sea levels from the twice daily tides is far greater than what could be produced by all the glaciers on earth. The video talks about a few inches, but tidal changes are measured in feet, not inches. In short, do not believe everything you read or see in a RUclips video.
On the other hand, there is abundant evidence that pollution, especially from fossil fuels but from other sources too, causes severe health and climate problems and needs to be addressed. But this doomsday glacier stuff, well, its not credible.
Projecting your shadow on to the virtual globe was a nice touch, excellent work.
Psychopath
So Corona,Arctic sea ice melting, economic collapse and now Thwaites??? Man 2020 is going to be interesting.
Cheer up! The destruction of Thwaites Glacier proceeds at a glacial pace compared to Covid19. Never look the gift horse in the mouth.
muhammad umair zia Don’t forget the fascism.
@@bongobrandy6297 You are correct yet the exponential behaviour of climate change,the unknown stuff happening like who would have thought that Corona virus could have spread and like wise dots connecting each other makes me feel uneasy.
If you research the impact of global dimming--a minor but important reduction in warming due to our constant air travel--and think about how that's being reduced by the coronavirus, it could be even more radical than everyone already expects.
Putin crowned himself President-for-Life. So there's that, too.
Thank you for all the good information you provide...hopefully us humans don't fail. But after COVID-19, my faith in humanity's co-operation skills has been really tested.
I'm glad I started paying attention to melting glaciers years ago and moved away from the coast while I could. Im in the Blue Ridge Mtns now, safe from the sloshing waters of the Atlantic when the solar nova shifts the planet and the oceans push inland hundred perhaps thousands of miles per ben Davidsons research. If you live along the coast or low lying areas, please consider moving now before everyone else notices and prices climb out of your reach, and you're stuck.
Meanwhile, there's millions of people who we can't even convince to take a free vaccine that could save lives right now.
I did the same, lived the first 25 years of my life on the coast not much above sea level and following, seeing constant flooding, global warming and glacial melt concerns. I moved inland about 20 miles to 120 meters above sea level about 12 years ago. The worlds coastlines will change in dramatically.
Glaciers are frozen rivers which calve off icebergs all the time.
Yes, they calve off 2,200 billion tonnes / year of ice. The assessment is that each one will increase its flow & calving by 6 times to 7 times the present amount after the ice shelf is gone (this has happened the last 2 decades for some small ones) so the increase is approximately 5.5 * 2,200 = 12,100 billion tonnes / year of ice into the ocean which would cause 33.6 mm / year of globally-averaged sea level rise (SLR) and this is the potential end game for Antarctica over the next couple of centuries if humans should so choose. Pretty damn simple.
@@grindupBaker , I was told that in 1990 by my Science teacher and am still waiting for sea level to rise. Its false .
December 2021 Update: Climate scientists say the Doomsday glacier could collapse within 5 years! So things haven't got better.
When global warming started to get some traction in 2000, I did my own calculations of a worst case scenario of all ice melting just by calculating (according to wikipedia) how much ice is on land and how much water that will produce (90%). Ice on water is not a direct problem, since it won´t raise the sea level. I calculated a max rise in sea level of 7 meters. I live in the Netherlands, so I bought my house accordingly at 8 meters above sea level. And now I am moving to 55 meters above sea level, because I realise it´s not just the rising of the water that is a problem for survival. Also I am now thinking of building underground to negate the temperatures that are becoming not very pleasant in summer. We will have to start building our houses differently, with the intention of keeping them cool, rather than keeping as much of the sun´s energy in, like in earth ships and such. Those will get mighty warm in coming years. At the very least you should have a good strategy for keeping excessive heat out.
Going underground seems to be the easiest and cheapest way to get some real insulation and thermal mass around you.
The thing is, there is a lot of ice in the Antarctic. So although it might eventually all melt, this will take a long time. Like 1,000 years or so. Most forecasts are for 1m+ rise of average sea level at the end of this century so although it doesn't hurt I don't think you need to be worried about the elevation of your house in your lifetime if you moved up 7 meters. Of course the oceans will also expand in volume as the average temperature rises. but this lies within a similar magnitude as the rise from melting ice on land, at least for this century. I would rather concentrate on reducing your carbon footprint and investing in renewabels.
Al Gore & Obama both have homes by the ocean & neither has an electric car - so are they worried ?
More heat leads to more evoporation so more rain and more water on land.
@@bennichols1113 Good news for the deserts & dryer regions - plus winters should be milder
I agree going underground is a good idea. However, have you calculated the effects of the Maunder Minimum and its cooling effect?
Once the next solar cycle starts up the jetstream will return to a more normal pattern and they wont get these random warming temperatures any longer and the data will start reading colder.
the solar cycle has been trying to cool the earth for the last decade, yet the earth has continued warming, the next phase of the solar cycle is to increase warming even further
Update. That isn't playing out. Note all of the temperate records around the world falling like domino's. Keep lying too yourself.
I wanna know what is under the ice. For one. For two, if we know the waters gonna rise there is no excuse to get caught sleepen
What happens to the ph balance of the ocean when you increase the depth of the ocean by 10'? Seems like there could be other side effects more drastic causing chain reactions
Salinity ?
Good question about the pH. Over the long term, the pH of the ocean has been about 8.2, which is mildly alkaline. That's why, if you get past the salty taste of ocean water, it's a bit bitter as well. (I know this from boogie-boarding as a kid and having waves shoot seawater up my nose, and then spending the next couple of hours with it draining out of my sinuses and down my throat as I make revolting snot-noises.)
Carbon dioxide dissolving into the ocean from the atmosphere increases the pH, because CO2 in water forms a weak acid, carbonic acid.
That's neutralized by calcium, which ultimately is supplied by erosion from the land.
Then there's water, with a pH of 7, or "neutral." What you're talking about is adding a whole lot of that neutral fresh water, and because fresh water is less dense than salt water, it floats, and takes some time to mix into the background.
For the past 20 million years, 8.2 pH is the sum total of the three different chemical factors, water, CO2, and calcium. When you add more water overall, you're going to add more "neutral," which means the average pH will be pulled toward 7, more acidic, even though the water itself is not acidic and the seawater will stay on the alkaline side of the equation.
However, water isn't the main game-changer for the ocean as a whole, the earth-wide system. Only about 2% of the water on Earth is in land-ice / glaciers, so even with 10 feet of fresh water floating on top of the denser salt water, it's not the number one effect on pH. I think the biggest impacts would be near the poles, where glaciers are melting and the fresh water hasn't mixed in yet. Since most of the calcium-shelled animals live in reefs near the equator, they won't experience that fresh water. The depth of the water will change where they live, but not how they grow.
To visualize that, imagine pouring a teaspoon of Drano into a gallon of water. Now add 2% more water. Whatever the pH was, it's not changed drastically, even if you did make the gallon jug overflow a little bit.
Still, what matters is that the dilution effect of fresh water WON'T help correct the acidity problem we're creating. The impact of the huge amount of carbonic acid being generated by the excess CO2 we've added to the atmosphere, 30% of which dissolves into seawater.
With all that extra acidity in the water, the pH of sea water has increased by 30%. (Numbers in the pH scale are logarithmic, and I have forgotten my log scales but the point of it is that a 0.1 change isn't a small change.) Instead of the long-standing pH of 8.2 that all sea life has evolved with, it's now up to 8.1, and already it's making shelled animals struggle to grow their shells.
Oyster farmers have been going out of business because their oysters can't grow. How crazy is that?
The fact that this CO2-caused destruction is hitting already, at the start of an accelerating curve, means that it is indeed going to have a lot of unforseen knock-on effects.
At some point, the higher acidity of the ocean will turn it into a wasteland, where the calcium-based corals that form reefs will no longer grow, but instead will slowly erode away. Most of the life in the ocean either lives in or reproduces in those reefs. The end of the food chain in the ocean? If we did nothing else with all of our technological f'kery, that would probably be the end of us.
Interesting summary of your understanding there ! As you’ve said we are having troubles down Under with the deterioration of the GREAT BARRIER REEF off Queensland Australia.
With all the other Global concerns & ongoing costs, it’s seeming * Too little To LATE * for an Australian Federal Government taking IMMEDIATE RESPONSIBLE ACTION !! This Great wonder of the World is fading into the back ground. Programs showing this much like Sir Attenborough s have before & after affects , a dying coral due to warming.
Apart from a shipping lane cut across it to export coal from inland , many protest against this mining company that doesn’t have good media coverage - even world updated news !
Weather clothed shades on connected & inserted poles placed around & over this wonder could aide it from sun damage for a starter……………..**BETTER IDEAS PLEASE LET QUEENSLAND PREMIER , - BRISBANE 4000 Australia KNOW !! ***
@@pennyoflaherty1345 it's beyond tragic, what's happening to the Great Barrier Reef. Something I've been saying for a few years now is that Sir Attenborough is someone I would love to have around for a long time, but it would be better for his soul if he did not outlive the Great Barrier Reef. He's already outlived too many natural wonders. I will never get to see that beautiful reef-world, so my sense of its loss will not be so intimate, but to know that this marvel of marvels and source of ocean-wide life is currently in its death throes is ... horrific, heart-stopping, indescribable. All things bad.
Your doing a really good job with this channel, thanks.
not YOUR, it is YOU'RE,, and you are (you're) also very very very underinformed/misinformed about what is going on with the climate on our planet
So his explanation of how the ocean conveyor system works is a bit off. Cold water is more dense so it sinks
Warm salty water may be more dense than cold fresh water, and it's cold fresh water that's melting off the ice ??
Roger Barton the warm salty water cools as it goes north especially when it melts the ice. So it is no longer warm it has cooled and that’s why it sinks
So here we are one year after this aired and it’s even more dire. Could break off in 5 years. What frightens me is that previous predictions were wrong and in that it’s happening much faster than they predicted
And now the annual Antarctic deep freeze has begun. Every part of the world has heat waves. There is no doomsday glacial event occurring in Antarctica.
This man frequently presents the content of a whole 5th grade presentation and sells it as an intro. Marvelous!
This dude is well worth a million subscribers.
If saying the deserves a million subscribers isnt sarcasm then it is just bullshit.
It will be interesting to see how this will affect marine life.
They'll just keep migrating to extinction!
Apparently Antarctica has just had the lowest winter temperature on record.
It’s about overall rising ocean temperatures, not one year of land temperature data. Did you even watch?
@@charlesbartlett2569 Yes I did thank you, but I thought I would just add my comment.
The more I see and hear about man made climate change the more sceptical I become. Some of the leading proponents are little more than scammers looking for funding, academic status and Nobel prizes. A Disgrace to the Profession is a book well worth reading.
The big players were not present at Cop 26 which tells me they're are not taken in by the junk science we're bombarded with and are not going to allow their economies to be ruined by so called green solutions that will achieve little or nothing.
What we need is a modern day King Canute who can demonstrate to all that we are not as clever or powerful as we think we are.
@@mpaul4584 There is no doubt that politics has invaded every facet of our lives including science. I have always believed that the arguments against fossil fuel use have been misguided. It should be less about climate change and more about breathing clean air versus sucking on the poisonous gases of a tail pipe. People would understand the suicide argument.
It’s (climate change) affecting my pay packet already. I work outdoors at heights. The amount of windy days, although something that isn’t thought about by the masses, is something that decides whether we can work or not. And have noticed a considerable increase in frequency and intensity.
It hadn’t occurred to me either. I am very conscious of climate change and the threat it poses to humanity, shortage of food, water and so on but never counted in the inability to work. So a good point but what else are we missing ?
May I ask it sounds like you may wash windows. Perhaps dangling outside on a scaffold with a wegee.
And the climate will be different next year. It runs in cycles.
@@sherrykendrick1765 yes, everything does from women to Vegas slot machines.
How To Live In Harmony With Nature And Reduce Pollution
1. Many Production Companies Which We Do Not Need Actually For Human Beings Has To Be Stopped
We manufacture so many products and it is creating pollution. So if we minimise our products, pollution would be less.
We produce so many things which we do not need, like cold drinks, leather products, potato wafers, chips, fruit juices, chocolates, biscuits, pickles, ice creams, etc.
Cold drinks, fruit juices, chocolates, biscuits, pickles, ice creams, etc. should be cooked at home only. If we stopped producing this things which are not required for humans, so much pollution could be reduced.
If we colour the clothes pollution occurs. So if we don't colour our clothes, the pollution resulting from colouring the clothes can be stopped. Let everything remain in white natural colour.
2. We Should Cook Foods In Its Natural Form
We can cook rice and wheat in our homes and eat it. Rice and Wheat is produced in farms. Then it is packed and transported to big warehouses, then wholesalers buy from them and supply to retail shops.
But if a manufacturing company makes bread from rice and wheat, then to make bread a manufacturing company has to be set up, machines and working staffs are needed. When a company is built many other things are also needed. Then at last a plastic pack is required to pack the breads.
So if we start cooking eatable things in its natural form then we do not need many companies like bread manufacturing company, tomato ketchup, noodles, fruit jam, pizza, burger, etc., the things required for the company and the plastic pack, paper box pack and glass bottles. If done like this, so many companies will not be required and hence less pollution for the world.
Also we could save our money like this. If you buy a packet of bread, it would cost you more money than if you cook wheat and rice in home.
Previously before industrial revolution, we didn't have technology, but our foods were rich with nutrients. Now we have technology, but technology is polluting our foods and our foods are not rich with nutrients, and because of that also we have health problems.
If this is done, then many jobs would be lost. For that many peoples should do farming and they should be given loans if they do not have enough money to start farming on their own.
Food, Medicines, Surgeries and Education's should be made free to the world till the world settles down with farming. After that food, medicines, surgeries and education's should be stopped free to the world.
Many people should study botany subject so that they have knowledge of plants and they should do farming.
Is their any another solution, that humans won't lose jobs and also pollution would decrease. Humans have to take this step certainly instead of going on polluting the earth, making wildlife extinct and also mass extinctions of humans in future.
3. Electricity Pollution
We create electricity from many types of sources like coal, water, etc., but it creates pollution. If electricity created from windmill and solar energy then no pollution occurs in the creation process. But still to manufacture windmill and solar machines pollution would occur.
As I previously said that if we shut down many manufacturing companies which are producing things which are not needed for humans, then the world would not require so much electricity. If less electricity required, then less pollution generated.
4. Could We Stop Drinking Cow's and Buffalo's Milk
Whatever vitamins and nutrients we get from milk, if we can get it from other eatable things, then we can stop drinking cow's and buffalo's milk. As milk has to be packed in glass bottles and plastic packs and then transported to places. All of this can be stopped.
For infants whose mother's have died or mother's who cannot breast feed their infants, only for them cow's and buffalo's milk should be given. We use milk in tea and coffee. Instead of milk we must use lime with tea and coffee or just plain tea and coffee. A lime should be cut into a few pieces and cooked with tea and coffee or something else can be used instead of lime.
5. How Much Should Be The World's Population
Every place should have a single house. No buildings, everything ground floor. If we do this and the whole lands of our planet earth would be occupied one day with homes, farms, forests, schools, hospitals, etc., then we would come to know how much our planet earth can have maximum population.
Once the population is determined, then we have to maintain that population. For example if our earth can have a population of 10 billion peoples, then when the population reaches 10 billion, then everyone should have only one child till the population reaches 9 billion peoples. As if we have only one child then the population decreases. When population is 9 billion peoples, then everyone should have 2 children's till the population reaches 10 billion peoples. After that again we should have only one child. In this way population can be maintained.
Refreshing! Shows like this inevitably takes me back to the universal, timeless routine of the great George Carlin... The Planet!!
So! I asked other comments ahead of you should I stop saying no and we'll they didn't answer so you my friends get a " SOOOO"!
This all sounds bad but when I asked Frank, a guy who lives at the
end of the road in a storm drain, Frank had nothing to say. So no worries.
Frank sounds like a Republican. to me ...
@Euro Wars However these " decent " people ARE prone to paranoia, racism and a paralyzing fear of " Globalism " that breeds rampant and dangerous Nationalism, not at all unlike the Nazi regime of the late 1930's ... so much for " Decency " ... so much for " common Sense " - a commodity that is in short supply in modern-day America !
@DylPickle The " Riots " are happening because the Cops are behaving like Nazi Brown Shirts. Americans like YOU have gotten so fat and happy, that they can't recognize the signs of impending tyranny. You are SO PROUD of your " Free Country ", but you fail to notice that it doesn't always work so well for every citizen. If you TRULY love the United States, you will have to do more than just wave a flag and salute the National Anthem. America has the POTENTIAL to be a Great Nation, but it isn't yet - and Trump will NOT make it one by uttering empty slogans !
@Tom Musial Frank is a dick ... Oscar the Grouch is mean, but at least he's honest !
Did he give you a red balloon?
Hurricane season 2020 has been pretty rough so far.
So what I've learned from this video. is Florida and the UK are similar in size.
Jk. What I've learned is we are completely screwed because of our reactionary nature.
Gotta laugh or you'll cry.
:**D
@@sket123flamez7 It is still part of Europe. Our country isn't floating off in to the Atlantic ocean. We have left the European Union, not Europe.
@@sket123flamez7 Europe is a continent and yes we are connected to it. The UK isn't floating...
@@sket123flamez7 Northern Ireland then is not the UK since it's not attached. Huh?
Actually, that _was_ one of the things that stuck out most for me in this video. I went and looked at my globe to compare the sizes.
This is a very polite and proper way of saying we're all gonna die.
It looks like the earth itself is designed to make sure we can not overpopulate for long. Our damage causes it to strike back.
You are correct, no one lives forever.
[10,000 years ago] Caveman 1: "Continental glaciation is melting." Caveman 2: "This is a climate disaster in the making."
" How Dare You !!!! "
[Current Day] Sane Person with a Basic Understanding of Science 1: "Wow, there are a lot of cynical morons that would rather debate a flat earth than hold polluting businesses accountable. Maybe some of us haven't changed much since being a caveman 10,000 years ago."
I recommend panicking and giving ALL your money to your government.
Might as well, they, or the medical establishment, will take it all anyway.
The temperature has been slowly rising for 12,000+ yrs, what caused it before the industrial revolution? Also why through all of history the rise of CO2 has always followed the rise in temperature by as much as 200 yrs and its allegedly now the opposite. Can anyone explain this? I'm so confused.
The sun cycle has more to do with climate change than humans. The pole shift and the reduction of our magnet field is allowing more radiation to reach earth. Once the ocean conveyer system stops we will go into the next ice age.
The rising co2 levels are followed by rising temperatures c02 is the chicken temperature is the egg
The Milankovitch cycles triggered a warming of 4°C between 20000-10000 years ago sending us into an inter-glacial period. Then the temperature stabilized and remained pretty stable for the past 10000 years, even showed a small downward trend. We reversed that and it's going up rapidly.
Consider that naturally a 4°C change took 10k years, so 2500 years per 1 degree change. Then consider that in the past century we recorded a 1 degree increase. That's 25 times faster than natural change, and we're still speeding up.
imarchello I guess that's why it's so friggin cold right now, right mate?
Interesting and very informative as usual.
The Love of money will constantly put the brakes on doing what is required to protect our planet.
Regards Gray
Australia
So much for "greed is good"
You say that because you have been fooled to believe that a few extra million parts of an important
nourishment for plants are the cause of us finally being able to get out of "The Little Ice Age" !
@@tomrogerlilleby2890
G'day Tom
I'm a bit slow mate. Maybe cause I live Downunder in the Land of Oz.
Anyhow pour y'self a tot a rum lad and pass me the bottle
Cheers Gray
The earth is NOT fragile. It recovers nicely on its own without freedom limiting extreme leftist/communist actions.
@@johntiggleman4686 yes it will recover John.
And we will cease harming the planet soon.
Resource Depletion
Cheers Gray
Extremely good narration. Thanks.
Quality Content
"And what happens if the whole thing lets go" ... It's a "Glacier" it's what they do ! salt water in liquid form will melt ice PERIOD !
It did let go about ten thousand years ago there was an ice oven over 2000 miles wide 2 miles deep that's when the ocean rose
even if the water is -2 degress celcius? LOL
The GOOD NEWS IS: This year is the coolest one that ANY of us will see for the remainder of our lives!!😁😁😁
British Columbia wants to seek with you
That's Celsius you're reading, not Fahrenheit 🤣
@@reuireuiop0 ?
In the last six months Antarctica has logged the coldest temperatures on record (according to CNN and the Washington post) but what do you hear from these guys? Not a peep. What about an update? What about a statement that says wow maybe we were wrong about Antarctica, maybe we’re just guessing, maybe our models are wrong.
Weird question: How do you determine which part of Antarctica is east or west? It is aligned with the Prime Meridian in some way?
Correct, the gmt splits it between west and east
that high record temp was closest to sth America Nothing new about those temps if you go back and look
When in doubt, just ask a Brit.
Presumably West Antartica is roughly logitudinally aligned with the Western nations. 0º runs from the North through UK to South. So I would guess West Antarica is West of that line.
Great question. 👍
I am having difficulty coming to grips with the threat, because of the physics of water. It reaches maximum density at 4°C , then expands as it freezes. Ice is 8% less dense than water, which is why an ice cube floats in your drink. So when the ice melts, the water level would be unaffected, or might drop. What am I missing?
If we all drink 8 glasses of water a day, the ocean level would certainly not increase.
It's not floating ice yet. It's a shelf hanging over water.
We're talking about taking a glass of water filled to the brim then dropping a handful of ice into it. Jason is absolutely correct that it's not floating ice yet and thus isn't currently contributing to the ocean levels today. They didn't even mention the consequence of adding that much freshwater to the ocean "conveyor belt". Yikes.
@@jasonlacroix6083
What is an ice shelf?
Ice shelves are permanent floating sheets of ice that connect to a landmass.
That shelf is on the water and supported by it. Thus it is floating ice.
When water freezes it expands. When it thaws it contracts. Has anyone studying this glacier given that any consideration. When ice melts in a glass of water the water level in the glass does not rise. If anything it falls because the frozen water has now contracted and is occupying a much smaller volume of the glass. I think this should apply to glaciers as well.
Thanks for the video, I live in the Caribbean and no one here is discussing this topic, can anyone provide a break down on when our islands are due to feel this substantial sea rise since I've seen 3 yr, 5 yr etc. Should we be looking for another country to live? Thanks
Depends on how far above sea level you are but if you can yes.
Fantastic graphics. Well done.
Why has the high tide mark on fixed objects in the sea ,such as the English Channel forts and the Sydney harbour fort,not changed .?
Exactly how come! AL Gore said 20yrs ago by 2020 we will melt due to global warming and drown to rising seas!
A few reasons, one is that ice floats and sea ice melting will actually lower sea level because ice occupies more space than liquid water. Water is a metal and solid water is what we call ice. Ice is a crystal configuration of water and as such water molecules locked in crystal form is bigger than the same exact volume of water molecules in liquid form. This is why water is poured into drill holes in a stone quarry and allowed to freeze , water turns to ice, it expands and splits the solid rock quite easily. Thus sea ice melting make zero volume increase. Talking of Glaciers, we have a different set of parameters. Glaciers only push their way out to sea and calve when there is sufficient snowfall upstream to then compress and work the glacier forward to the sea. Again we have to remember that the snow came from somewhere such as the worlds oceans evaporate which then forms clouds and eventually drops either rain or snow. The earths hydrological cycle is a closed loop system. So when glaciers are calving X mount of ice to the sea, it was very likely that that X amount of ice volume originated from , you guessed it, the sea. Again zero net gain or loss to sea level . The question becomes: In what scenario does sea level rise of any real significance actually occur? The short answer is the end of an ice age. Technically speaking , though the earth has enjoyed a nice interstadial epoch for 12,600 years, that is the last great Ice Age ended 12,600 years ago +/- and we have had a warm global climate comparatively, we are still in an ice age. When both poles of the earth have ice all year 'round , we have an ice age. Now then, what needs to happen for sea level to catastrophically rise is that one or both polar regions completely melt away and there have been ages like this, some of the most life abundant ages mind you. So why would there be ages of warm and ages of ice? The short answer is this thing we call the sun which is a variable star ( i suggest all stars are variable) and that the sun and it's relative distance to earth are the main reasons for the global climate of the earth. As for where are we now and what is happening? I suggest you look into the solar cycles and a well documented ( the Chinese have documented solar cycles for about 8 thousand years) modulation of our star Sol, of Grand Solar Maximums ( earth gets warmer) followed by Grand Solar Minimums ( earth gets colder). We are now at the beginning of a Grand Solar Minimum and indeed the sun has gone quiet, Grand Solar Minimums have seen the fall of civilizations many times due to crop failure and wild weather and earth quakes and volcanoes and rapidly changing climate to ice age conditions. Sometimes severe and sometimes less severe and sometimes the sun goes quiet for hundreds of thousands of years in which case we see extremely low sea levels and lots of ice miles high on the continents with habitable zones in places that are below sea level today.
@@freelectron21 I was taught that water is a liquid not a metal
@@soner818 Hi Soner, Liquid is a state of of matter. Water is classed as a metal according to ancient Chinese scientists in classification. I think this is true today as well in modern science. There are 3 states of water: Liquid = water , Solid = water ice , Gas = water as vapor (i.e. steam or clouds ) - Water behaves much like metals in this respect as most metals share the same three states. Water as a pure thing , strictly H2O - that is 2 hydrogen ions bonded to 1 oxygen atom, does not naturally exit, one must use extreme filtering and/or distilling processes to even approach a pure volume of pure H2O. Most metals share this trait of having three states of matter, solid, liquid, gas and have melting points and points of gasification. Water can go from solid (ice) to gas (vapor) in a process called sublimation, that can happen when it is so cold that wind will pick off water molecules directly from an ice field, which is fascinating. Anyway, water is a truly magical thing!
I live in newfoundland Canada at absolute sea level my entire life there is no measurable rise in sea level this is just nonsense propaganda that the leftists have been pushing for 40 years the glaciers are growing and that is why they calve they must think we are not paying attention. storm surge and erosion have been happening for 4.5 billion years fanatics worry about their funding.
You're preaching to the choir. Even if the US alone went to 0 carbon, it would only reduce the world carbon footprint by 15%. Talk to China and the other high polluters like India, SE Asia, and the middle east. Talk to Brazil about deforestation of the Amazon.
Information = preaching.
@@gags730 there's no preparing for whats coming! Sea level rise is ganna be the least of your worries
Look up: cumulative CO2 emmision. . USA = nr 1. ourworldindata.org/contributed-most-global-co2 , ourworldindata.org/grapher/cumulative-co-emissions?tab=chart&time=earliest..2017&country=NLD~GBR~USA~CHN
@Peter Breis If the west manufactured all their produce at home their emissions would be huge...its easy to outsource manufacturing to china india etc and then blame them.
China is not our scapegoat. We cant get China to do anything if we dont to it first
This glacier will collapse before 2030. It's melting
faster than they have determined. Get your water wings here !
Antarctic is now gaining ice as scientists said it would..
Using The Guardian as a reliable source of scientific data?????? Your credibility just took a massive hit mate.
That never report the oposing view the is an aposeing view. There is no man made gobble warming..
ruclips.net/user/Suspicious0bservers
Motorbike in your profile pic? Your credibility just took a massive hit mate.
@@tauIrrydah Congratulations! The most bizarre personal assessment I have ever received. Quite an achievement in these interesting times.
Have you calculated the cooling effect of the cyclic, lack of sunspots Maunder Miniumum, which we are currently experiencing, against the warming, green house effect?
Great question. This deserves muuuuuch more attention.
Just make up any numbers you want. As long as it shows the responsibility lies mostly in the US & Western Europe, you will be believed!
@@FastEddy1959 the one good thing about climate change is that m0rons like you will dle too
Food for thought? How many holes have been drilled down into the ice allowing air in places that have not had air in a million years? Have the scientists taken the effect the holes might have in Antarctica ice melting? Actions have consequences.
Scientists are a part of the problem.
I believe that when they take the drill out the holes freeze up pretty quickly
You can’t accurately predict the weather next week, so how would you know?