James Rae, I'd like to suggest that you add a point most people don't "get," that the CO2 we're adding, had been sequestered safely away. That's what makes it extra, additional CO2 in the atmosphere. Many people I talk to (and I interview two new people a week about what they think about climate change) -- they think that "carbon is natural, CO2 is not a toxin, we breathe it out, right?" they don't "get" that we've added to the atmosphere, what had been taken out of circulation for millions of years.
@CITIZENsingingway.... You Source Hope.... Anything beyond surfeit can be a pollutant.... we're looking at a question of balance.... excess CO2 is not taken up by plants that are not allowed to exist.... and our current Agricultural and Industrial Methods are disruptive in the EXTREME.... for Natural Nurture FROM plant growth..... around the World. At the Same time we started hyper-injecting fossilized carbon into our atmosphere.... we began proliferating Iron Plow Tillage.... agriculturally disrupting photo-synthetic carbon sequestration.... effectively Doubling the Damage....at LEAST. We MIGHT be able to turn THAT around faster than anything else we CAN do.... EXPONENTIALLY increasing Soil Carbon Retention by adopting all-around no-till organic agricultural methods.... MANY beneficial Societal effects here... MO' Bettah Food&Health/Mo' Bettah Money (at the GROUND-level.... where LongGREENMoney makes Mo' Bettah Benefits in a bubble-UP ECOnomic model) & LESS+LESS money for the Manufacturers of Agri-Toxins.... where Mo' Money makes BUT Mo' Profit$forPoi$on$ and LITTLE el$e.... be$ide$ Profit$ for Political Power in Proliferation of Popular Pain AND Penury.... and THERE'$ your trouble.... NOW we know why it's so hard to even TALK about making beneficial changes much less understand root Need for So doing AND....Root Cau$e for NOT. Go ahead.... Wave your magic Wand.... even WITHOUT climate crisis.... these agri-poison$ cause Air/Water/Food AND Health Pollution.... so IF you should find yourselves mentally incapable of grasping a WIDER Scope for this Impending Horror... understand clearly NOW.... that carcinogenic and other-wise Toxic agri-chemical residues are CURRENTLY doing to your body&being what the manufacturers of those chemicals are doing to all Life IN and ON Earth. It is Time to Change.... not just how we generate and use our energy (Roof-topSolarW/BatteryBack-upNOnukes) but how we grow the very food we eat....and in So doing we CAN.... in MOST likelihoods.... RESOLVE our Climate AND Pollution PROBLEMS.... in REAL Time. ThankYou CITIZEN SingingWay for theTimely Work you do.... YOU and ALL the others WHO.... Source Hope.
‘Still still in the hunter gather stage for coal’ huh, never though about it that way. ‘we’re like a flock of birds.’ I’m really liking the imagery you are using.
We have had a rising sea level for 20000 years coming out a glacial maxima. At c. 2mm per year that's 200mm per century. His claim of 1 meter is way off and indeed 2019 saw a drop.... due to water being dumped on land and growth in the ice on Greenland and Antarctica. We seldom get the environmentalists providing due and proper context. We are exiting an ice age and still have a distance to go to exit. Sea level has risen 140 meters in the last 20000 years we still have about 1 to 1.5 mm rise due to ice age exit. Florida sea level stories are a scam. Florida is sinking due to massive water extraction below the population on the south east coast which is 40% of Floridas population. I do not dispute there has been some anthropogenic contribution to warming. I believe the data is fraudulent in that the revised temperature data plays to correlate to CO2 with the past being reduced and the present being raised. The temperatures reported now show daytime being largely unchanged but night temperatures being higher - a function of where the thermometers are with heat island effect. I accept some warming but it is not a crisis at all. It is within norms and this notion of preindustrial is rubbish. Life on the planet arrived 500 million years ago during the Cambrian when CO2 w 5000 ppm. CO2 has declined to 180 ppm at the last glacial maxima. We were one glacial cycle to complete loss of ALL life on earth when CO2 would have dropped below 150ppm and photosynthesis stops working. This video is loaded with the usual bias and light weight science with political and self interest agenda. I hold a degree in Physics and have worked as a Scientist.
@@davidramsay6142 With sea level measurements strange things happen. The satellite altimetry since 1993 shows consistently twice as much sea level rise as the global tide gauge measurements. An impressing gap of about 2 mm per year is building up. Checking this fact i realized that the satellite altimetry does not measure the level of sea relative to the coast but the change of water masses. IPCC needs these data for verifying their claims. For the measurement of the supposed growing risk of inundation for the people living at the coast it seems that only the tide gauge measurents are relevant. Of course corrected by the vertical tectonic changes of tide gauge. It seems that both measurement methods cannot be combined, they are completely different things. Nobody calls the attention to this fact to my knowledge. Since IPCC can control the altimetry data sets they do not call the attention to this and use the altimetry to produce the scare they need to justify their work and sea level rise has the highest scare potential. The world wide distribution of modular mass produced and more sophisticated tide gauges, combined with cheap Continuous GPS altidude measurements would be necessary to calibrate and check by citizens the dubious satellite altimetry measurements. It will possibly result that Sea levels should have risen much more taken in account the supposed net mass loss of the polar ice shields. The thermal expansion will also result almost inexistent since the tide gauge measurements show no acceleration. The tide gauge measurements seem to be a phantastic possibility to control by citizen projects the IPCC boy scouts. What do you think?
This is so simplistic that it should not be featured as a tedtalk. His "france crops" is so narrowly scoped. The food supply has skyrocketed recently. Look at the greening since the 1980s
Peace, unity and global collaboration are vital to address climate change and all other global issues.“The well-being of mankind, its peace and security, are unattainable unless and until its unity is firmly established” ~ Gleanings from the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh
Diplomacy ends up exhausted than gunpowders ( laser weapons !! Coming soon ) it should be vice-- versa...the other way around . can't call it civilized ..can I ?
This is totally solvable. I'm working on one such solution myself. However, no solution will work without transitioning to a non-fossil global economy. But just to talk about ONE solution: if you position several satellites with large solar blankets at the L1 point (the point at which Earths gravity and the Suns gravity exactly cancel), then they can be positioned to reduce solar insolation on Earth's poles by maybe 10-30%. This has the subtle and temporary effect of cooling the Poles, reducing the threat of sea level rise, permafrost outgassing, and AMOC shutdown.
nice thought... but will need some kind of geoengineering as well to counter Sulphates, etc.. in atmoshere that are currently helping to deflect , ( Global Dimming ).. if we stop burning Fossil fuels , then the Global dimming that comes with the Co2 stops/ dissipates quickly.... Instant warming then , as Co2 hangs for 100's - 1,000's of years...
Thanks, Crystal. CO2 lags warming at vostok station: reason being its in Antarctica, which is practically not even on Earth. Efforts to understand the GLOBAL temperature response to CO2 as we transitioned from the last ice age confirm what we'd expect from Physics from 1860 on: temperature LAGS CO2. (Coming out of a glacial period: Antarctica warms from orbital perturbations. So does the Arctic. Eventually, this shuts down the AMOC, which warms the Southern Ocean, which outgasses CO2, and THAT warms the planet, about 800 years after Antarctica started warming due to purely orbital effects).
midbrew it sounds as if you are saying that co2 somehow warms the planet? co2 cannot warm the planet and the notion that co2 does warm the planet is ridiculously absurd. co2 acts as insulation and therefore slows cooling. co2 also has a low saturation point. just as three or four coats of red paint will make a barn about as red as it will ever get, co2 can only trap so much heat no matter its density due to the radiation spectrum it blocks. Look at it this way, at night, unless a warm front moves in, it will always cool down no matter where on earth you are. This is because the sun is not shining. It is that simple. Remove the heat source and the area cools. Hopefully you now understand why claiming co2 warms the planet is totally absurd. Science requires precision not folly.
Psalms 104... from verse 6 concerning the waters, gods sets their boundaries in verse 9 But thou hast set them a boundary which they shall not pass: they shall not return to cover the earth. GNV 6 Thou coverest it with the [c]deep as with a garment: the [d]waters would stand above the mountains. 7 But at thy rebuke they flee: at the voice of thy thunder they haste away. 8 And the mountains ascend, and the valleys descend to the place which thou hast established for them. 9 But thou hast set them a bound which they shall not pass: they shall not return to cover the earth.
I don't see the solvability portion. Fossil fuels currently are the only form of energy capable of maintaining human prosperity. Unless we are willing to go nuclear.
Look up Scotland’s energy system. I believe they are using wind power which generates more electricity than they can use. There are many other sources, sun, wind farms, geothermal power ran my school.
Wind/solar power could maintain human prosperity if enough time was invested into it. If every single building had enough solar panels, humans would last. Fossil fuels and nuclear could eventually be a limited supply, if they are used enough, while sunlight lasts forever.
In all honesty, I started as a climate change denier until I started hearing just absolute nonsensical things from other denialists like Tony Heller. I stopped paying attention to social media, pundits, bureaucrats, and politicians. I started reading the actual research papers (not blogs, videos, or independent publishers). Climate change is not difficult to understand. Like weather, there are limited factors which affect climate. Understanding what they are and how they interact isn’t difficult.
It's seriously concerning when a "scientist" misleads the general public by comparing the glacial and interglacial periods as if the change in CO2 was the cause, rather than mostly the result of the temperature change due to Milankovitch cycles (see NASA page for details). This is easy to prove mathematically because the greenhouse gas response to CO2 is logarithmic, and a change from 190 to 280ppm is ony 0.9 degC, while the change in average Earth temperature between glacial and interglacial periods is about 7 degC.
How much CO2 does producing, packaging and transporting the new LED lightbulbs produce? Plus the production, packaging and transport of the original still working lightbulbs which will just end up in the bin. How long before this is recouped? Also what happens when we give everyone on earth the same number of lightbulbs as we have per person in the west?
That's why we have the idea called offsetting. The energy Used on production is partially offset by use of LED's. Now, that does not happen with good old CFL's does it?
The logical solution to the problem you proposed is not replacing working lightbulbs. Simply only use LEDs as replacements as opposed to buying another traditional bulb. On the other hand, who still buys traditional bulbs in this day and age anyways?
I agree with everything he says except for an error at around 13:23 when he states that hunter gatherer mankind drives the wooly mammoth to extinction. That's just wrong. He was certainly taught that in school as was I, but we know that mankind in hunter gatherer configuration doesn't exploit animals to the point of extinction. That's a modern man thing. No the mammoths and all of the mega fauna that went extinct around the globe and the Clovis civilisation in America for example, were wiped out by a catastrophic astrological/geological event in the form of a meteor or comet collision that occurred 12600 years ago in the North American ice sheet and at least in the Greenland Ice sheet. This is well documented now with even very recent discovery of the impact crater under the ice in Greenland. It was cataclysmic. The mega fauna were not hunted out but perished along with most of humanity at the beginning of the Younger Dryass.
Anything beyond surfeit can be a pollutant.... we're looking at a question of balance.... excess CO2 is not taken up by plants that are not allowed to exist.... and our current Agricultural and Industrial Methods are disruptive in the EXTREME.... for Natural Nurture FROM plant growth..... around the World. At the Same time we started hyper-injecting fossilized carbon into our atmosphere.... we began proliferating Iron Plow Tillage.... agriculturally disrupting photo-synthetic carbon sequestration.... effectively Doubling the Damage....at LEAST. We MIGHT be able to turn THAT around faster than anything else we CAN do.... EXPONENTIALLY increasing Soil Carbon Retention by adopting all-around no-till organic agricultural methods.... MANY beneficial Societal effects here... MO' Bettah Food&Health/Mo' Bettah Money (at the GROUND-level.... where LongGREENMoney makes Mo' Bettah Benefits in a bubble-UP ECOnomic model) & LESS+LESS money for the Manufacturers of Agri-Toxins.... where Mo' Money makes BUT Mo' Profit$forPoi$on$ and LITTLE el$e.... be$ide$ Profit$ for Political Power in Proliferation of Popular Pain AND Penury.... and THERE'$ your trouble.... NOW we know why it's so hard to even TALK about making beneficial changes much less understand root Need for So doing AND....Root Cau$e for NOT. Go ahead.... Wave your magic Wand.... even WITHOUT climate crisis.... these agri-poison$ cause Air/Water/Food AND Health Pollution.... so IF you should find yourselves mentally incapable of grasping a WIDER Scope for this Impending Horror... understand clearly NOW.... that carcinogenic and other-wise Toxic agri-chemical residues are CURRENTLY doing to your body&being what the manufacturers of those chemicals are doing to all Life IN and ON Earth. It is Time to Change.... not just how we generate and use our energy (Roof-topSolarW/BatteryBack-upNOnukes) but how we grow the very food we eat....and in So doing we CAN.... in MOST likelihoods.... RESOLVE our Climate AND Pollution PROBLEMS.... in REAL Time.
Sorry, but this is wrong on so many levels. You are trying to address one symptom not the problem itself. There are multiple dependencies and feedbacks, which you can't ignore. Yeah, let's just cool down the planet with Solar Radiation Management or/and grow phytoplankton through Ocean Fertilization! Ignorance in this case will be our END! SRM will exacerbate global dimming which will have direct impact on crop production across the globe! And that's just one aspect of the puzzle. Ocean Fertilization will cause massive dead zones and essentially speedup the demise of all marine life. And on top of that most of the population is still in the mindset of "Climate Change is a Hoax" or "Yeah, it's changing but we didn't cause it".Wake up! It's not just CO2 anymore. It's methane. It's Harvey, Irma, Florence. It's wildfires, droughts, torrential rains and flash floods. It's irreversible changes in the biosphere. It's wasps infestations and disappearance of bees. At the moment, the average thickness of the ice in the arctic is about 1.2 meter. With a 70% chance of another El Nino this upcoming winter, we are on track to lose all that ice by September 2019. What would it do? Here's a revelation for you. No ice = phase shift and rapid warming of the entire northern hemisphere.=> Global crop (and by extension food production) failure as soon as 8-10 months after that => massive migrations, wars for resources and the end of our civilization.Keep talking about simple solutions...business as usual...
None of the hurricanes nor the wildfires were caused by climate change or global warming. Hand wringing is not an answer. Unless you are willing to go back into a cave, along with 7 billion others, it's not going to happen. It is far better to use our resources to prepare for any negative issues, end abject poverty and innovate.
bart thomassen thomassen, It's not a matter of opinion or belief unfortunately. The severity and frequency of natural disasters is one of the key 'features' of climate change. If you wish to argue about scientific facts, take it somewhere else. I don't see you arguing about the existence of magnetic field around your smartphone. Why is that? Because the existence of magnetic field doesn't stop you from making money. Climate change does. So it becomes personal and we come up with all sorts of ideas to protect our revenue. Innovate? For sure! But we don't innovate anymore, it's against the current economic model. What you call innovation is nothing but tiny incremental upgrades that allow corporations to remain stable. True Innovation would be creating a new paradigm of human civilization. How about creating FREE housing for everyone? Simple, truly sustainable and energy efficient living? Zero living cost, zero energy cost. What about free food? With the science and technology we have today, it's entirely possible to achieve that and more. How about making everyone healthy on birth, so that people don't ever need any medical treatment aside from accidental injuries? In the last 25 years of my involvement in science, I've seen thousands of successful research projects that could be used to create all of the above! So why haven't we done a thing? Because it would break the existing economy and world order as we know it. That is unacceptable and thus all those papers are either collecting dust in the vaults of big corporations like IBM or been buried deep in the maze of bureaucracy and lawsuits. But hey, climate change is a hoax! Let's keep rolling, mining, cutting and fracking. We have infinite amount of resources here, right? We don't pollute, don't lose fertile soils. What matters is that each and every morning your starbucks coffee is ready for you on time! Now, don't get me wrong, I've been around long enough to realize that corporate capitalism isn't going away any time soon. There won't be any revolutions or civil wars. We are zombified sufficiently to feel insecure to even think of radical changes. I'm not advocating such changes. But based on my [not outstanding by any means] knowledge in this field, any attempts to do a large scale solar radiation management, ocean fertilization or geo-engineering in general, would most likely end our civilization faster than a nuclear war. We are little kids playing with matches in the forest on a hot summer day. Knowing very little but having tools and eagerness to try stuff. So yeah, let's try a planet-wide geo-engineering! What could possibly go wrong!
@@tyfode224 Absolutely, even more so. I have watched with interest each natural disaster and or weather event, read the IPCC's reports and if anything, I would double down on my comments above. A good book I am currently reading dealing with all thing AGCC is Apocalypse Never by Michael Shellenberger. Also, Bjorn Lomborg's numerous and autoreactive writings and videos demonstrate the same anti catastrophist truths. We also now have the data from Germany, which has gone Green more than any other nation and now is being held hostage by Russia because of their over reliance on Russian fossil fuels after having shut down their nuclear plants, all of which were 100% clean. Yup I totally agree with my former self on this topic.
paul slade The amount of CO2 affects how much water vapour is able to be free in the atmosphere before it forms and falls back down as clouds and rain. If CO2 concentrations are doubled, it allows for 4x the amount of water vapour to be present in the air. This increase the heat absorption proportionally by about 20x thanks to the increase of water vapour However, if CO2 levels are reduced, the amount of atmospheric water vapour decreases exponentially (and with it, the increase of absorption and therefore global warming.) A quick google search will yield you with far more understandable and detailed explantations, but that’s the long and short of it. TLDR: High levels of atmospheric water vapour is a product of global warming, not the cause of it.
While driving in urban areas, try using the cruise control whenever possible. Driving carefully, my hybrid gets between 40 and 60 miles per gallon. Already agreed upon by manufacturers, there was going to be a stipulation to make 55 mpg standard on autos in 8 years, but our toxic Pres.Nit-wit overturned that. Also, if you're headed out to the steakhouse in your Silverado, and believe in facts, consider that 18% of global warming is generated from cows, including methane. Bon Appetit.
@thomasbrogueira......... the biggest problem with nuclear power is Insurance.... only affordable at Federal levels.... 'US'. Nuclear Power is economically untenable..(..never mind ECOnomically..)... it always was.... having been historically the single MOST subsidized form of power generation while creating FEWER jobs and less electricity ($/Kw) than ANY of the others.... even as Solar and Wind.... having been STARVED historically for State'n'Federal funding.... are currently generating MORE jobs and subsequent payroll taxes than ALL the others COMBINED.... and we're JUST getting started.... Nuclear Power puts TOO much wealth and political power into the hands of TOO few people. Roof-top Solar w/ Battery Backup does the obverse.... keeping Way more of that money ON THE KITCHEN TABLE.... with the remainder flung to ALL Four Winds of a Distributive ECOnomy....
omg! How many of these lectures are we expected to endure? It's like a religion, where the preacher preaches the same gospel week after week. If it were that simple we wouldn't need to have it drummed into our heads over and over again. Fact is, it's NOT simple at all -- in fact it's impossible. Sure there are many things "we" could do and many fixes that might seem reasonable. But given the social, political and economic realities there is no way to either implement or coordinate them, short of the establishment of some sort of totalitarian world government. AINT gonna happen.
Solution pay carbon tax, pay twice as much for electric, so the green electricity can come off subsidy. Lie to as many people as possible so they doubt there own judgement with what they see. Does he look silly trying to be an atom dancing. Nonsence vid stop scaring children
The only person here scaring children is you, spreading your right wing propaganda. Electric energy is not twice as much, and everyone could easily have electric if billionaires stopped hogging money. This is a kids video, that's why he was being silly.
@@MeowPau so you agree he is being silly that's what I said. It doesn't matter why we both agree he was silly so what's your gripe. Scaring the kids would not be his dancing, but the profits of doom about the planet heating up. Unless you think that wouldn't frighten children? If billionaires were not greedy I agree we would all be better off. But you said the electric would not be twice as much. Twice as much as when? Because if it was all on renewable without subsidy and having to cover all its own overheads, it most certainly would be.
@@MartinA-kp8xg ....EVERYTHING is subsidized.... from Soup to Nuts.... literally.... Can you do some work just a bit on your Clarity of expression in Syntax..? It's just a bit difficult to understand EXACTLY what you're ON about. We'd ALL dearly LOVE to know.
when i saw this guy put up a chart for 2090...i felt sorry for him. he may be right, but thats not how you communicate anything. even i didn't care at that point, and i clicked on the video in the first place. even HIS child will be 70 at that point...ffs. scientists really are not the best communicators.
James Rae, I'd like to suggest that you add a point most people don't "get," that the CO2 we're adding, had been sequestered safely away. That's what makes it extra, additional CO2 in the atmosphere. Many people I talk to (and I interview two new people a week about what they think about climate change) -- they think that "carbon is natural, CO2 is not a toxin, we breathe it out, right?" they don't "get" that we've added to the atmosphere, what had been taken out of circulation for millions of years.
@CITIZENsingingway.... You Source Hope.... Anything beyond surfeit can be a pollutant.... we're looking at a question of balance.... excess CO2 is not taken up by plants that are not allowed to exist.... and our current Agricultural and Industrial Methods are disruptive in the EXTREME.... for Natural Nurture FROM plant growth..... around the World. At the Same time we started hyper-injecting fossilized carbon into our atmosphere.... we began proliferating Iron Plow Tillage.... agriculturally disrupting photo-synthetic carbon sequestration.... effectively Doubling the Damage....at LEAST. We MIGHT be able to turn THAT around faster than anything else we CAN do.... EXPONENTIALLY increasing Soil Carbon Retention by adopting all-around no-till organic agricultural methods.... MANY beneficial Societal effects here... MO' Bettah Food&Health/Mo' Bettah Money (at the GROUND-level.... where LongGREENMoney makes Mo' Bettah Benefits in a bubble-UP ECOnomic model) & LESS+LESS money for the Manufacturers of Agri-Toxins.... where Mo' Money makes BUT Mo' Profit$forPoi$on$ and LITTLE el$e.... be$ide$ Profit$ for Political Power in Proliferation of Popular Pain AND Penury.... and THERE'$ your trouble.... NOW we know why it's so hard to even TALK about making beneficial changes much less understand root Need for So doing AND....Root Cau$e for NOT. Go ahead.... Wave your magic Wand.... even WITHOUT climate crisis.... these agri-poison$ cause Air/Water/Food AND Health Pollution.... so IF you should find yourselves mentally incapable of grasping a WIDER Scope for this Impending Horror... understand clearly NOW.... that carcinogenic and other-wise Toxic agri-chemical residues are CURRENTLY doing to your body&being what the manufacturers of those chemicals are doing to all Life IN and ON Earth. It is Time to Change.... not just how we generate and use our energy (Roof-topSolarW/BatteryBack-upNOnukes) but how we grow the very food we eat....and in So doing we CAN.... in MOST likelihoods.... RESOLVE our Climate AND Pollution PROBLEMS.... in REAL Time. ThankYou CITIZEN SingingWay for theTimely Work you do.... YOU and ALL the others WHO.... Source Hope.
‘Still still in the hunter gather stage for coal’ huh, never though about it that way. ‘we’re like a flock of birds.’ I’m really liking the imagery you are using.
I sure do love seeing all of the non-scientists "disproving" James' point, even though he is a scientist.
We have had a rising sea level for 20000 years coming out a glacial maxima. At c. 2mm per year that's 200mm per century. His claim of 1 meter is way off and indeed 2019 saw a drop.... due to water being dumped on land and growth in the ice on Greenland and Antarctica.
We seldom get the environmentalists providing due and proper context. We are exiting an ice age and still have a distance to go to exit. Sea level has risen 140 meters in the last 20000 years we still have about 1 to 1.5 mm rise due to ice age exit. Florida sea level stories are a scam. Florida is sinking due to massive water extraction below the population on the south east coast which is 40% of Floridas population.
I do not dispute there has been some anthropogenic contribution to warming. I believe the data is fraudulent in that the revised temperature data plays to correlate to CO2 with the past being reduced and the present being raised. The temperatures reported now show daytime being largely unchanged but night temperatures being higher - a function of where the thermometers are with heat island effect.
I accept some warming but it is not a crisis at all. It is within norms and this notion of preindustrial is rubbish. Life on the planet arrived 500 million years ago during the Cambrian when CO2 w 5000 ppm. CO2 has declined to 180 ppm at the last glacial maxima. We were one glacial cycle to complete loss of ALL life on earth when CO2 would have dropped below 150ppm and photosynthesis stops working.
This video is loaded with the usual bias and light weight science with political and self interest agenda.
I hold a degree in Physics and have worked as a Scientist.
@@davidramsay6142
1 year ago
MeowPau sea level has dropped since this lecture..... one year ago
@@davidramsay6142 my original comment is over a year old man chill
@@davidramsay6142 With sea level measurements strange things happen. The satellite altimetry since 1993 shows consistently twice as much sea level rise as the global tide gauge measurements. An impressing gap of about 2 mm per year is building up.
Checking this fact i realized that the satellite altimetry does not measure the level of sea relative to the coast but the change of water masses. IPCC needs these data for verifying their claims. For the measurement of the supposed growing risk of inundation for the people living at the coast it seems that only the tide gauge measurents are relevant. Of course corrected by the vertical tectonic changes of tide gauge. It seems that both measurement methods cannot be combined, they are completely different things. Nobody calls the attention to this fact to my knowledge. Since IPCC can control the altimetry data sets they do not call the attention to this and use the altimetry to produce the scare they need to justify their work and sea level rise has the highest scare potential.
The world wide distribution of modular mass produced and more sophisticated tide gauges, combined with cheap Continuous GPS altidude measurements would be necessary to calibrate and check by citizens the dubious satellite altimetry measurements. It will possibly result that Sea levels should have risen much more taken in account the supposed net mass loss of the polar ice shields. The thermal expansion will also result almost inexistent since the tide gauge measurements show no acceleration.
The tide gauge measurements seem to be a phantastic possibility to control by citizen projects the IPCC boy scouts. What do you think?
This is so simplistic that it should not be featured as a tedtalk. His "france crops" is so narrowly scoped. The food supply has skyrocketed recently. Look at the greening since the 1980s
Peace, unity and global collaboration are vital to address climate change and all other global issues.“The well-being of mankind, its peace and security, are unattainable unless and until its unity is firmly established” ~ Gleanings from the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh
Diplomacy ends up exhausted than gunpowders ( laser weapons !! Coming soon )
it should be vice-- versa...the other way around . can't call it civilized ..can I ?
agricultural revolution was driven by fossil fuels as well
which one?
This is totally solvable. I'm working on one such solution myself. However, no solution will work without transitioning to a non-fossil global economy. But just to talk about ONE solution: if you position several satellites with large solar blankets at the L1 point (the point at which Earths gravity and the Suns gravity exactly cancel), then they can be positioned to reduce solar insolation on Earth's poles by maybe 10-30%. This has the subtle and temporary effect of cooling the Poles, reducing the threat of sea level rise, permafrost outgassing, and AMOC shutdown.
nice thought... but will need some kind of geoengineering as well to counter Sulphates, etc.. in atmoshere that are currently helping to deflect , ( Global Dimming ).. if we stop burning Fossil fuels , then the Global dimming that comes with the Co2 stops/ dissipates quickly.... Instant warming then , as Co2 hangs for 100's - 1,000's of years...
the premise of your argument is false. co2 lags not leads warming. a simple experiment with two coke cans proves that. CAGW is a fraud.
Thanks, Crystal. CO2 lags warming at vostok station: reason being its in Antarctica, which is practically not even on Earth. Efforts to understand the GLOBAL temperature response to CO2 as we transitioned from the last ice age confirm what we'd expect from Physics from 1860 on: temperature LAGS CO2. (Coming out of a glacial period: Antarctica warms from orbital perturbations. So does the Arctic. Eventually, this shuts down the AMOC, which warms the Southern Ocean, which outgasses CO2, and THAT warms the planet, about 800 years after Antarctica started warming due to purely orbital effects).
Chicken or Egg????????????????
midbrew
it sounds as if you are saying that co2 somehow warms the planet? co2 cannot warm the planet and the notion that co2 does warm the planet is ridiculously absurd. co2 acts as insulation and therefore slows cooling. co2 also has a low saturation point. just as three or four coats of red paint will make a barn about as red as it will ever get, co2 can only trap so much heat no matter its density due to the radiation spectrum it blocks. Look at it this way, at night, unless a warm front moves in, it will always cool down no matter where on earth you are. This is because the sun is not shining. It is that simple. Remove the heat source and the area cools. Hopefully you now understand why claiming co2 warms the planet is totally absurd. Science requires precision not folly.
We need to get the population down ASAP as well
Who knew Corona would take up the job in a year?
@@lunalovegood7842 two words: quarantine babies.
Psalms 104... from verse 6 concerning the waters, gods sets their boundaries in verse 9 But thou hast set them a boundary which they shall not pass: they shall not return to cover the earth.
GNV
6 Thou coverest it with the [c]deep as with a garment: the [d]waters would stand above the mountains.
7 But at thy rebuke they flee: at the voice of thy thunder they haste away.
8 And the mountains ascend, and the valleys descend to the place which thou hast established for them.
9 But thou hast set them a bound which they shall not pass: they shall not return to cover the earth.
I don't see the solvability portion. Fossil fuels currently are the only form of energy capable of maintaining human prosperity. Unless we are willing to go nuclear.
I can hear the Greens convulsing
YES Nuclear.
Or unless we start leading a less luxurious life.
Look up Scotland’s energy system. I believe they are using wind power which generates more electricity than they can use. There are many other sources, sun, wind farms, geothermal power ran my school.
Wind/solar power could maintain human prosperity if enough time was invested into it. If every single building had enough solar panels, humans would last. Fossil fuels and nuclear could eventually be a limited supply, if they are used enough, while sunlight lasts forever.
In all honesty, I started as a climate change denier until I started hearing just absolute nonsensical things from other denialists like Tony Heller.
I stopped paying attention to social media, pundits, bureaucrats, and politicians.
I started reading the actual research papers (not blogs, videos, or independent publishers).
Climate change is not difficult to understand. Like weather, there are limited factors which affect climate. Understanding what they are and how they interact isn’t difficult.
Thank You, James! Interesting, informative, enlightening.
How much does he gain for his propaganda
It's seriously concerning when a "scientist" misleads the general public by comparing the glacial and interglacial periods as if the change in CO2 was the cause, rather than mostly the result of the temperature change due to Milankovitch cycles (see NASA page for details). This is easy to prove mathematically because the greenhouse gas response to CO2 is logarithmic, and a change from 190 to 280ppm is ony 0.9 degC, while the change in average Earth temperature between glacial and interglacial periods is about 7 degC.
How much CO2 does producing, packaging and transporting the new LED lightbulbs produce? Plus the production, packaging and transport of the original still working lightbulbs which will just end up in the bin. How long before this is recouped?
Also what happens when we give everyone on earth the same number of lightbulbs as we have per person in the west?
That's why we have the idea called offsetting. The energy Used on production is partially offset by use of LED's. Now, that does not happen with good old CFL's does it?
The logical solution to the problem you proposed is not replacing working lightbulbs. Simply only use LEDs as replacements as opposed to buying another traditional bulb. On the other hand, who still buys traditional bulbs in this day and age anyways?
How can you know all this and still have a kid?...
I agree with everything he says except for an error at around 13:23 when he states that hunter gatherer mankind drives the wooly mammoth to extinction. That's just wrong. He was certainly taught that in school as was I, but we know that mankind in hunter gatherer configuration doesn't exploit animals to the point of extinction. That's a modern man thing. No the mammoths and all of the mega fauna that went extinct around the globe and the Clovis civilisation in America for example, were wiped out by a catastrophic astrological/geological event in the form of a meteor or comet collision that occurred 12600 years ago in the North American ice sheet and at least in the Greenland Ice sheet. This is well documented now with even very recent discovery of the impact crater under the ice in Greenland. It was cataclysmic. The mega fauna were not hunted out but perished along with most of humanity at the beginning of the Younger Dryass.
.... WELL done.... Son.... well DONE.
James Rae's "science" is so simple only a simpleton could believe it.
Anything beyond surfeit can be a pollutant.... we're looking at a question of balance.... excess CO2 is not taken up by plants that are not allowed to exist.... and our current Agricultural and Industrial Methods are disruptive in the EXTREME.... for Natural Nurture FROM plant growth..... around the World. At the Same time we started hyper-injecting fossilized carbon into our atmosphere.... we began proliferating Iron Plow Tillage.... agriculturally disrupting photo-synthetic carbon sequestration.... effectively Doubling the Damage....at LEAST. We MIGHT be able to turn THAT around faster than anything else we CAN do.... EXPONENTIALLY increasing Soil Carbon Retention by adopting all-around no-till organic agricultural methods.... MANY beneficial Societal effects here... MO' Bettah Food&Health/Mo' Bettah Money (at the GROUND-level.... where LongGREENMoney makes Mo' Bettah Benefits in a bubble-UP ECOnomic model) & LESS+LESS money for the Manufacturers of Agri-Toxins.... where Mo' Money makes BUT Mo' Profit$forPoi$on$ and LITTLE el$e.... be$ide$ Profit$ for Political Power in Proliferation of Popular Pain AND Penury.... and THERE'$ your trouble.... NOW we know why it's so hard to even TALK about making beneficial changes much less understand root Need for So doing AND....Root Cau$e for NOT. Go ahead.... Wave your magic Wand.... even WITHOUT climate crisis.... these agri-poison$ cause Air/Water/Food AND Health Pollution.... so IF you should find yourselves mentally incapable of grasping a WIDER Scope for this Impending Horror... understand clearly NOW.... that carcinogenic and other-wise Toxic agri-chemical residues are CURRENTLY doing to your body&being what the manufacturers of those chemicals are doing to all Life IN and ON Earth. It is Time to Change.... not just how we generate and use our energy (Roof-topSolarW/BatteryBack-upNOnukes) but how we grow the very food we eat....and in So doing we CAN.... in MOST likelihoods.... RESOLVE our Climate AND Pollution PROBLEMS.... in REAL Time.
you cannot put the genie back into the bottle.
There is a lot to say in 20 mins. U r going to have holes in ur talk as u address ur talk to different people.
Your*
*You are
Sorry, but this is wrong on so many levels. You are trying to address one symptom not the problem itself. There are multiple dependencies and feedbacks, which you can't ignore. Yeah, let's just cool down the planet with Solar Radiation Management or/and grow phytoplankton through Ocean Fertilization! Ignorance in this case will be our END!
SRM will exacerbate global dimming which will have direct impact on crop production across the globe! And that's just one aspect of the puzzle.
Ocean Fertilization will cause massive dead zones and essentially speedup the demise of all marine life.
And on top of that most of the population is still in the mindset of "Climate Change is a Hoax" or "Yeah, it's changing but we didn't cause it".Wake up! It's not just CO2 anymore. It's methane. It's Harvey, Irma, Florence. It's wildfires, droughts, torrential rains and flash floods. It's irreversible changes in the biosphere. It's wasps infestations and disappearance of bees. At the moment, the average thickness of the ice in the arctic is about 1.2 meter. With a 70% chance of another El Nino this upcoming winter, we are on track to lose all that ice by September 2019. What would it do? Here's a revelation for you. No ice = phase shift and rapid warming of the entire northern hemisphere.=> Global crop (and by extension food production) failure as soon as 8-10 months after that => massive migrations, wars for resources and the end of our civilization.Keep talking about simple solutions...business as usual...
None of the hurricanes nor the wildfires were caused by climate change or global warming.
Hand wringing is not an answer. Unless you are willing to go back into a cave, along with 7 billion others, it's not going to happen. It is far better to use our resources to prepare for any negative issues, end abject poverty and innovate.
bart thomassen thomassen,
It's not a matter of opinion or belief unfortunately. The severity and frequency of natural disasters is one of the key 'features' of climate change. If you wish to argue about scientific facts, take it somewhere else. I don't see you arguing about the existence of magnetic field around your smartphone. Why is that? Because the existence of magnetic field doesn't stop you from making money. Climate change does. So it becomes personal and we come up with all sorts of ideas to protect our revenue.
Innovate? For sure! But we don't innovate anymore, it's against the current economic model. What you call innovation is nothing but tiny incremental upgrades that allow corporations to remain stable. True Innovation would be creating a new paradigm of human civilization. How about creating FREE housing for everyone? Simple, truly sustainable and energy efficient living? Zero living cost, zero energy cost. What about free food? With the science and technology we have today, it's entirely possible to achieve that and more. How about making everyone healthy on birth, so that people don't ever need any medical treatment aside from accidental injuries? In the last 25 years of my involvement in science, I've seen thousands of successful research projects that could be used to create all of the above! So why haven't we done a thing? Because it would break the existing economy and world order as we know it. That is unacceptable and thus all those papers are either collecting dust in the vaults of big corporations like IBM or been buried deep in the maze of bureaucracy and lawsuits.
But hey, climate change is a hoax! Let's keep rolling, mining, cutting and fracking. We have infinite amount of resources here, right? We don't pollute, don't lose fertile soils. What matters is that each and every morning your starbucks coffee is ready for you on time!
Now, don't get me wrong, I've been around long enough to realize that corporate capitalism isn't going away any time soon. There won't be any revolutions or civil wars. We are zombified sufficiently to feel insecure to even think of radical changes. I'm not advocating such changes. But based on my [not outstanding by any means] knowledge in this field, any attempts to do a large scale solar radiation management, ocean fertilization or geo-engineering in general, would most likely end our civilization faster than a nuclear war. We are little kids playing with matches in the forest on a hot summer day. Knowing very little but having tools and eagerness to try stuff. So yeah, let's try a planet-wide geo-engineering! What could possibly go wrong!
@@thomassenbart three years later, do you still have the same opinion?
@@tyfode224 Absolutely, even more so. I have watched with interest each natural disaster and or weather event, read the IPCC's reports and if anything, I would double down on my comments above.
A good book I am currently reading dealing with all thing AGCC is Apocalypse Never by Michael Shellenberger. Also, Bjorn Lomborg's numerous and autoreactive writings and videos demonstrate the same anti catastrophist truths.
We also now have the data from Germany, which has gone Green more than any other nation and now is being held hostage by Russia because of their over reliance on Russian fossil fuels after having shut down their nuclear plants, all of which were 100% clean.
Yup I totally agree with my former self on this topic.
What about water vapour. There’s more of that in the atmosphere than co2 and that causes global dimming aswell.
paul slade
The amount of CO2 affects how much water vapour is able to be free in the atmosphere before it forms and falls back down as clouds and rain. If CO2 concentrations are doubled, it allows for 4x the amount of water vapour to be present in the air. This increase the heat absorption proportionally by about 20x thanks to the increase of water vapour
However, if CO2 levels are reduced, the amount of atmospheric water vapour decreases exponentially (and with it, the increase of absorption and therefore global warming.)
A quick google search will yield you with far more understandable and detailed explantations, but that’s the long and short of it.
TLDR: High levels of atmospheric water vapour is a product of global warming, not the cause of it.
this could be interesting for trump...
While driving in urban areas, try using the cruise control whenever possible. Driving carefully, my hybrid gets between 40 and 60 miles per gallon. Already agreed upon by manufacturers, there was going to be a stipulation to make 55 mpg standard on autos in 8 years, but our toxic Pres.Nit-wit overturned that. Also, if you're headed out to the steakhouse in your Silverado, and believe in facts, consider that 18% of global warming is generated from cows, including methane. Bon Appetit.
Why not use nuclear power?
@thomasbrogueira......... the biggest problem with nuclear power is Insurance.... only affordable at Federal levels.... 'US'. Nuclear Power is economically untenable..(..never mind ECOnomically..)... it always was.... having been historically the single MOST subsidized form of power generation while creating FEWER jobs and less electricity ($/Kw) than ANY of the others.... even as Solar and Wind.... having been STARVED historically for State'n'Federal funding.... are currently generating MORE jobs and subsequent payroll taxes than ALL the others COMBINED.... and we're JUST getting started.... Nuclear Power puts TOO much wealth and political power into the hands of TOO few people. Roof-top Solar w/ Battery Backup does the obverse.... keeping Way more of that money ON THE KITCHEN TABLE.... with the remainder flung to ALL Four Winds of a Distributive ECOnomy....
Not to mention the large amount of radioactive nuclear waste that has to go somewhere..
omg! How many of these lectures are we expected to endure? It's like a religion, where the preacher preaches the same gospel week after week. If it were that simple we wouldn't need to have it drummed into our heads over and over again. Fact is, it's NOT simple at all -- in fact it's impossible. Sure there are many things "we" could do and many fixes that might seem reasonable. But given the social, political and economic realities there is no way to either implement or coordinate them, short of the establishment of some sort of totalitarian world government. AINT gonna happen.
Sadly, I agree. we are screwed!
Solution pay carbon tax, pay twice as much for electric, so the green electricity can come off subsidy. Lie to as many people as possible so they doubt there own judgement with what they see. Does he look silly trying to be an atom dancing. Nonsence vid stop scaring children
The only person here scaring children is you, spreading your right wing propaganda. Electric energy is not twice as much, and everyone could easily have electric if billionaires stopped hogging money. This is a kids video, that's why he was being silly.
@@MeowPau so you agree he is being silly that's what I said. It doesn't matter why we both agree he was silly so what's your gripe. Scaring the kids would not be his dancing, but the profits of doom about the planet heating up. Unless you think that wouldn't frighten children? If billionaires were not greedy I agree we would all be better off. But you said the electric would not be twice as much. Twice as much as when? Because if it was all on renewable without subsidy and having to cover all its own overheads, it most certainly would be.
@@MeowPau BLESSINGS on your House.... and Everything you DO.
@@MartinA-kp8xg ....EVERYTHING is subsidized.... from Soup to Nuts.... literally.... Can you do some work just a bit on your Clarity of expression in Syntax..? It's just a bit difficult to understand EXACTLY what you're ON about. We'd ALL dearly LOVE to know.
@@nealtauss1715 who are we, don't presume to speak for others too. If you want to criticise me have the balls to do so without the need to say we.
nuclear energy is the solution!
ban lightbulbs altogether - solved overnight. Your welcome world!
Guy from Europpean Union here. We've banned them.
when i saw this guy put up a chart for 2090...i felt sorry for him. he may be right, but thats not how you communicate anything.
even i didn't care at that point, and i clicked on the video in the first place.
even HIS child will be 70 at that point...ffs. scientists really are not the best communicators.