admin

admin at survivalacres dot com

36 thoughts on “Open Thread

  • January 5, 2017 at 6:51 pm
    Permalink

    World heat shatters records in 2016 in new sign of climate change

    Global surface temperatures in 2016 averaged 14.8 degrees Celsius (58.64°F), or 1.3C (2.3F) higher than estimated before the Industrial Revolution ushered in wide use of fossil fuels, the EU body said.

    Paul Beckwith reports this even higher, 1.7C as I recall. Virtually no chance now of stopping this as the world still stupidly dickers and burns. This is runaway warming.

  • January 5, 2017 at 6:58 pm
    Permalink

    Nobody Takes Climate Change Seriously

    Well, almost nobody. They didn’t interview me.

    “Ambiguous Science

    The scientists that claim that humans cause climate change, don’t treat the situation objectively. Although there is evidence that anthropogenic factors do cause part of the problem, there is absolutely no evidence that going the opposite way or even stop doing what we are doing, will reverse the situation. People picture climate change like a Walt Disney cartoon where once we stop the “evil force” the good one will shine. This stance is both juvenile and dangerous and this is why even scientists engaging in this debate do not take each other seriously. “

    • January 5, 2017 at 7:04 pm
      Permalink

      This blog is lightyears beyond what most seem to ‘grasp’. The world is never going to catch up to the truth.

  • January 5, 2017 at 8:03 pm
    Permalink

    Are you chugging mug after mug of hot chicken soup? 🙂
    In the spirit of doing what you can when nothing you do may matter, I would like to hear from you and your blog participants about what everybody is doing to prepare for the future — however bleak it may appear.
    My projects last year included a greenhouse, a solar shower (in Washington west of the Cascades, lol), a rocket stove, a trombe wall, a camp kitchen, and a mini tractor repurposed from a riding mower.
    When I narrow my focus to what I can do on my small homestead, it eases the anxiety and frustration for me.

    • January 5, 2017 at 10:03 pm
      Permalink

      No, I can’t eat anything.

      I’m digging graves, does that count? They’re not for me or mine of course. Dead zombies have to go someplace.

      I feel a little better, but won’t even try to sit here all day.

      I’ve not done much more other then I already had, other then clearing trees for fire hazards, simplifying some things that have to be maintained, installed another generator, more drip irrigation, and got rid of a bunch of stuff. I do have plans but no funds to do some big projects, I don’t think I’ll get to do them.

      Was going to tell you about the new shooting lanes, trenches with punji sticks, guard towers and ground vibration detectors, automated turrets, and cadre of trained guards willing to die for a daily ration of pilot biscuits, but then I’d be giving too much away…

      • January 6, 2017 at 11:13 am
        Permalink

        Are these “improvements” planned for the resilient community you may lead to greatness? Or just for your place?
        Start a GoFundMe page with THAT objective and I’ll bet you can at least get the automated turrets.

    • January 5, 2017 at 10:31 pm
      Permalink

      Action is the antidote to depression to some extent.

      I exhausted myself, financially and physically, over a period of about 7 years making preparations such as those you described -planted fruit trees, converted a wall into a trombe wall, built greenhouses, built solar drying cabinets, installed a wood stove etc. tried making a sow’s ear into a silk purse, and largely failed. Though there are a few rewards I get for my efforts like a warmer, healthier home, reduced electricity bills and lots of fruit.

      Stymied by illness, declining physical capabilities and lack of money, I have done much less over the past three years by way of preparation. I am already years ahead of most people around here, of course.

      Currently waiting for light at the other end of the tunnel and hoping it’s not a train coming the other way. And while I wait for various health problems to resolve I am disposing of excess stuff I have accumulated over many years. Also enjoying what remains of the environment and attempting to re-establish stamina by cycling almost every day to minor social events like playing cards.

      I’m much less worried about waking people up or the actual consequences of collapse than I was a decade ago because I have learned from experience that you cannot wake people who are trapped in ‘the Matrix’ to reality.

      I keep a fairly close eye on all the major aspects and trends so I do not get caught ‘asleep’ when the next crisis arrives.

  • January 5, 2017 at 9:10 pm
    Permalink

    I look at it this way.

    The English physicist Tyndall discovered that carbon dioxide absorbs unidirectional energy and releases that energy multi-directionally when, in 1859, he put some CO2 into a gas tube and passed energy of various wavelengths through it and found the energy did not all reach the end of the tube. This helped explain why the Earth was somewhat warmer than theoretical calculations indicated, bearing in mind that by the mid-1800s the behavior of heat was fairly well understood.

    Towards the end of the nineteenth century the Swedish chemist Arrhenius worked out that it was the presence of a relatively tiny amount of CO2 in the atmosphere that kept the Earth in the temperature range suitable for life as we know it, and also postulated that continued burning of coal would cause the temperature of the Earth to rise, though he did not anticipate the emergence of an oil-based economy, nor the increase in burning of coal that accompanied the population explosion that would increase the atmospheric CO2 burden so quickly.

    By the middle of the twentieth century, it was becoming apparent that Tyndall and Arrhenius were correct and that the Earth would overheat, so big oil and big coal mounted massive misinformation campaigns to keep the masses from responding to the situation by reducing consumption of oil and coal. And big oil and big coal either sponsored pro-business-as-usual liars into government, or formed the core of government and ensured nothing was done about CO2 emissions(other than scams that made matters worse).

    I have known much of the above for a long time, but only in recent years discovered the stranglehold that banks, corporations and opportunists have on government, and why absolutely nothing has been done, or will be done, to cut emissions.

    It was quite recently that I discovered that Fourier, the brilliant French mathematician, had, in the 1820s, worked on the mystery of why the Earth was warmer than its position in the Solar System indicated.

    https://www.co2.earth/1820-1930-fourier-to-arrhenius

    So, we are now approaching 200 years of having basic knowledge of the problem and making it worse.

    And it is very clear that greed, ignorance, stupidity and manipulation of systems government by big businesses and opportunists will render the Earth largely uninhabitable in a few more decades.

    • January 6, 2017 at 1:14 pm
      Permalink

      Didn’t we just learn that the upper troposphere water vapor is increasing? And this vapor is 80% more heat trapping then at the surface? The link you shared shows the science up to 1930. So wouldn’t Arrhenius now be considered wrong?

      • January 6, 2017 at 4:20 pm
        Permalink

        No. That was the basis of my argument with McPherson.

        There is almost no water vapour in the upper troposphere because the temperature is so low (minus 50oC). Therefore, although there could be an increase in water vapour in the upper troposphere it has very little effect, as is pointed out in this 2014 scientific paper:

        http://www.pnas.org/content/111/32/11636.full

        Most of the water vapour in the atmosphere is in the bottom 1,000 metres. As soon as water vapour increases to a threshold, determined by temperature and pressure, it condenses to water (clouds, mists, fogs etc.) and is no longer water vapour and therefore has no greenhouse effect.

        The water vapour in the bottom portion of the atmosphere has a far greater greenhouse effect than that higher in the atmosphere.

        Arrhenius analysis is still correct because CO2 is the primary driver of planetary overheating. His ‘error’ was in underestimating the time required by industrial humans to ruin the atmosphere by overloading it with CO2.

        Water vapour is a secondary greenhouse gas, and the role of clouds is still poorly understood because they are influenced by so many other factors, especially temperature, whereas atmospheric CO2 does not change with temperature. CO2 is a gas and stays a gas in the atmosphere, except when it temporarily dissolves in water droplets.

        • January 6, 2017 at 5:01 pm
          Permalink

          I’m sure you saw this, but maybe not? My comments from a few days back and the troposphere. This is where I drew my 80% comment from.

          “Approximately 80% of the total water-vapor feedback results from water vapor in the upper troposphere. Although the absolute increase in water vapor is small at these levels, the absorptivity scales with the fractional changes in water vapor, which are typically 2–3 times larger in the upper troposphere compared with the surface (SI Materials and Methods).”

          The quoted text came from the Discussion and Conclusions section, but it’s the same paper as yours, just a different website. If I understand it, they’re saying that 80% of the total water-vapor feedback results from water vapor in the upper troposphere (even though the amount of water vapor is small) and the feedback is typically 2-3 times larger then the surface.

          So what am I missing here (in simple terms) in regards to what portion of the water vapor column has the most effect?

          Your explanation sounds sensible enough – so what does the Discussion and Conclusion section mean? I’ve gone of the rails here somewhere…

          And isn’t water vapor the primary greenhouse gas, having more effect then C02? I just checked Skeptical Science on this.

          • January 6, 2017 at 6:20 pm
            Permalink

            It is true that water vapour is the most important greenhouse gas in the atmosphere in terms of its actual current greenhouse effect (the increase in temperature due to its presence versus it absence) simply because there is much more water in the air than there is CO2.

            However, water vaour is not a primary greenhouse gas because its concentration in the atmosphere is a function of temperature, and temperature is largely dependent on the concentration of carbon dioxide.

            The most convincing demonstration of this is the so-called Snowball Earth, the period about 700 million years ago when evidence indicates the Earth was entirely covered in ice because the CO2 level fell too low. As far as we know, it was only extreme volcanic activity releasing a humungous amount of CO2 into the atmosphere that rescued the Earth from its snowball condition. The vapour pressure of ice is close to zero.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snowball_Earth

            As Wiki points out, we cannot accurately assign a number to water vapour because it is so variable (due to temperature).

            ‘Water vapour[edit]
            Water vapour has a profound infrared absorption spectrum with more and broader absorption bands than CO2, and also absorbs non-zero amounts of radiation in its low absorbing spectral regions,[16] (see greenhouse gas (GHG)), its GWP is therefore difficult to calculate. Further, its concentration in the atmosphere depends on air temperature and water availability; using a global average temperature of ~16 °C, for example, creates an average humidity of ~18,000ppm at sea level (CO2 is ~400ppm[17] and so concentrations of [H2O]/[CO2] ~ 45x). Another issue with calculating GWP is that, unlike other GHG, water vapor does not decay in the environment, so an average over some time period or some other measure consistent with “time dependent decay,” q.v., above, must be used in lieu of the time dependent decay of artificial or excess CO2, molecules. Other factors complicating its calculation are the Earth’s temperature distribution, and the differing land masses in the Northern and Southern hemispheres.’

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming_potential

            As far as the previously linked article is concerned, the key to understanding might be this sentence:

            ‘Two additional model experiments, integrated with anthropogenic greenhouse gases and natural forcing sources separately, further indicate that the observed moistening trend is mainly induced by an increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gases. As a result, it is expected that the influence of a projected increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gases will amplify upper-tropospheric moistening, and is thus likely to amplify global warming via enhanced water-vapor feedback..

            What this is saying is that the tiny increase in water vapor detected by satellites was due to an increase in CO2 and that a further increase in atmospheric CO2 will raise the temperature and increase the water vaour content of the atmosphere, and that the effect will be greater in the Upper Troposphere than lower in the lower atmosphere.

            I have some concerns about those conclusions because the greenhouse effect is this: low frequency radiation passes through the atmosphere and is absorbed by the Earth’s surface and re-radiated back towards space at a longer wavelength. As it moves away from the Earth it encounters molecules that absorb that radiation and re-emit it in all directions, some of it back towards the Earth.

            We know that most spectrally active molecules are in the bottom portion of the atmosphere, so it would make sense that it is there that most of the absorption and re-emission takes place.

            I am not saying the greenhouse effect of water vapour in the Upper Troposphere is zero, only that it is negligible compared to other factors and cannot be a prime driver of overheating.

            That is why I had the big argument with Guy McPherson seven months ago, because what he was saying about moistening of the Upper Troposphere driving a massive leap in global temperature contravened all established science and scientific theory.

            • January 6, 2017 at 6:58 pm
              Permalink

              That’s a great explanation (and a great lesson), thanks! Makes perfect sense now to me.

  • January 5, 2017 at 10:55 pm
    Permalink

    After the big bust up I had with Guy McPherson over him presenting a narrative of ‘8C of warming in a matter of a few months or years’ (which had no scientific basis) I took little notice of anything emanating from him. Occasionally other people link his stuff.

    I have to say this piece is decidedly weird. An odd mixture of facts, fabrications, fantasies and delusions? Another ‘Mike Ruppert moment’ coming?

    http://robinwestenra.blogspot.co.nz/2017/01/are-long-knives-coming-out.html Juine

    I just carrying on doing what I can.

    I’m 66 by the way, and my father and grandfather both got to their late 80s. But I can’t see any possibility of that for me.

    • January 5, 2017 at 11:26 pm
      Permalink

      Personally, I’ve lost all respect for Robin. He censors his blog heavily. Another one of those individuals who ensures you only see the narrative he wants, and he’s got a lot of it wrong. I’ve shared all kinds of information with him and finally just gave up on him, he never allowed any of it to see the light of day. He also became a Ruppert groupie. That was a subject he never allowed anyone to point any faults with.

      Ruppert made many similar claims and began acting very erratically towards the end by his own hand. Among his fans, you were not allowed to discuss this. To them, he’s a god. Not to me.

      I put zero credibility to the article you linked to (now archived here, I do not trust Robin), apparently written by McPherson. Austin is most probably, a nobody, just somebody desperately trying to be a somebody. The content of his words is truly ridiculous.

      These sorts of tactics are often used to bring attention to the teller, which is how I see this. McPherson is no threat to anyone. No credible ‘agent’ would EVER risk this sort of exposure or contact, the entire story is absolutely absurd. It could even be fake to garner attention. In either case, even sharing the story online like this is a clear warning sign of advancing mental instability.

      • January 5, 2017 at 11:53 pm
        Permalink

        Agree with that assessment.

        Just shows how increasingly nutty the world is becoming.

    • January 6, 2017 at 11:09 am
      Permalink

      Truth, I’ll be 70 in April. It’s just a number, in many ways, and I’ll die in the garden or the chicken coop before I agree to being closer to civilization again.
      I may move a little more slowly and have more aches and pains, but I’m not abandoning ship just because the rocks lie straight ahead.

  • January 6, 2017 at 5:22 am
    Permalink

    I hate to read that about Guy. Is he still married? The amount of isolation he must feel has to be enormous. He basically lost everything for his beliefs in NTHE. It is eerily similar to Ruppert’s final years. I wouldn’t be surprised if someone from Homeland Security checked out Guy though. Our own political and corporate leaders are such paranoid lunatics these days – and so tightly interwoven – that Guy is probably viewed as a potential domestic terrorist because of his views on civilization. In that same vein, I wouldn’t be surprised if this blog was monitored as well. Why not? They have the capability. They monitor Facebook, Twitter, Instagram etc.

    Glad you’ve been posting so much lately admin. Nothing keeps the train rolling towards the cliff. I did read some good news – the average life expectancy in the U.S. declined for the first time in decades. If that’s not a wake up call to our so-called progress, nothing is.

    • January 6, 2017 at 10:16 am
      Permalink

      I don’t know if he’s still married. I can’t see how what he’s done as being a threat to anyone, but DHS is paranoid. They monitor everything.

      There is no way that I can ‘filter’ out who reads this blog, even with login. But I also think they have bigger fish to fry then people who are tracking the collapse. We are of no real interest to them.

      I don’t understand why he chose the path of telling everyone they’re going to die like he does, traveling all over the world. Very weird to me. Ineffective and misguided. Can’t see this as doing any good at all. Still think it is the wrong message at the wrong time and teaches the wrong ‘efforts’ everyone should be doing right now.

      But I’ve never wished him any ill will either.

      • January 6, 2017 at 1:22 pm
        Permalink

        It was reported on Nature Bats Last Forum that McPherson went to Belize, with a new partner (Pauline, I believe. I no longer comment on NBLF because it got taken over by trolls and ‘true believers’ in the infallibility of GMP’s non-scientific narratives. Whether GMP is still in Belize I have no idea or much interest.

        I don’t think Sheila (his wife) was ever really comfortable with the ‘mud hut’ existence in New Mexico. But they both invested a lot in it, so she will either still be there or attempting to cut her losses, I suppose.

        I tried in vain to get GMP to deliver what I regard as the right message for the times we live -that we are constantly lied to by people and organisations that promote the short-term interests of the global industrial empire.

        That was a message he didn’t want to deliver, and he went off on a self-serving tangent that ended up a self-defeating tangent.

        Unwillingness to change course seems to be one of the most fatal of flaws of the human animal.

        • January 6, 2017 at 1:44 pm
          Permalink

          I have seen (and experienced) this before. In the archives, are some of my commentary about my past efforts and those that I met, instructed and worked with. Many of these people ‘imploded’. I did too but found a path for salvation as it were and extracted myself from my own erroneous thinking. It is exactly what has shaped me into whatever you want to call me today.

          I saw families dissolve, marriages fail, lives ruined, even several people were killed, others died in frustration, homeless and broke. Their ‘beliefs’ as it were, were wrong and led them to take the wrong paths and make the wrong decisions. They failed to heed the warnings and insisted on pushing further down the road of self-despair. They number in the hundreds, perhaps even a thousand or more people that I know that this happened to.

          Not one of them was willing to follow me out of the darkness. Now, these many years later, a tiny few have managed to track me down and are amazed. Their still trapped in their false beliefs and they know it. I’m not. But the point here is how you can implode all too easy if you take the wrong fork in the road and stubbornly insist that this is the only way, even when it does you or your family or other terrible harm. A lot of people do this to themselves and they all fail.

  • January 6, 2017 at 11:29 am
    Permalink

    Worth reading – Seeing the devastation of climate change in the ruins of Aleppo

    The connection between the devastation in Syria, concrete and climate change. A good example of how utterly stupid humans have become. Food prices there jumped 26% per year since 2008, a million farmers lost their livelihoods.

    “Already, extreme heat, drought and floods in the United States have grown increasingly common, intense and chaotic. In the summer of 2015, rainfall in normally arid Texas was measured in feet, not inches. Meanwhile, humid subtropical states such as Alabama have been experiencing extreme drought. In the short term, climate destabilization creates whiplash for farmers trying to plan. In the long term, the situation is much more serious: Climate models project mega-droughts that will disrupt agriculture across America in the coming decades.”

    The so-called ‘carbon negative’ method of producing concrete overlooks the very negative aspect of enabling more construction and growth.

    • January 6, 2017 at 1:02 pm
      Permalink

      The author of that piece is correct in linking the manufacture of concrete to climate change.

      However, this statement is simply not true: ‘The technology already exists to make cement without emitting any greenhouse gases….The human version works by reacting the CO2 in industrial flue stacks with calcium-rich water, resulting in powdered limestone — tons of it — no mining, no heating and so no greenhouse gases. In fact, cement produced this way is carbon negative:’

      That is total bullshit, based either on lack of understanding of basic chemistry or deliberate misrepresentation to promote a business.

      Obvious questions such as these arise:

      Where does the ‘calcium-rich water’ come from?

      What generates ‘CO2 in industrial smoke stacks’ and how does it get there?

      Having produced ‘powdered limestone’, CaCO3, how is that converted to CaO (which is the basis of cement) without driving out the CO2 using heat generated by burning a fossil fuel?

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m8U76Bm8kDY

      ‘Sam Stier is director of the Center for Learning With Nature (www.LearningWithNature.org) and teaches science and sustainable design at Otis College of Art and Design.’

      Keep your kids away from that place if that is piece representative of the level of ‘science’ taught there.

      Of course, anything published by a mainstream ‘newspaper’ has to be hopium-based bullshit geared to maintaining some tweaked version of status quo in order to get past the editor.

      It really pisses me off that we are drowning in an ocean of lies and gross misrepresentations.

      • January 6, 2017 at 1:10 pm
        Permalink

        It is the Age of Deception, the ‘Idiotocene’, where people will believe anything that they are told.

  • January 6, 2017 at 2:34 pm
    Permalink

    I quit reading Guy M. a couple of years ago. I have mildly autistic tendencies and am prone to extreme anxiety. I am hard wired to look for and expect threats coming from every direction. Crappy traits to have during complacent and peaceful times, great ones to have during times of danger. I like to read and get a variety of opinions and analyses from all directions but found Guy just a little to much.

    Living on the northern Great Plains of N.A. I am used to some pretty extreme cold and am not so fond of winter anymore. In an overheating world I shouldn’t complain about still having the opportunity to freeze my ass off.

    However with respect to cold, things are not like they used to be. Where -40 was fairly routine in my youth (I’m 52)-20F to -25F is more normal now, last year -18F was the coldest. I am certain that is highest winter minimum in the time period of any living person here. I never expect to see -40 here again.

    Where only the hardiest crabapples would survive in the past I have a thousand black walnuts growing and thriving on my farm. I have test plantings of honeylocust, American chestnut, hickory, pinyon pine (from 1000 km south!). Anyone who can’t see the changes is either young or not very observant or smart. A program of assisted plant migration will certainly be urgently needed and soon.

    When in school we were given projects such as making butterfly collections where we had to collect a dozen different species of butterflies. With the exception of cabbage butterflies which thrive in the local canola fields, I don’t think I even see a dozen butterflies of all species combined in a year. This is no joke! Gone as well are the frogs, toads and mussels in the local river. All creatures who quickly absorb the poisons in our increasingly toxic world. Instead I am surrounded by 10000 acres farms producing food that is probably not really fit to eat.

    The dry heat of summers past is replaced with months of unusual humidity and mosquitoes and ticks. We had a epidemic
    of West Nile here years ago where many including my wife got very sick and one person even died. An African disease in Canada! I found 2 ticks on me in all of the first 25 years of my life. Now I get thousands every year in a tick season that lasts 4 months. I am sure the tick diseases will soon arrive.

    It scares me to think the changes are really just starting.

    • January 6, 2017 at 2:57 pm
      Permalink

      Pinyon pine? Do you plan on nut harvesting these? I’ve not heard of anyone around here (much further south then you) growing any nuts, but I eat a lot of nuts all the same (thank you – fossil fuels for transporting to me the delicacies and essentials that I like to eat). There are some fruit trees here, Washington is known for it’s apples, but this area it is mostly blueberry bushes, huckelberries and hay. No real farming of any significance, although I did just learn of a organic beef / poultry farm I didn’t know of. First one I’ve heard about around here.

      Amphibians are particularly susceptible to environmental toxins and changes, the ‘canary in the coal’ mine keystone species. When they disappear, we’ve got big problems.

      I’ve heard of the major tick problem in Minnesota (sucking moose dry of blood, literally) but not in your region. You have a lot of large game animals there as well?

    • January 6, 2017 at 3:22 pm
      Permalink

      Most of the bogus ‘prepper’ community denies climate change (the majority). It is a particular point of (misplaced) pride with them. An no, they are not very observant or smart (imo). Their concept of ‘prepping’ is for many of the wrong reasons. I never became popular or liked by this group because of this. This crowd refuses any and all scientific evidence, actual measurements and even eye-witness reports (they actually consider themselves better qualified and more expert on the topic then the experts actually are). You describe a known history to the local people, but this other group will simply deny it all.

      I bring this up because I just read another climate denial article by a so-called ‘prepper’ who teaches classes on prepping. I cannot help but wonder what these people are going to do when they discover that they’ve been wrong for years. They think it is all about government control, taxes and money. Even these arguments of theirs never make any real sense. That’s like trying to describe a tall building by simply pointing to the antenna on top. They’ve completely missed everything else that leads up to it.

      If you have the wrong premises in life, then you will make the wrong decisions. Layer after layer of wrong decisions become wrong choices and can become dangerous to your own well-being. This describes the ‘prepper’ community to me – the wrong philosophy, the wrong premise, the wrong decisions, the wrong choices. Being preppers they’ll have some things right, but everything else wrong. The disharmony (cognitive dissonance) must be immense in their minds.

      I used to be afraid for them (concerned) but even gave that up. They’ve always had the choice to be better informed and up-to-date on the subject, but they’ve chosen not to. Every day I read a least a dozen or so article just like this and they consistently refuse to accept the science and the measurements and the real-life effects. Every possible attempt, straw argument and conjecture, logical fallacy is used to explain it all away. Some will even claim that since it is not in the Bible it cannot be true or “of God”. I could spend days just trying to show them where they’ve erred (and have) but it does no good in the end.

      It is after all, what the entire human race has done – deny its cause and effects, endlessly. We know the folly of it all and the ultimate outcome.

  • January 6, 2017 at 3:38 pm
    Permalink

    We do have a lot deer in our area but then again we always did. For some reason,likely environmental, my guess is humidity, the populations have just exploded. My legs are a mess with sores by the time they die off in August.

    My pinyons are still small so I’m not sure of long term viability. I am experimenting with many different species.

    Natural Resources Canada has an interesting site called Canada’s Plant Hardiness Site (www.planthardiness.gc.ca, sorry don’t know how to put the link up) where they run plant species adaptions through their climate models and try to predict future ranges of plants under various emission scenarios. I always assume the worst and the site predicts by mid-late century the core area of adaption for Colorado pinyon (P. edulis) to include large areas southern Saskatchewan and Alberta Canada. Hopefully I interpreted everything correctly as I find this difficult to fathom.

    • January 6, 2017 at 3:50 pm
      Permalink

      I take it you mean tick bites. I’m out of my league here but that would be a major concern for me due to their ability to carry disease. I have not seen a large jump in ticks here (yet).

      Your link works fine – just put the URL in (web address) and everybody can cut / paste if they like to view it.

      You can also use the link button in the comment editor. Double click on the words or text you want to make into a link, then click the link button and put in the URL and press “Add Link”. Either way works fine.

  • January 6, 2017 at 5:19 pm
    Permalink

    Grrrr! In a post-truth world, the fight against climate change is still winnable”

    Written by a clueless scientist of notable repute. Sigh…

    I want to scream “HOW”? When everything we DO is destructive, pollutive, contributing to greenhouse gas levels at every step of the way?

    The article is INCREDIBLY DISHONEST FROM A SCIENTIST.

    a) There are no sources of “green energy” that are not pollutive. Not yet at least. Photosynthesis doesn’t count because humans aren’t plants.

    b) The “at the root the solution to climate change is technological” is “more, never less” mantra that has NEVER worked. I can’t see that it will either. Increasing complexity will never be green or sustainable, but it will require a lot of energy and resources to manufacture, distribute and maintain. Every step of the way will be pumping more greenhouse gas into the atmosphere.

    c) “greening supply chains” changes nothing except fostering the illusion of “sustainable” and “green”.

    d) I’m fine with more (or even all) solar energy, but how does this lower consumption and the related effects of growth? How do solar panels change energy and resource demands? How does any of this reduce the need for oil to create and maintain the panels? Has anybody even calculated the amount of oil it is going to take to build the panels the world will need? To maintain them? To replace them? Why not? If we don’t understand this simply point then why are we racing down this road?

    e) What about Jevon’s Paradox and the claimed ‘efficiencies’ and growth desired? Won’t innovation simply consume whatever ‘gains’ are alleged (because the growth paradigm will be held onto with a death-grip)?

    f) the future isn’t ‘clean, green energy’ unless you account for the true carbon costs during it’s entire lifecycle – which is why there is no such thing.

    g) Does ‘post-truth’ mean that incessant lying is now the acceptable manner of discourse and dissemination of (dis)information? I think so.

    h) I almost forgot – the technology proposed is VAPORWARE. It does not exist anywhere on the planet. Also embedded in the IPCC reports and nearly every other proposal on how humans are going to save themselves from their incessant stupidity and insistence that they’re always going to be in control. NOT.

    We’re smart enough to measure what’s going on, what causes it, but we don’t have the capability of stopping it now, especially since we can’t let go of this civilization and all that it means. But you won’t be allowed to hear this point. I’ve seen some scientist make mention it, but they don’t provide the essential details on what it will mean.

    This is the best we’re going to get from the brightest, most enlightened minds on the planet.

    • January 6, 2017 at 6:38 pm
      Permalink

      I don’t think that garbage was written by a person we could validly describe as being a scientist.

      ‘Written by
      Naomi Oreskes, Professor of the History of Science, Harvard University’

      In fact, it’s all about business and money. It’s usually about business and money. Sometimes it’s about social control. But usually it’s about business and money.

      From the World Economic Forum link:

      https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2015/11/open-letter-from-ceos-to-world-leaders-urging-climate-action/

      ‘We are CEOs from 79 companies and 20 economic sectors. With operations in over 150 countries and territories, together we generated over $2.1 trillion of revenue in 2014.’

  • January 6, 2017 at 9:56 pm
    Permalink

    I have just spotted an error I made in an earlier comment:

    ‘low frequency radiation passes through the atmosphere and is absorbed by the Earth’s surface and re-radiated back towards space at a longer wavelength. As it moves away from the Earth it encounters molecules that absorb that radiation and re-emit it in all directions, some of it back towards the Earth.

    That should have been: high or medium frequency radiation passes through the atmosphere and is absorbed by the Earth’s surface and re-radiated back towards space at a longer wavelength. As it moves away from the Earth it encounters molecules that absorb that radiation and re-emit it in all directions, some of it back towards the Earth.

Leave a Reply