Climate Change thread

[Chekhov]

2 hours ago, Organgrinder said:

 nor bombed that much (contarty to what people seem to think) 

 

I would advise you to edit the bit in bold unless you want to look an even bigger idiot than usual.

I lived through the war and remember all the bombed houses in our district that we played on.

I remember the state of Exchange St, High St, Angel St and The Moor and I have a large collection of photographs to back me up.

We were lucky that they were not good at bombing our industry but housing and commercial premises WERE badly hit.

Absolutely not.

Parts of the UK were heavily bombed, Hull in particular by virtue of it being coastal (it was easy to find in the dark) and it was under the return flight path of German bombers to empty their loads on if they had been unable to bomb their primary targets in the North.

 

More generally :

Asymmetric warfare.....

Total bomb tonnage on the UK in WWII = Approx 75,000 tons

Total bomb tonnage on Germany in WWII (RAF and USAAF) = Approx 2 Million tons (about 27 times more)

 

The Sheffield blitz (12-13 Dec 1940) resulted in about 350 tons being dropped on the city.

The RAF/USAAF raids on Hamburg in late July 1944 about 10,000 tons of bombs were dropped, that's nearly 30 times more than was dropped on Sheffield (though admittedly over four nights and on a bigger city).

 

France received around 500,000 tons of bombs plus it suffered significantly as a result of "collateral damage" as a result of military operations, particularly in Normandy.

Countries in the East (e.g. Poland) suffered mainly as a result of military operations, though it is arguable if the reprisal flattening of Warsaw by the Germans in October 1944 could legitimately be described as such.

Edited February 22, 2023 by Chekhov

[Chekhov]

2 hours ago, Magilla said:

...and no humans, but plenty of evidence that the current staple crops won't deliver the nutrient or protein content humans need at the associated carbon levels in the atmosphere.

We have mentioned this before, but since photosynthesis (the formula that means we can all live) is basically Water + Carbon dioxide = Oxygen + Sugar (food) then increased levels of CO2 must surely mean more photosynthesis, which uses up more CO2 !

 

The Times - 10 Oct 22 p8 :

Rising carbon emissions make trees grow bigger

Trees feasting on increased CO2 emissions have grown thicker and larger researchers at Ohio State University suggest.

Academics examined the volume of trees in ten temperate forest groups across America and found that the volume of tree trunks was up 30% bigger than 30 years ago.

The phenomenon, known as Carbon fertilisation - when an influx of CO2 increases a plant's rate of photosynthesis - is likely to be replicated across the world.

 

2 hours ago, Magilla said:

The point being that this time it [global warming] is a result of human intervention.

Even if it is that does not necessarily mean we can do anything about it, particularly at bearable cost.

 

More to the point, if any particular country decides it would rather keep its standard of living and risk the effects of "Global warming" that is a legitimate decision for the population of that country to take. Assuming they are given the democratic opportunity to do that of course.....

Edited February 22, 2023 by Chekhov

[Guest]

38 minutes ago, Chekhov said:

Absolutely not.

Parts of the UK were heavily bombed, Hull in particular by virtue of it being coastal (it was easy to find in the dark) and it was under the return flight path of German bombers to empty their loads on if they had been unable to bomb their primary targets in the North.

 

More generally :

Asymmetric warfare.....

Total bomb tonnage on the UK in WWII = Approx 75,000 tons

Total bomb tonnage on Germany in WWII (RAF and USAAF) = Approx 2 Million tons (about 27 times more)

 

The Sheffield blitz (12-13 Dec 1940) resulted in about 350 tons being dropped on the city.

The RAF/USAAF raids on Hamburg in late July 1944 about 10,000 tons of bombs were dropped, that's nearly 30 times more than was dropped on Sheffield (though admittedly over four nights and on a bigger city).

 

France received around 500,000 tons of bombs plus it suffered significantly as a result of "collateral damage" as a result of military operations, particularly in Normandy.

Countries in the East (e.g. Poland) suffered mainly as a result of military operations, though it is arguable if the reprisal flattening of Warsaw by the Germans in October 1944 could legitimately be described as such.

You count the tons if you like but I saw the streets and you don't know what your talking about, especially when you compare Sheffield with the whole of France.

I'm sure you wouldn't be quoting numbers if you were sat under it.

Not interested in statistics of Europe. I was talking about Sheffield although I shouldn't have expected a sensible reply from you.

 

 

[Anna B]

45 minutes ago, Chekhov said:

We have mentioned this before, but since photosynthesis (the formula that means we can all live) is basically Water + Carbon dioxide = Oxygen + Sugar (food) then increased levels of CO2 must surely mean more photosynthesis, which uses up more CO2 !

 

The Times - 10 Oct 22 p8 :

Rising carbon emissions make trees grow bigger

Trees feasting on increased CO2 emissions have grown thicker and larger researchers at Ohio State University suggest.

Academics examined the volume of trees in ten temperate forest groups across America and found that the volume of tree trunks was up 30% bigger than 30 years ago.

The phenomenon, known as Carbon fertilisation - when an influx of CO2 increases a plant's rate of photosynthesis - is likely to be replicated across the world.

 

Even if it is that does not necessarily mean we can do anything about it, particularly at bearable cost.

 

More to the point, if any particular country decides it would rather keep its standard of living and risk the effects of "Global warming" that is a legitimate decision for the population of that country to take. Assuming they are given the democratic opportunity to do that of course.....

Then isn't that nature taking care of itself? 

More CO2, bigger trees taking up more CO2

 

And aren't they able to grow protein (beef) in the lab these days?

 

We have over 100+ years of encouraging motor transport, very successfully.  We've adapted, to the point where we depend on it.

Then they rip the carpet out from under you, and they expect people just to go along with it. ( As long as they can continue to use their cars...)

 

There are many things they can do to clean up the earth, that are relatively simple but haven't been tried yet.

Let's stop encouraging mass consumption. Let's have a 4 day week. Let's plant more trees (not chop them down...) Let's  put solar panels on all roofs and use white tiles on roofs to reflect the heat, let's use tidal power, let's stop the bombing round the world..  Let's...

 

 

Edited February 22, 2023 by Anna B

[El Cid]

1 hour ago, Chekhov said:

We have mentioned this before, but since photosynthesis (the formula that means we can all live) is basically Water + Carbon dioxide = Oxygen + Sugar (food) then increased levels of CO2 must surely mean more photosynthesis, which uses up more CO2 !

 

The Times - 10 Oct 22 p8 :

Rising carbon emissions make trees grow bigger

The UK would benefit from more warmth/sun, but the Sahara would benefit from more precipitation.

It is forecast that we will get more cloud cover and precipitation, more warmth and more extreme weather.

I think it's a little more complex than you are suggesting.

[Prettytom]

2 hours ago, El Cid said:

The UK would benefit from more warmth/sun, but the Sahara would benefit from more precipitation.

It is forecast that we will get more cloud cover and precipitation, more warmth and more extreme weather.

I think it's a little more complex than you are suggesting.

You spelt “a lot more” incorrectly.

[trastrick]

 

9 hours ago, El Cid said:

The UK would benefit from more warmth/sun, but the Sahara would benefit from more precipitation.

It is forecast that we will get more cloud cover and precipitation, more warmth and more extreme weather.

I think it's a little more complex than you are suggesting.

Mother Nature will never be an "equal opportunity" weather phenom, where it rains exactly when and where we want it to, and snows when and where we want it to, and has the sun shine where and when we want it too!

 

But overall it gets the job done to make the planet habitable gfor humans, in all regions, from the Arctic Circle to the Equator.

 

Some folks, these days can't seem to accept that reality. 

 

And World Agricultural Food Production continues to set records as the planet warms by a few hundredth of a degree.

 

Now, some folks don't like to hear that either, for some strange reason, and you won't see it highlighted in the MSM headlines.

 

This kind of relatively simple information, you have to dig deep for, which is beyond most folks attention span! 

 

And the MSM know it! They know their readers well!

 

https://www.fao.org/3/cc2212en/cc2212en.pdf

Edited February 23, 2023 by trastrick

[Annie Bynnol]

1 minute ago, trastrick said:

Mother Nature will never be an "equal opportunity" weather phenom, where it rains exactly when and where we want it to, and snows when and where we want it to, and has the sun shine where we want it too!

But overall it gets the job done to make the planet habitable in all regions, from the Arctic Circle to the Equator.

Some folks, these day can't seem to accept that reality. 

And World Agricultural Food Production continues to set records as the planet warms by a few hundredth of a degree.

Now, some folks don't like to hear that either, for some strange reason, and you won't see it highlighted in the MSM headlines.

This kind of relatively simple information, you have to dig deep for, which is beyond most folks attention span! 

And the MSM know it! They know their readers well!

https://www.fao.org/3/cc2212en/cc2212en.pdf

     .

     Probably the most mistimed comment in the history of this thread.

     Never before has so much food been grown but it is not just about more agricultural land, better strain, better storage it is also about what we are becoming used to eat and expect to be able to get from our stores every day of the year

     If you watch/read/listen to the headlines in most British MSM news and newspapers yesterday and today you might notice that they are all commenting on our 'salad rationing' due to our dependency on North African and Spanish growers being unable to supply because of  bad weather. A situation which is predicted to last for several weeks. British growers have been unable to compete because of the huge rise in energy costs and the associated massive hike in fertilizer, pesticides, fungicide etc, fuel and transport costs and the loss of EU rebates and have cut back drastically. Flying in unseasonal produce into the UK has always been an issue and it is widely commented on that growing and transporting veg. and fruit from all over the globe.  

      

 

 

 

      

[trastrick]

18 minutes ago, Annie Bynnol said:

     .

     Probably the most mistimed comment in the history of this thread.

     Never before has so much food been grown but it is not just about more agricultural land, better strain, better storage it is also about what we are becoming used to eat and expect to be able to get from our stores every day of the year

     If you watch/read/listen to the headlines in most British MSM news and newspapers yesterday and today you might notice that they are all commenting on our 'salad rationing' due to our dependency on North African and Spanish growers being unable to supply because of  bad weather. A situation which is predicted to last for several weeks. British growers have been unable to compete because of the huge rise in energy costs and the associated massive hike in fertilizer, pesticides, fungicide etc, fuel and transport costs and the loss of EU rebates and have cut back drastically. Flying in unseasonal produce into the UK has always been an issue and it is widely commented on that growing and transporting veg. and fruit from all over the globe.  

      

 

 

 

      

"salad rationing" ?

 

Go ask people in the World if that is on their list of "Crises", too! 

 

Better spent time would be how to get out of the endless European Wars and unsustainable, spiraling National Debt.

 

But we all have our personal priorities! 

 

 

Edited February 23, 2023 by trastrick

[Magilla]

13 hours ago, Chekhov said:

We have mentioned this before, but since photosynthesis (the formula that means we can all live) is basically Water + Carbon dioxide = Oxygen + Sugar (food) then increased levels of CO2 must surely mean more photosynthesis, which uses up more CO2 !

 

The Times - 10 Oct 22 p8 :

Rising carbon emissions make trees grow bigger

Trees feasting on increased CO2 emissions have grown thicker and larger researchers at Ohio State University suggest.

Academics examined the volume of trees in ten temperate forest groups across America and found that the volume of tree trunks was up 30% bigger than 30 years ago.

The phenomenon, known as Carbon fertilisation - when an influx of CO2 increases a plant's rate of photosynthesis - is likely to be replicated across the world.

 

Presumably, you didn't respond the last two times this was expanded on, so you could spout it again?

 

Remind me again, how many tree's have you eaten today?

 

Quote

Even if it is that does not necessarily mean we can do anything about it, particularly at bearable cost.

It also doesn't mean we can't, and certainly doesn't mean we shouldn't try.

 

Quote

More to the point, if any particular country decides it would rather keep its standard of living and risk the effects of "Global warming" that is a legitimate decision for the population of that country to take.

Pretty sure they voted in a party who claimed they were going to be the greenest ever.

 

What makes you so certain that doing nothing won't effect and reduce any "standard of living" anyway, beyond wishful thinking?

 

Quote

Assuming they are given the democratic opportunity to do that of course.....

Clearly, that opportunity exists.... of course, the only people offering it are complete loons with no idea how anything works, so you take your chances.

 

 

 

Edited February 23, 2023 by Magilla