Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Tom_Mazanec

Pages: [1] 2
1
AIRS confirms global warming at least as bad as thought (worse at Arctic):
https://weather.com/science/environment/news/2019-04-18-nasa-study-confirms-global-warming-trends

2
GoSouthYoungins:
Thanks. From the summary:
The “shale revolution” has provided a reprieve from what just 13 years ago was thought to be a terminal decline in
oil and gas production in the U.S. It has sparked calls for “American energy dominance”107 – despite the fact that
the U.S. is projected to be a net oil importer through 2050, even given EIA forecasts. This reprieve is temporary,
and the U.S. would be well advised to plan for much reduced shale oil and gas production in the long term based
on this analysis of play fundamentals.

The only problem is the short and medium term, where fracking is still producing a lot of AGW. If the old projections were correct, and AGW would not be a problem till late in the century, then PO and not AGW would be the peril. But disruptions to the climate are occurring already.

3
The rest / Re: Climate on Reddit
« on: Today at 01:43:21 PM »
I am not in favor of AGW. Now, I hate winter here in the Lake Erie snowbelt, but I'm not stupid enough to wish it ten degrees hotter all over the world. Similarly, I am afraid of bees and wasps, but I am not stupid enough to wish them extinct.
As I said, I was afraid of Peak Oil until recently. I was always interested in AGW, as I was interested in everything involving the future, but did not think this was the thing that would "get" us, until the last year or two.
The articles I have posted from several reddits have all IIRC been about the dangers of AGW. I hope for a non-carbon future, so I cannot see how I am supporting the idea of spewing teratons of CO2 into the atmosphere. What disinformation have I posted?

4
The forum / Re: Suggestions
« on: Today at 01:31:23 PM »
Thanks, Lurk.
I had to look for a moment...it was under my avatar on the left.

5
The rest / Re: Cli Fi
« on: Today at 04:07:08 AM »
Has there been any good cli-fi since Nov 2015?

6
The forum / Re: Suggestions
« on: Today at 03:27:45 AM »
I have "liked" several postings (like a couple on cli-fi).
As I like more and more, is there some way to find a list of all the postings I liked?

7
Bank of England - Climate change could cause $4 trillion - $20 trillion losses:
https://qz.com/1596486/climate-change-could-cause-20-trillion-in-losses-says-bank-of-england/?utm_source=reddit.com

9
The rest / Re: Climate change activists should not fly
« on: Today at 01:00:51 AM »
I was using him as an example.

10
The rest / Re: Climate on Reddit
« on: Today at 12:58:22 AM »
I was referring to the Unabomber's decision to live like a back to nature hippy lifestyle, and specifically said I did not like his "bombing shit". Also, I did not post a link from either r/collapse or r/dieoff. The links I found were on the reddits I initially listed. If someone posted them on both reddits, I can't help that. I hadn't looked at either the above two in quite some time.

11
Arctic sea ice / Re: Are 3 dimensions better than 2?
« on: Today at 12:50:25 AM »
Sorry...as I said, I thought this was the best place for it.

12
Arctic sea ice / Re: Are 3 dimensions better than 2?
« on: April 17, 2019, 09:46:55 PM »
Well neven, I thought that if you see that, say, the Antarctic icecap is 500 billion tons lighter gravitational pull, it means 500 billion tons of ice melted, and that means around 500 billion cubic meters (a cubic meter of ice weighs about a ton, right?) less ice volume.
I am trying not to start new threads, so I thought I should post it here.

13
Arctic sea ice / Re: Are 3 dimensions better than 2?
« on: April 17, 2019, 09:36:20 PM »
While we're talking about area vs volume, here is some results (using Earth's gravity) of ice mass and sea level rise, which should give us a volume clue:
https://phys.org/news/2019-04-earth-gravity-reveals-climate.html
BTW, the link comes from the Dieoff reddit...so that is who cliffhanger1983 is.

14
The rest / Re: Climate change activists should not fly
« on: April 17, 2019, 08:56:43 PM »
Well, I've thought it over and maybe people would dismiss a hippy type talking on AGW. Not me, it would make me more likely to believe that he really means it and that he doesn't have an axe to grind.
I respect Ted Kaczynski for how he lived (not for, you know, the bombing shit), he showed he meant it.

15
The rest / Re: Climate on Reddit
« on: April 17, 2019, 08:50:46 PM »
Sorry, I forgot that one. I was in my Peak Oil bookmark folder from back when I was more concerned about that.
Here it is https://www.reddit.com/r/collapse/ and it updates quite often.
Thanks.
No I am not trying to disinform people...I am getting quite worried about AGW. Unless you are a denier? Or Sam Canara?
And who is cliffhanger1983? Sounds familiar, but I can't place him.
Here is another I put in Peak Oil for some reason https://www.reddit.com/r/DieOff/ which is quite pessimistic and often updates.

16
The forum / Re: Suggestions
« on: April 17, 2019, 08:39:40 PM »
If there is a 120 day limit for old threads, the search results should not jump all over the forums history.

There's no limit, it's just a warning that you don't have to abide.

Try to do what results in the least amount of work for Neven.  ;)

Thanks.
The Alternate History Forum is really nasty when you do that. They would probably "kick" temporarily or even permanently ban someone who did it more than once.

17
The rest / Climate on Reddit
« on: April 17, 2019, 06:27:37 PM »
https://www.reddit.com/r/Climate_apocalypse/ gives a number of scary headlines, but seldom updates.
https://www.reddit.com/r/ClimateChaos/ updates very frequently, but has a lot of "local" weather events.
https://www.reddit.com/r/StormComing/ has more local events that might be of interest to us, but does not update often.
https://www.reddit.com/r/FridaysForFuture/ sometimes covers climate protests et al.
https://www.reddit.com/r/GlobalWarming/ updates moderately often and has good AGW articles.
https://www.reddit.com/r/climate/ is very good for subject and frequency of update.
https://www.reddit.com/r/MakeTotalDestr0i/ updates only occasionally and covers other facets of the global Metacrisis as well as AGW.
 
On the other side of the aisle, https://www.reddit.com/r/climateskeptics/ gives the denier side of the issue. You may want to debate on that reddit. Or not.

Any others I've missed, on either side of the aisle?

18
Well, I know it uses some energy, not how much.
I have 58 posts, how much have I used?
You have 1959 posts...are your posts longer than mine or shorter? Does that affect how many ergs are used? Or is it just 1959/58 times as much as I've used?

19
Arctic sea ice / Re: 2019 sea ice area and extent data
« on: April 17, 2019, 05:46:52 PM »
<snip, on topic, please, and no unnecessary references to religious anecdotes; N.>

20
The forum / Re: Suggestions
« on: April 17, 2019, 05:03:30 PM »
And another thing (a different suggestion, so I will do a different post).
Is there some way you can make the search results reverse chronological? Just for giggles, I just tried search for /methane/.
First result was March 30, 2019
Second was November 11, 2018 (so far so good)
Third was August 09, 2018 (ditto)
Fourth was February 14, 2019 (huh?)

I am trying to find threads to put my postings on. When I tried to post an article that sensitivity to CO2 doubling may be higher than thought (searching for /double/) and tried to post, I got a message that the thread had not been updated in 120 days and to start a new thread. So I did, and neven closed it.
If there is a 120 day limit for old threads, the search results should not jump all over the forums history.

EDIT: I realize now I should have searched for /doubling/ but the suggestion still stands.

21
The rest / Why I am getting more worried about AGW (a personal story)
« on: April 17, 2019, 04:54:33 PM »
Until recently, my bugaboo about what the world will be like when I am old was Peak Oil. I thought we would either be getting a post-oil technology and infrastructure by now, or entering an Energy Crisis Hyperdepression.
Then came fracking. At first I thought (based on my reading PO blogs) that it would be a flash-in-the-pan. But it seems to have legs. Meanwhile, the things that I thought would start happening in years like 2050 in a BAU scenario started happening in years like 2015.
So was I right before, or now? Will fracking collapse in a year or two and transportation start breaking down, or will the Earth become a hotter, less livable planet?
EDIT: and is your story similar to mine (anybody)?

22
Arctic sea ice / Re: 2019 sea ice area and extent data
« on: April 17, 2019, 03:59:32 PM »
Do you happen to know what time of day https://ads.nipr.ac.jp/vishop/#/extent updates (Eastern Time Zone)? Or is it whenever it gets around to it?

23
The forum / Re: Suggestions
« on: April 17, 2019, 03:53:51 PM »
Let me give you an example of what I mean:
https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,2441.msg195728.html#msg195728

I posted an article link on the 2020 election. It was about a proposal for a Democratic Primary debate exclusively on climate change. Almost nine hours later I found a link to a petition to sign for such a debate. I signed it (at least I think I did...I'm not used to signing online petitions and am not sure I pushed all the right buttons). But if someone clicked on /new/ in those nine hours they would not see that petition (because I hadn't added it yet...duh). If they were to check that thread's /new/ again now, when there have been a couple other postings, would they find out about the petition?

24
The forum / Re: Suggestions
« on: April 17, 2019, 01:57:26 PM »
Is there some way to tell what posts have been recently edited, so you can see the new version? I have taken to editing my posts to add more links when I find them later, if no one else has posted anything on that thread yet. Or should I just make a new posting?

25
The rest / Re: Archaeology/Paleontology news
« on: April 17, 2019, 01:30:43 PM »
A lot of species we can see today will be "paleontology" in a hundred years.
When does species loss become a social crisis:
https://www.straight.com/news/1228996/david-suzuki-when-does-plant-and-animal-species-loss-become-societal-crisis

26
The rest / Re: How could I have done this better?
« on: April 17, 2019, 01:26:01 PM »
Thanks, neven.
The biggest talking point, IIRC, was the in-the-Seventies-they-said-we-would-be-in-an-ice-age-by-now one. When I tried to refute this, they almost called me a liar (which annoys me because I try very hard to be truthful). They also made a point of old estimates of temperature, CO2, etc. being all over the place.
I guess I was wasting the electrons with my effort over there. But it was not primarily a denier forum, and I thought some might be more reasonable, if I made an explicit topic on it. No such luck.

27
The rest / Re: Climate change activists should not fly
« on: April 17, 2019, 01:21:07 PM »
Yes, neven.

29
Consequences / Re: Health Effects of Climate Change
« on: April 17, 2019, 05:30:20 AM »
As a former hay fever sufferer...
Pollenpcalypse:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/11/us/extreme-pollen-north-carolina.html

30
Permafrost / Re: Arctic Methane Release
« on: April 17, 2019, 05:20:47 AM »
The Arctic is also releasing Nitrous Oxide...twelve times as much as thought:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/04/190415090848.htm

31
The rest / Re: Climate change activists should not fly
« on: April 17, 2019, 05:16:31 AM »
The whole point is that a woman does not have a right to murder her baby just because it is located in her womb.

34
The rest / Re: Climate change activists should not fly
« on: April 17, 2019, 02:17:39 AM »

Actually, as a Catholic, I believe no one should masturbate, which is why I replied to your post that way. But that is not something for law, because an innocent life is not at stake until conception. It is also a Mortal Sin to miss Mass on Holy Days and Days of Obligation, but I am not going to pass a law on that either. But when a helpless infant in the womb is involved, then the law should protect that infant.

If we are terming embryos ‘infants’ and claiming that climate change activists shouldn’t fly, the world is already doomed. Each one of those ‘infants’ contributes way more to AGW than the one flight to a foreign land to prove our devotion to a made up concept that makes us feel good about death. Religions aims to placate and control the masses by telling them that if we do our best in this life, we get something better when we die. And then the people in power subvert that already subversive message to consolidate even more power by making you contribute funds to made up campaigns while sexually abusing the same helpless infants that they seem to want more of.

Even if you are an Atheist, you have to admit the embryo is human. What else would it be...an aardvark? And if you can kill a human because it is less than 9 months old, can you kill him/her because he/she is less than 6 years old? After all, such children do not think as sophisticatedly as us adults. Or should we use an IQ test where you have to score 100 or more? If that is too high, why not just 90? Or go up to 110 and just have smarter people. Where do you draw the line?

35
The rest / Re: Climate change activists should not fly
« on: April 17, 2019, 02:12:34 AM »
You have to walk the walk, not just talk the talk. When activists fly around the world but say we have to cut carbon emissions, it send the message that you have to sacrifice but I don't. Activists for civil rights were thrown in prison, attacked by police dogs, tear gassed, etc. and have mostly triumphed. Activists for climate change too often are do what I say, not what I do and have mostly failed.

Most probably a trolling question but I'll bite - and back on topic.

1) What gives you the right to define what is the correct behaviour of others and what is not allowed? What if a climate scientist is vegetarian, doesn't drive and uses only renewable energy at home? Are they allowed to fly then? Is the quality of their work a factor in what  CO2 emissions they're allowed to produce? Can that be applied to all workers? - I doubt that would be popular.  What about the energy consumed by running the climate models their work is likely to be based on - should all the model results be calculated with pen and paper? When started down this road where is the line drawn?

2) The statement supports the fallacy that the problem of climate change can be solved by personal choice. This is not true - the only way to make the fundamental changes required is by systemic change. It is often stated that the only way to change the established order is to be part of the establishment. By using other transport to air travel they would be setting themselves as 'other' - which automatically reduces their influence. 

3) What is the point of the question - it only makes any sense if some sort of action is taken. What would that be? Discount any science published by scientists that take flights? Sounds very Stalinist.

4) You say you're prolife? How many orphans have you fostered and/or adopted? Less than 10? - then I can discount all your views then can I ? - you're not walking the walk enough.

5) Even asking the question implies that scientists are aiming to persuade public opinion - no, they are producing science based on the scientific method. Public opinion and policies should be based on the scientific facts - scientist's job is to educate, not persuade. This is a key difference between scientists and civil rights activists.

Some advice:  You've recently joined the forum and  make posts and provocative statements randomly across the forum. It's equivalent to walking into a room full of strangers in which a long, sometimes ridiculous, sometimes enlightening discussion has been going on for years between a group of acquaintances and  immediately talking over everybody disrupting the conversation. Observe, read and slowly increase participation after gaining a grasp of the tone and rhythm of the threads - you never know you may learn something.


The point is that people arguing for an end to global warming, like Al Gore, who fly around almost weekly on jet planes, are giving people the perfect rationalization to ignore what they are saying. Sorry if you don't see that.
I never adopted someone, but I contribute heavily to my Church and its social programs, and spent 18 years working at ~minimum wage at a group home until it closed down in 2010, so I try to help others.

36
The rest / Re: Climate change activists should not fly
« on: April 17, 2019, 01:52:22 AM »
Quote
Well, I am not a climate change "activist" (though I am a bit of a prolife activist).

Prolife activists should not masturbate.  ;D

Correct.

Why? What does that have to do with pro-life?

Actually, as a Catholic, I believe no one should masturbate, which is why I replied to your post that way. But that is not something for law, because an innocent life is not at stake until conception. It is also a Mortal Sin to miss Mass on Holy Days and Days of Obligation, but I am not going to pass a law on that either. But when a helpless infant in the womb is involved, then the law should protect that infant.

38
The rest / Re: Climate change activists should not fly
« on: April 16, 2019, 10:45:34 PM »
Nice one, Neven.

Saying, "Well, I am not a climate change "activist" (though I am a bit of a prolife activist)." is basically saying I'm so obsessed with controlling women's bodies that I can't really be bothered with trying to help save all complex life forms on the planet.

So you are so obsessed with saving the furbish lousewort that you are willing to allow a million preborn babies be killed in America every year?

39
The rest / Re: Climate change activists should not fly
« on: April 16, 2019, 10:43:57 PM »
Quote
Well, I am not a climate change "activist" (though I am a bit of a prolife activist).

Prolife activists should not masturbate.  ;D

Correct.

40
Consequences / Re: World of 2030
« on: April 16, 2019, 08:03:21 PM »
Well, I am a short-term pessimist and long-term optimist. I think technology will catch up with the problem eventually.
I created two "Furry" backgrounds for my stories and role-playing. In the Mammaloids (currently being retconned) global warming is a second order issue...maybe a meter or two of sea level rise over the Third Millennium (the first order issue is Humanity fighting, and losing, a series of wars with genetically engineered anthropomorphic animals). In GURPS Aesop the year is 1994 but technology is at World War One levels, so global warming is hardly on the horizon (the anthropomorphic animals are magical in origin).

41
The rest / Re: Climate change activists should not fly
« on: April 16, 2019, 06:45:19 PM »
Well, I am not a climate change "activist" (though I am a bit of a prolife activist). I am considering flying on a Pilgrimage to the Holy Land my Parish is sponsoring...that is item one on my "bucket list" and that is the only way I am ever going to get there.

42
The rest / Re: How could I have done this better?
« on: April 16, 2019, 06:42:01 PM »
The trouble with not posting all of it is that I am not Bob Newhart. You need all the comments to get the context. So I PMed Neven (it took 15 PMs if I counted right) and he can read it at his leisure and pick out what to post and edit out.
Or, of course, just delete the PMs if he wishes.  :)

43
Consequences / Re: World of 2030
« on: April 16, 2019, 05:50:05 PM »
dnem, I think you underestimate how long people can convince themselves of what they want to believe. Even when a million Americans a year die of heat stroke, I suspect the deniers will still be going strong.

44
The rest / Re: How could I have done this better?
« on: April 16, 2019, 04:04:06 PM »
Well, perhaps I shouldn't have said forum, but they are certainly a denier community. It is actually devoted to a Furry web comic strip artist (very good strips, btw, which is why I am there), but most are Evangelical Fundamentalist Christians. For example, I once asked "What would the world be like if everyone had twice their IQ but still a Fallen Nature" and the first answer was that no one would fall for the evil Global Warming Hoax...that kind of stuff. I started the thread with a link to Ecosophia by John Michael Greer saying climate change activists are failing because they are "do as I say, not as I do" by doing things like flying all over the world. I thought that would be less controversial. Still ended up in a 8 page (20 posts per page) debate. Should I copy and paste this?

45
The rest / Climate change activists should not fly
« on: April 16, 2019, 12:57:20 PM »
You have to walk the walk, not just talk the talk. When activists fly around the world but say we have to cut carbon emissions, it send the message that you have to sacrifice but I don't. Activists for civil rights were thrown in prison, attacked by police dogs, tear gassed, etc. and have mostly triumphed. Activists for climate change too often are do what I say, not what I do and have mostly failed.

46
Consequences / Re: Health Effects of Climate Change
« on: April 16, 2019, 12:48:21 PM »
gerontocrat, it has been warned for a lot more than a decade. I once read a "Golden Age" scifi story where explorers went to Venus to get antibiotics from the fungus jungles and swamps of the planet, because overuse of antibiotics had made all terrestrial ones useless.

47
The rest / Re: How could I have done this better?
« on: April 16, 2019, 12:40:15 PM »
Well, it is a denier forum (which was one reason I toned down the pessimism). I guess it was a lost cause, but I wanted to do better.
Thanks.

48
The rest / How could I have done this better?
« on: April 16, 2019, 02:04:43 AM »
On this thread I purposely stated the optimistic end of my range of opinion on AGW, and it was still too extreme for the forum.
What tips do you have for any future debates I may have?
Do you have any answers to the people's arguments?
http://www.rhjunior.com/Forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=5673

49
Arctic sea ice / Re: Glossary ... for newbies and others
« on: April 15, 2019, 10:39:27 PM »
What is a "saddle collapse"?

50
Consequences / Re: World of 2030
« on: April 15, 2019, 10:26:29 PM »
The flames of this flame war could account for a percentage of observed global warming.  :(

Pages: [1] 2