ocean conditions are changing due to Rapid Global Climate Shift

THE AUSTRALIAN | Greens slam merger as symbolic retreat on climate change

 

Hang on... I saw that movie - when Yellowstone blew, didn't they build and escape in boats?

 

I've enjoyed your posts, and learned from them. But maybe it's time to narrow the focus, and start posting items more directly related to how climate change affects our oceans.

 

I take offence to that! ( just kidding).
I've read nearly all your posts.
I believe that global warming is a reality.
And while we are adding to it, are we the cause?
What I don't believe, is that man, collectively, will do anything about it.
At least, until it is too late.
There are too many other problems to deal with/distract us.

 

Well, it has all the hallmarks! There is a difference between the scientific method (observation, hypothesis, testing, theory, testing, law) than the relentless and unshakeable faith of those that claim man is wrecking the planet and we must save it now now now. Mainly by impoverishing and enslaving people. It is typical for AGW-ers to seek to shut down debate altogether, and resort to rhetorical trickery and colossal hypocrisy. I have no problems with talking about religion, even if you want a brutal dagger fight, but it's the sore losers with gags that annoy me.

This thread is purported to be about rising oceans because of human input. My contribution so far has been to point out that the human input is of a wholly different kind...ie not CO2. Yes, the climate is changing and warming, and no it is not the AGW hypothesis. I believe Dr Brown has a valid theory but am not interested in red herring squabbles about it or how he is studiously ignored and marginalised. Kudos to him for refusing to compromise, and also kudos to Lord Monckton. Since the AGW methods are bankrupting us and depriving us of freedom (yes we are also progressively losing freedom to build and use boats!!), I thought I'd make an effort to inject a different view and to try to bring some perspective and a different approach to problems perceived and real. Btw, watch out if you're sailing in Arctic waters, there's craploads of ice, and it's swarming with polar bears which are known AGW-activist eaters. For your riposte, I request some ideas and predictions to do with how much longer we little folk will be permitted to use the oceans and waterways, and specific and realistic methods we can improve our stewardship of them. Otherwise, it's just a political propaganda thread and I'll leave it as a playpen for nutters and agitators. My special interests would be: realistic antifouling, efficient and cheap hybrid drives, and more info about legislation actually/or attempting to ban us peasants from the seas. Also, PM me for theological debate because if you post it publically I'll reply to it publically.

Best Regards,

Stefan

 

Now you're applauding Monkton, too?!? Even if everything else you said made sense (which it didn't), you'd have lost me right there.

There's nothing admirable about a failure to compromise when a person is dead wrong. And Monkton is worse than wrong. He's a charlatan and a con man.

No, I'm not going to debate theology with you -- publicly or privately. I'll just point out that I'm not required to swallow foolishness or ignorance, just because someone hooks God's name onto it.

add: I didn't say AGW is 97% settled science; science is never 'settled.' I said 97% of scientists believe AGW is real and happening. And that isn't a myth, son; it's a flat statement of fact.

 

http://climatechallengervoyage.net/

 

Interesting site. Thanks for posting it.

 

http://iniwijnen.com/

 

CLIMATE CHANGE COULD ROCK YOUR BOAT

Still unsure about the pace of climate change? Or whether it’s even happening at all? Ask a Rear-Admiral, suggests Eddy Canfor-Dumas
I was invited to speak at a mind-boggling conference recently on climate change and its effects on health and security.
It was organised by the British Medical Journal in the plush London headquarters of the British Medical Association, and it brought together medics, medical and other academics, senior military officers, researchers, figures from the world of business and insurance, and many others, including me.
The morning was spent scaring the bejeezus out of us.
Presentation after presentation, from world experts in their fields, showed how the negative effects of climate change are not just the stuff of future nightmares - they're happening now.
Especially significant was the contribution of Rear-Admiral Neil Morisetti, the MoD/FCO Climate and Energy Security Envoy. That the UK Ministry of Defence regards climate change as an established fact, which warrants the appointment of a rear admiral to spread the message worldwide, should serve as a serious wake-up call to anyone who is still sceptical or unsure. Their US cousins, the Department of Defense, are if anything even more convinced.
Morisetti highlighted the prediction that climate change will have a serious negative impact on the UK - the idea that we'll simply be able to cast off 'Lifeboat Britain' from the rest of the world and enjoy the delights of growing Chardonnay in the Yorkshire Dales is dangerously deluded. We source much of our food from parts of the globe that will either be drying out or regularly inundated with flood waters, and intensifying competition for resources is expected to heighten political and social instability and the risk of violent conflict. The recent riots in England suggest we will not be immune.
Add to this a raft of warnings on interconnected health risks and by lunchtime I was ready to crawl back home and bury my head under the duvet.
I resisted the temptation not just because I was due to speak in the afternoon but because, time and again, speakers from stage and floor kept asking why the urgency of this message was not being heard by policy-makers or the public at large. In fact, post-Copenhagen and 'ClimateGate' the proponents of climate change have lost ground. The issue has slipped out of the news and down the policy agenda, aided by the financial crash and economic slump. It was this question that kept me engaged as much as the chilling excellence of the various presentations.
And as I listened a thought started to grow in my head: We have to tell a better story.
So far, the 'merchants of doubt' have managed to spin a tale of improbability, uncertainty and scepticism that has resonated with the unwillingness of very many people to accept what an overwhelming number of scientists are saying. Their message might be backed up with facts, figures, graphs and tables but as Drew Westen explains in The Political Brain, when it comes to engaging with the public the 18th century philosopher David Hume was right - reason is a slave to the emotions. And the story that connects with the emotions - true or not - will win the day.
My background is story-telling - screenwriting (I've actually written three TV disaster movies) - and I strongly believe that narrative is almost hard-wired into our DNA. It's how we learn, how we make sense of the world. Our personal story - the one we tell ourself about ourself - is what gives our life meaning.
To date, the story of climate change, as told by those who have the vast majority of the facts and figures on their side, is a story of loss; either total loss (the end of human life on this planet) or the loss of much of what we hold dear in the economically advanced parts of the world - air travel, carbon-hungry gadgets, and the freedom to spend, spend, spend on whatever we like. No wonder the merchants of doubt find such an attentive audience.
To convince the sceptics, the undecided and the don't cares that climate change is real, man-made and really very dangerous, we need a story that is deeper, richer and much more powerful than the one currently being told. Warning people, scaring people, is not enough - there has to be a happy ending, sunlit uplands, that will motivate them to take on the challenge ahead and keep at it over many years till a victory is won.
A tall order. But I have a few ideas...

 

High food prices gave birth to the Arab Spring.

Will Tropical diseases and parasites spreading northward give birth to a European spring ?

 

So much for the happy spin on things....

 

Hopefully government policy makers, military, civil defense ...consider these scenarios and create defensive strategies.

You saw how stressful bird flu was.

 

Ireland, while concerned over global warming, can't afford to do anything about it.....
Until 2050 !!?!?!

 

Ok...perhaps Ireland will just be the collateral damage.

Many countries will cease to exist.

Sustainably will be brought back via natural selection