ADVERTISEMENT

A sensible discussion on climate change/global warming

I can't really smell the smoke ever. My eyes just sting (I wear contacts).

I try to stay indoors as much as possible when the air quality is poor.
From experience if your close to the fire a mask will help with the large particulate matter but farther away what you get is the smaller more mobile matter that causes more issues like asthma, eye irritation ect...
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrianNole777
I can't really smell the smoke ever. My eyes just sting (I wear contacts).

I try to stay indoors as much as possible when the air quality is poor.
Wise choice If only Canada had more controlled burning the problem could be mitigated.

Too many regulations?

“Essentially, you’ve handcuffed folks — foresters and silviculturists — from being able to get off successful prescribed burns because we made the rules so onerous and so restrictive” causing more wildfire fuel to be left on the forest floor, said Sarah Bros, a forester and co-owner at Merin Forest Management based in North Bay, Ontario, who has done prescribed burning. “Harvesting doesn’t do what Mother Nature does.” NYT
 
I think it is a bit of a false equivalence to compare test scores and financial well being to death. It’s difficult to be sure, but businesses and financials can be rebuilt and kids will continue to be educated. Did people refuse to go to hospitals because they scared of mitigation efforts or because some of those places were treating COVID patients in the hallways? Maybe that’s the cost of not mitigating. There are/were other ways to deal with all those problems you mentioned and still mitigate.
“I don’t want wear a mask because it messes with my mental health”. Seriously, buttercup?😒
I don't know how much the masks messed with mental health. My view is that if wearing a mask messed you up mentally you were not very resilient in the first place. Masks just didn't work and people really knew that. People also knew the doctors office and hospitals were full of sick people. If you went there you were more likely to get sick and the mask wasn't going to help you. Mitigation efforts slowed the spread but nothing was going to stop it once it was out.
 
I think it is a bit of a false equivalence to compare test scores and financial well being to death. It’s difficult to be sure, but businesses and financials can be rebuilt and kids will continue to be educated. Did people refuse to go to hospitals because they scared of mitigation efforts or because some of those places were treating COVID patients in the hallways? Maybe that’s the cost of not mitigating. There are/were other ways to deal with all those problems you mentioned and still mitigate.
“I don’t want wear a mask because it messes with my mental health”. Seriously, buttercup?😒
I'm not going to argue with you, but there is a bunch of good science out there indicating everything I put out there.................I don't care if anyone wears a mask.............personal choice. I grew tired of posting peer reviewed science a year ago and just laugh at folks now. We are well beyond arguing over this in a political fashion, so I won't. Besides you totally missed the point of not being able to figure out which mitigation effort causes what outcomes. Multi-variable analysis only goes so far in an open complex system.
 
Last edited:
Wise choice If only Canada had more controlled burning the problem could be mitigated.

Too many regulations?

“Essentially, you’ve handcuffed folks — foresters and silviculturists — from being able to get off successful prescribed burns because we made the rules so onerous and so restrictive” causing more wildfire fuel to be left on the forest floor, said Sarah Bros, a forester and co-owner at Merin Forest Management based in North Bay, Ontario, who has done prescribed burning. “Harvesting doesn’t do what Mother Nature does.” NYT
I will mention this, Canada has so much forest that it is really inconceiveable that they could do prescribed burn in any meaningful fashion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BelemNole
Across Canada, there are a handful of controlled burns each year, according to partial figures compiled by the National Forestry Database. Foresters seeking to perform them must go through a lengthy process to get approval from a province.

The burns are generally unpopular in places like public parks, and even more so when they go wrong. In 1995, more than 1,000 people were evacuated after a prescribed burn got out of control and threatened the town of Dubreuilville, Ontario.

In some fire seasons, the duration of the approval process exceeds the narrow window when weather conditions are favorable for controlled burns.

The rules minimize the risk of an out-of-control prescribed burn, but they increase the risk of an out-of-control wildfire. NYT
 
I will mention this, Canada has so much forest that it is really inconceiveable that they could do prescribed burn in any meaningful fashion.
The Canadian as well as the various Province governments have stated that their budgets for forest fire control had shortfalls in funding which didn’t allow them to cover an all hands on deck effort to control the fires. Canada has far more wilderness acreage than the US.
 
The Canadian as well as the various Province governments have stated that their budgets for forest fire control had shortfalls in funding which didn’t allow them to cover an all hands on deck effort to control the fires. Canada has far more wilderness acreage than the US.
With roughly the same total land mass, Canada is 23% wilderness versus 5% in the US...............Canada has the second most, behind Russia.
 
The Canadian as well as the various Province governments have stated that their budgets for forest fire control had shortfalls in funding which didn’t allow them to cover an all hands on deck effort to control the fires. Canada has far more wilderness acreage than the US.
Is Daniel Boone in your family tree? Lewis and Clark (not Griswald)? Asking for a fellow forester. :)
I’ve always been curious about what she was hiding under her head covering but now we know…nuthin’
Now, was that absolutely necessary? :)
 
Last edited:
Yeah, okay.
SO grateful for my old friend Mr. Ignore Button.
Have a great day.
Almost a skirmish? Keep up the great work with your always interesting factoids about the weather and our planet as a whole. "What the world needs now..... is love sweet love....."
Just know that Burt Bacharach and Jim Cantore are in your corner. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 89nole and goldmom
With roughly the same total land mass, Canada is 23% wilderness versus 5% in the US...............Canada has the second most, behind Russia.
According to our world in data as of 2020 the US has 34% of its area covered in forest. Canada is at 39%.

Other countries of note:

Russia - 49%
Brazil - 59%
Finland - 74%

The highest is Suriname with 97%

 
blob
 
Hell......you can't say the fossil fuel industry hasn't got their monies worth
 
Last edited by a moderator:
FYI: https://www.nature.com/articles/nature22030?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
While global deforestation induced by human land use has been quantified, the drivers and extent of simultaneous woody plant encroachment (WPE) into open areas are only regionally known. WPE has important consequences for ecosystem functioning, global carbon balances and human economies. Here we report, using high-resolution satellite imagery, that woody vegetation cover over sub-Saharan Africa increased by 8% over the past three decades and that a diversity of drivers, other than CO2, were able to explain 78% of the spatial variation in this trend. A decline in burned area along with warmer, wetter climates drove WPE, although this has been mitigated in areas with high population growth rates, and high and low extremes of herbivory, specifically browsers. These results confirm global greening trends, thereby bringing into question widely held theories about declining terrestrial carbon balances and desert expansion. Importantly, while global drivers such as climate and CO2 may enhance the risk of WPE, managing fire and herbivory at the local scale provides tools to mitigate continental WPE.

 
Last edited:
Back to climate change

I just read where two bouys in the keys measured temps over 100 degrees

Ok, we need way more info than that
How deep from surface are they reading

What is water depth where they are reading
Atlantic or gulf side

High or low tide?

They are trying to tie it to global warming, if this were true wouldn’t the adjacent buoys have the same high readings?
 
Back to climate change

I just read where two bouys in the keys measured temps over 100 degrees

Ok, we need way more info than that
How deep from surface are they reading

What is water depth where they are reading
Atlantic or gulf side

High or low tide?

They are trying to tie it to global warming, if this were true wouldn’t the adjacent buoys have the same high readings?
My question is what are the historical readings? Are these records and if so how much over. We see they are above average but that doesnt tell us much.
 
This makes pretty good sense fundamentally as well as empirically based on the 2009 / 2020 humanity reductions of CO2 production during the great recession and covid lockdowns.

Hard to poke holes in his logic.

GO NOLES!!!
If holes cant be poked he will be called biased.
 
  • Like
Reactions: trunole1
So, does that mean it's settled science?
No. I'm pretty sure that side never claimed it was. Climate change advocates say things like settled science, end debate, without question ect... When there is science to the contrary they are called deniers.

Like I've stated before I don't think we have enough data to support either argument. It could be human induced climate change but it also may not be. Were working with very small sets of data to say one way or another.
 
Everyone is focusing on warming, but there is a major problem happening right here in the US. After 40 plus years at working to clean our lakes and rivers, they are polluted again.

The most important thing for survival of the species is water. No water, no life.

That aside, having had a sizable back yard farm for 22 years, keeping constant records of soil temperatures, there were some notable variations, but this is only what was going on in my backyard.

More noticeable were the effects that constant spraying by someone on the street, had on my honeybees. I made many efforts to get the guy to spray after 5pm or before 9am to no avail. The effects of his spraying resulted in repeated years of dead bees, not in the winter which would be common, but in September and October.

There is a cycle to pollutants, and one affects another. Spraying plus rain, and those pollutants go into the ground water.
 
No. I'm pretty sure that side never claimed it was. Climate change advocates say things like settled science, end debate, without question ect... When there is science to the contrary they are called deniers.

Like I've stated before I don't think we have enough data to support either argument. It could be human induced climate change but it also may not be. Were working with very small sets of data to say one way or another.
The algae bloom is most definitely related to humans deforesting the amazon, and chemicals getting into the river which runs to the sea.
 
The algae bloom is most definitely related to humans deforesting the amazon, and chemicals getting into the river which runs to the sea.
Chemicals are the biggie but I agree. Deforestation is having a impact in ways we don't realize. Even though its rebounding in certain areas some of the damage cant be undone in the short term.
 
  • Like
Reactions: goldmom
Everyone is focusing on warming, but there is a major problem happening right here in the US. After 40 plus years at working to clean our lakes and rivers, they are polluted again.

The most important thing for survival of the species is water. No water, no life.

That aside, having had a sizable back yard farm for 22 years, keeping constant records of soil temperatures, there were some notable variations, but this is only what was going on in my backyard.

More noticeable were the effects that constant spraying by someone on the street, had on my honeybees. I made many efforts to get the guy to spray after 5pm or before 9am to no avail. The effects of his spraying resulted in repeated years of dead bees, not in the winter which would be common, but in September and October.

There is a cycle to pollutants, and one affects another. Spraying plus rain, and those pollutants go into the ground water.
Sorry I'm not following the bee story. Who is it that was spraying and why?
 
Figure 3. U.S. Annual Heat Wave Index, 1895–2021
Figure 3

Figure 1. Heat Wave Characteristics in the United States by Decade, 1961–2021
Figure 1

If you look at the two figures the bottom one from the 60's through now shows a rise in intensity and duration and frequency. If you look at the first figure which is from the 1890's it tells a different story.

 
  • Like
Reactions: F4Gary and trunole1
I don't know.

A scientist here would be great.
*a good climate scientist… probably more than one, with the understanding that they could be wrong, and preferably one who doesn’t start sentences with, “the science says.”

Most opining on vaccines, climate, and transgenderism are simply parrots and don’t know what they’re talking about, no matter what opinion they voice, largely.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: trunole1
No, wearing a mask didn't kill anyone but to say there were no negative effects is likely wrong as well. On the other hand its hard to say if masks stopped anyone from dying or getting sick. They could have but its hard to say without a situation where masks were universal and equally effective.

With the global warming thing I agree its probably best to plan for were all going to drown or burn in a fire in 5 years and hope its not that bad. Less carbon emissions and pollution in general is a good thing along with renewable energy and others.
Masking of the non n95 variety was a waste of time. Masking children was actively harmful. Masking teachers was actively harmful. Masking was mostly performative.
 
I don't know how much the masks messed with mental health. My view is that if wearing a mask messed you up mentally you were not very resilient in the first place. Masks just didn't work and people really knew that. People also knew the doctors office and hospitals were full of sick people. If you went there you were more likely to get sick and the mask wasn't going to help you. Mitigation efforts slowed the spread but nothing was going to stop it once it was out.
I think it likely played into personality/mood disorder space features for many people. I still know people who mask inside. Anecdotally, they’re rigid, rule driven and anxious with a little self righteousness thrown in. The mask became a symbol of morality.
 
I think it likely played into personality/mood disorder space features for many people. I still know people who mask inside. Anecdotally, they’re rigid, rule driven and anxious with a little self righteousness thrown in. The mask became a symbol of morality.
I expected there to be a rule where the jabbed wear a different color mask as well but I guess they figured one symbol was enough.
 
I expected there to be a rule where the jabbed wear a different color mask as well but I guess they figured one symbol was enough.
The mental health aspect of Covid and how people responded to it is quite interesting. Long Covid appears to have a psychiatric component to it. Views on Covid correlate with development of long Covid. Also, psychiatric issues prior to developing Covid predict long Covid.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT