Deaths from climate change

[cyrano]

I'm sorry, I'm not into religion. It's just that I read your footer too late...

 

[user 37518]

I'm sorry, I'm not into religion. It's just that I read your footer too late...

So now you are attacking me personally, since I haven't spoken about religion. But your attack on me still doesn't support your argument.

 

[crazydoc]

So if the future of the climate is just a guess, and if changes are made to mitigate global warming, that will cause some distress among some segments of the population, but likely no catastrophic and hopefully controllable sequelae. But if no changes are made to control energy trapping, and if increasingly serious events do occur and continue to worsen, it will almost certainly be too late to make any effective changes to control it, at least in the near (decades/centuries long) term.

A stitch in time...

But of course most of us have no vested interest in this, except for our descendants.

BTW John, is that "1000 year" weather event affecting you down there?

 

[AnalogPackrat]

So if the future of the climate is just a guess, and if changes are made to mitigate global warming, that will cause some distress among some segments of the population, but likely no catastrophic and hopefully controllable sequelae. But if no changes are made to control energy trapping, and if increasingly serious events do occur and continue to worsen, it will almost certainly be too late to make any effective changes to control it, at least in the near (decades/centuries long) term.

Yeah, you've made quite a few assumptions there. What if the "mitigation" is completely unneccessary or ineffective? You still think it's OK to radically change the world and make others suffer on a collection of guesses?

A stitch in time...

But of course most of us have no vested interest in this, except for our descendants.

We all have a vested interest in not destroying our economy and society while countries like China take full advantage of our stupid "mitigation" while doing more of the exact things you think we should stop. Moronic.

BTW John, is that "1000 year" weather event affecting you down there?

I've experienced several "100 year" events. All that shows is how little science actually knows about the historic frequency of such events.

 

[shabtek]

why don't we all do the 3 'R's?
(not a pirate joke)

 

[shabtek]

I mean as a matter of national policy?

 

[shabtek]

and business policy...err I guess that answers my question.

 

[crazydoc]

"There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know."
Donald Rumsfeld

 

[JohnRoberts]

So if the future of the climate is just a guess, and if changes are made to mitigate global warming, that will cause some distress among some segments of the population, but likely no catastrophic and hopefully controllable sequelae. But if no changes are made to control energy trapping, and if increasingly serious events do occur and continue to worsen, it will almost certainly be too late to make any effective changes to control it, at least in the near (decades/centuries long) term.

that is a bit simplistic view of the climate, energy trapping is just one aspect.

A stitch in time...

?

But of course most of us have no vested interest in this, except for our descendants.

In the short term it is mostly virtue signaling or warm and fuzzy feel-goodism.

We all should want to leave this world a better place. The claims of some existential threat from climate change is clearly hyperbolic overblown fear mongering.

BTW John, is that "1000 year" weather event affecting you down there?

certainly a 20 year event... My next door neighbor had water in his den, and the last time that happened was a couple decades ago. My floor is several inches higher than his and I have dry feet. My sump pump ran almost 24 hours to clear water out of my crawl space.
This picture was taken well before the runoff peaked. You can just see the top of the 3' diameter front culvert pipe. At max flow water was a few inches higher than the top of the pipe with a whirlpool reaching down to the pipe mouth.

This is from across the street the next day looking at the outlet end of the same pipe. You can see my house with the light colored roof (to save energy in the summer). The gray house right behind mine is the guy who had water in his den. Those plants with huge leaves are called elephant ears and they were partially blocking the output flow. Thats what they do to create swamps . You can see how the fast water flow tore them up. Not visible in that picture about 10' down stream from there is a new sand bar formed by all the sediment that had built up inside the pipe and got flushed out. I sent this picture to the state highway department because it is a state road and keeping the culvert clear and rain ditches flowing is their responsibility. We'll see if they respond. My speculation is that we would have surely flowed more water if the culvert was completely clear but I won't speculate if my neighbor would have still flooded.

The flooding over ran my raised bed garden and today I pulled a bunch of branches out of it. My second growth squash got covered up with leaves and debris but I feel lucky.

[edit- in MS we call this weather.../edit]

JR

 

[Matador]

Ad populum fallacy, I don't know what is the point for that graph, and why the center for climate change publishes that graph, is it supposed to be evidence of something?

It proved Planck was right...did you not read the post?

 

[user 37518]

It proved Planck was right...did you not read the post?

Ok, you proved Planck right, but it still doesn't answer my question, which was: what is the purpose of presenting such a graph (not by you, by the climate committee or whatever its called), is it supposed to be support for the evidence of something?

 

[JohnRoberts]

"There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know."
Donald Rumsfeld

I recall when he became secretary of defense under president Bush.

JR

 

[user 37518]

I recall when he became secretary of defense under president Bush.

JR

Is it my imagination or Kamala Harris just recently said something very similar?

 

[AnalogPackrat]

"There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know."
Donald Rumsfeld

You can't make valid policy decisions based on the last two categories.

 

[crazydoc]

that is a bit simplistic view of the climate, energy trapping is just one aspect.

JR

To me that is the crux of the problem. So, educate me.

Glad you survived this without bad problems.

 

[crazydoc]

You can't make valid policy decisions based on the last two categories.

Exactly.

 

[JohnRoberts]

To me that is the crux of the problem. So, educate me.

Climate is complex and that is only one term in a simultaneous multi-variable equation. Simplistically we have energy input from the sun, minus the heat loss radiated away, heat reflected/blocked by the upper atmosphere. We have historical records showing global temperature drops correlated with massive volcanic eruptions. This is in fact one avenue to consider for active cooling of our planet should we ever need to. Another variable is heat absorption in our oceans. I have speculated how reducing the ocean surface temperatures could reduce severity of tropical storms that accumulate energy from warm ocean waters. This is impractical with todays technology, but climate remedies need to be viewed over a much longer time scale.

I have shared multiple times, that the earth is warming. This IMO is settled science. The arguments remaining are over what should we do in response? The focus on reducing atmospheric CO2 is somewhat problematic, especially when proposed as the obvious remedy. This is why I have cited texts from people with different fields of expertise. One is a physicist/nuclear scientist with expertise in climate modeling and data analysis (Koonin). Another with expertise in cost analysis in government policy wrt to GDP growth out decades into the future (Lomborg). My third source (that I haven't finished reading) is a self described philosopher (Epstein) who dissects the state of modern information dissemination, distortions, manipulations, and flawed world views.

This is too complex for a simple 25 words or less explanation, but IMO we need the potential wealth from inexpensive fossil fuels to lift more people out of poverty, and pay for the adaption we actually need to make against rising sea levels and the like. Driving an EV will not make a measurable difference there other than a feel good exercise. A thoughtful response to climate change involves a cost benefit tradeoff between climate policy and future GDP growth. We also need to pursue climate research and future new technologies. IMO we should be fully embracing modern nuclear energy technology as a clean bridge energy source for the next several decades.

I am repeating myself but in my judgement the urgency painting this as a world ending existential threat is just a strategy to suspend critical thinking about a practical path forward. I just caught part of a new Bill Nye special series that appears more scare tactics.

It is possible to hold two truths in mind at the same time. #1 the globe is warming, and #2 the government policy is somewhere between ineffective and a blatant power grab.

Glad you survived this without bad problems.

I did better than my neighbor, and the state HWY has not cleared out the elephant ears yet. From where I sit this was just another bad rain event. 4-5" of rain in only a few hours causes flash flooding on low ground (like where I live). I don't watch much mainstream news, but besides you, my brother who lives in SOCAL reached out to check on me, so apparently this weather event was widely reported in CA. I could see the storm coming as it dumped a lot of rain in TX a day earlier.

Thanks for your concern but no problemo.


This was not the high water mark, but is has already runoff. My grass loves all the extra water.

JR

 

[AnalogPackrat]

Exactly.

Yet that is exactly what is happening.

 

[AnalogPackrat]

Here is an example of the kind of subtle manipulation of public opinion that is occurring on a large scale.

 

[JohnRoberts]

In a bit of positive news, Japan has reversed their rigid anti-nuclear policy adopted after Fukushima. They are restarting some shuttered nuclear energy plants. Of course they will be using modern nuclear technology that are safer in the event of future earthquakes and tsunamis for any new plants.

Germany is still on track to shut down their last three nuclear energy plants despite uncertain russian gas supplies.

JR

 

[JohnRoberts]

To answer the question you didn't ask "where do elephant ear plants come from?" the wash down stream from up hill (another neighbors rain ditches uphill from me).

There are a few relatively new clusters of elephant ears in my mid-side rain ditch 50-75 yards from that culvert. I mow/string trim my ditches every couple weeks so that is brand new growth. These plants apparently propagate by floating downstream.

Their broad leafs prevent water evaporation and put down roots to slow water flow. At this stage they are easier to cut. The ones blocking my culvert pipe outlet are better dealt with using a back hoe. They all came from upstream of me.

JR