Information

Climate Concerns

The "CLIMATE CONCERNS" group is dedicated to discussion regarding the topic of the ever present and serious issue of changes to our climate due to the introduction into the atmosphere of human induced effects which prove harmful to the environment and which eventually may prove destructive to our planet. 

Members: 51
Latest Activity: Jan 3

Reference/Research Sites

Discussion Forum

How Woody Guthrie can help us fight for science

Started by Joan Denoo Jan 3. 0 Replies

Oklahoma, the home of protest singer Woody Guthrie, provides an example of resistance in the 1930s class and culture wars between rural and urban values. If Woody could use his voice to speak up, so…Continue

Tags: method, Permaculture, soil, voices, farming

Framing Climate Destabilization

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Bertold Brautigan Dec 9, 2016. 22 Replies

The words we use and the images they evoke shape public comprehension of Catastrophic Climate Destabilization's immanence. Here are a few terms from the past few days. It's a tiny…Continue

Tags: communicating climate science, Climate Destabilization, framing

Jet Stream Mayhem begins Tues

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Ruth Anthony-Gardner Dec 3, 2016. 3 Replies

Siberian air…Continue

Tags: jet stream waves

Comment Wall

Comment

You need to be a member of Climate Concerns to add comments!

Comment by Donald L. Engel on December 11, 2016 at 1:21am

Ruth, on page 10 of this thread, I posted a chart showing 420,000 years of climate history.  It shows that we are coming out of the last of 5 warming periods.  And while we are nearing the temperature peaks attained by the previous four warming periods.  We aren't there yet.  Mankind was not on this earth duiring the previous four warming periods, and yet they warmed along the same general trend as what we are experiencing today.  How can you possibly blame mankind for the warming cycle this time?  Our Industrial Revolution would be about the width of a hair at the end of that chart.  Can we please get off the "Climate Change" routine?  Mankind has nothing to do with it.

I am for clean air.  I am against acid rain, smog, and all the other atmospheric problems that are bothering our cities.  And we are working toward electric cars which will help tremendously in this regard.  If you look up the ingredients of smog, you will see that CO2 isn't even mentioned.  From Wikipedia:

Smog is a type of air pollutant. The word "smog" was coined in the early 20th century as a portmanteau of the words smoke and fog to refer to smoky fog, its opacity, and odour.[1] The word was then intended to refer to what was sometimes known as pea soup fog, a familiar and serious problem in London from the 19th century to the mid 20th century. This kind of visible air pollution is composed of nitrogen oxides, sulfur oxides, ozone, smoke or particulates among others (less visible pollutants include carbon monoxide, CFCs and radioactive sources).[citation needed] Human-made smog is derived from coal emissions, vehicular emissions, industrial emissions, forest and agricultural fires and photochemical reactions of these emissions.

That is the stuff I want the EPA to clean up.

Comment by Ruth Anthony-Gardner on December 10, 2016 at 7:47pm

I'm a bit confused, Donald. You're for the EPA protecting clean air and water, unless it's a global scale threat from climate change? Is that because one country alone can't completely combat global threats? Are you in favor of an international effort to counter such threats, like the Paris Accord? But EPA actions directly impact our ability to do our part in cooperative actions.

Comment by Donald L. Engel on December 10, 2016 at 4:24pm

No, Ruth.  Just that part that concerns "man-made" global warming.  I'm sure you're not surprised at that, since it is what I've been saying for the last year, or two.

I'm all for keeping the air clean.

Comment by Ruth Anthony-Gardner on December 10, 2016 at 1:40pm

So you're in favor of eliminating the EPA, Donald?

Comment by Donald L. Engel on December 10, 2016 at 12:54pm

I think it's the first thing Trump has done right.  He had Al Gore in to give his spiel on "Man-made" global warming, and then confirmed his choice was Pruitt.

Comment by Bertold Brautigan on December 9, 2016 at 5:20pm

Foxes guarding henhouses abound.

Comment by Ruth Anthony-Gardner on December 9, 2016 at 4:05pm

The apparent decision to put Oklahoma state attorney general Scott Pruitt in charge of the EPA is “like putting an arsonist in charge of fighting fires”.    Sierra Club

Comment by April Niccolai on October 7, 2016 at 2:42pm

Its so refreshing to arrive on a site that has a climate change section like this one. Keep it up! Joined, and will be following.

Comment by Ruth Anthony-Gardner on September 28, 2016 at 5:21pm

Jennifer Francis:

“We’re in this new world that’s much much warmer with much less sea ice and that’s changing the way the atmosphere behaves,” said Francis. “It’s an interesting time to be studying this, but the bad news is, we’re watching this planet fall apart.”

Jennifer Francis image

earthnullschool screen capture of jet stream over US 4:11PM 9/28/16

I found their story interesting to, Daniel. Because it was expected climate deniers would misconstrue their algorithm to "prove" CO2 wasn't responsible for climate change, their article was initially rejected.

Comment by Daniel W on September 20, 2016 at 3:09pm
Here is a tale of two scientists who, in an effort to counter bias regarding their alternative climate change paradigm, published under pseudonyms.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/09/19/scien...

Their research, analysis, and conclusions should stand or fall on the merit, or lack of merit, contained within. Not on who they are. Kind of an interesting story.
 

Members (51)

 
 
 

line

Update Your Membership :

Membership

line

line

Nexus on Social Media:

line

Latest Activity

© 2017   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service