Just found the above chart backing up what I have been saying for years.
Global warming is a wholly natural event, if humanity disappeared tonight, global warming would still happen.
I don't think you understand how global warming works. Do you think it just started recently?
I'll take the experts over someone that can't google.
ahh the usual tactic of deflection. “You don’t understand” or the other one is “you must support big oil companies”. Go ahead and commit the fallacy of appeal to authority to these agenda driven self elected “experts”.
Btw your opinion is by far the consensus now and I’m well aware my opinion is in the minority. It just shows how well the communist agenda has successfully converted the masses. Enjoy your future bug meals.
So anyone who disagrees with your view is following a "communist agenda"? Would you cop yourself on FFS!
Still standing by my point that desertification is having an enormous impact on Global Warming.
Top photo is of the Sahara desert. For context the Sahara alone is more than 130 times the size of Ireland. So imagine 130 Irelands of desert that’s baking in the sun 365 days a year…. Second picture is what it looks like on a global scale.
no. That’s not what I said. People are being manipulated into believing a communist agenda. There is a distinction.
reference to your maps , so what . ? What they’re displaying is there’s warm places and cooler places. Is this the level of “evidence” we are using to compound the existence of climate change ?
Yeah, my comment still stands: would you cop yourself on FFS! 🙄
Epper si muove
When it was shown that there are indeed wildfires happening now you deflected rather than acknowledging that you had made a mistake and we're wrong. Such behaviour is immune to evidence or reason.
Jesus I dunno why i bother, look at size and scale of it. All over the world
Almost none of that land is growing anything so there fore it’s not capturing any greenhouse gases & storing it in the ground.
The point you are missing is that most of those deserts are defined by geography and lack of rainfall. They far predate man made global warming and are entirely natural and inevitable. The fact that you keep banging on about it shows you haven't a clue of the issues driving global warming.
That’s your view on it & i think it’s bullshit. Most of the desertification has been caused by human’s. It’s absolute fact. And most get plenty of seasonal rainfall, it just runs off as floods because the ground is like concrete.
Illness & diseases are natural things too but we don’t just leave those to nature.
Have they always been deserts? 🧐
Mostly within a certain geological epoc.
There is a problem of desertification of agricultural lands - but this represents a relatively small area compared to the natural deserts we have had since the last ice age.
so maybe britanica will be a bad source in some people’s opinion but I reckon it’s fairly scientific:
https://www.britannica.com/video/179436/Overview-impact-Sahara-discussion-desert-climate-change#:~:text=The%20Sahara%20had%20once%20been,rains%20had%20revived%20the%20desert.
It looks like the argument that I heard back in the 80s by the early Irish greens that Ireland will be a desert by the millennium if we don't all go back to farming by horse.
Care to provide evidence of this or is it yet another of your made up claims?
It's my recollection of their doomsday fantasies.
I also remember being told in school in the 80s that acid rain would destroy all our lakes and forests, and then suddenly that doomer fantasy met science.
The situation turned out to be much more complex than had been predicted. The acidity of a lake is determined as much by the acidity of the local soil and vegetation as it is by acid rain. Many lakes in north-eastern America, dead in the 1980s, had plenty of fish in 1900. It was surmised by environmentalists that 20th-century sulphur dioxide emissions had choked these lakes to death with acid rain. But the NAPAP showed many of these lakes were acidic and fishless even before European settlement in America. Fish survived better in these lakes around 1900 because of extensive slash and burn logging in the area. The soil became more alkaline as the acid vegetation was removed, reducing the acid flowing into the lakes and making the water hospitable to fish. Logging stopped in 1915, acid soils and vegetation returned and the lakes became acidic again. The study also found that in many cases forests were suffering debilitation due to insects or drought and not acid rain.
The NAPAP reported in 1990. The findings were explosive: first, acid rain had not injured forests or crops in US or Canada; second, acid rain had no observable effect on human health; third, only a small number of lakes had been acidified by acid rain and these could be rehabilitated by adding lime to the water. In summary, acid rain was a nuisance, not a catastrophe.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/science/what-made-the-acid-rain-myth-finally-evaporate-1.900603
That really just confirms what I just said.
it’s your assertion that these wildfires are from climate change. Don’t accuse me of deflection when your assertion is scientifically baseless. (Unless you use bought & paid for hysterical media reports as a “proof” of climate starting fires)
This embarrassing imo that anyone believes this tripe
Again deflecting, you asserted there were no wildfires and you were wrong.
I know she isnt a serious science person but who is the so called scientist and what did he actually say?
When I in Australia a very interesting book came out called The Biggest Estate on Earth about how native australians managed the land effectively via controlled burning. Their forced clearance off most of their territory by european settlers upset the established land management patterns and so began a pattern of bad practices that repeatedly would see livestock and humans perish in bushfire infernos.
In western and north Australia where the bushfire management survived the state governments actually pay the tribal corporations to maintain that system.
However in the south east and east coast where such practices disappeared during colonisation bushfires were still being blamed on climate effects.
Unfortunately the down side of the "controlled burning" is that it coincided with the extinction of all the Australian megafauna. Yes it was first introduced as a means of hunting and it was rather to successful.
The reality is that the 6th mass extinction coincides in lock step with the expansion of humans out of Africa - and it has just gathered pace recently and is threatening all higher life forms on the planet.
Wasn't the last Australian megafauna much smaller and easier to haunt than on other continents?
The Moa bird in NZ was much taller than a human but was easily hunted into extinction within a few generations of first Maori arrival.
one of the biggest problem’s & solutions for stopping global warming & climate change is where to store all the excess greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere.
We can’t store anymore in the ocean as they are acidifying & bio diversity is in serious trouble
Trees are only part of the ambient cycle, once they die after approximately 100 year’s they release that carbon back unless it rots in the ground over a long time.
We have no option but to store it in the soil, and instead of land turning to desert, we can stop desertification & biodiversity loss while storing the carbon in the ground & taking it out of the atmosphere.
It doesn't say that all humans will be wiped out over 5 years. Just that humans will be wiped out if it isn't stopped in that time.
Would this not be a good time to build massive solar farms in these areas?
You need global stability for this to work. Only then can you establish the durable trading relationships needed for the supply network to form.
Russia could have become a stable majority exporter of wind power to the west cementing it's place in a stable Europe beyond it supply of gas. However corruption and an expansionist outlook have rendered that impossible and help to make the stable world order needed for renewables all but impossible.
Very good point.