Do we need to be preparing for Arctic cruising strategies because of Global Cooling

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

Irrelevant conjecture doesn't change the facts.

Sent from my SGP521 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

Now go look in a mirror and repeat that 1000 times.

My post is all fact.

[jackdale]

One of my favourite climate scientists.

https://youtu.be/PtrYNGs9oRM

[SV THIRD DAY]

Fighting MMGW is an issue of self control...do you have the self control to change your own lifestyle to one that uses less CO2 on a daily basis?

If you don't...then this is just a selfcongratulatory meaningless thread, not intended to help the problem, but to aggrandize. Sadly based on the lack of self control exhibited here, it's pretty obvious that many can't self regulate themselves nor reduce their own Carbon footprint.

[jimbunyard]

Originally Posted by newhaul

Meanwhile according to the Canadian government the northwest passage in the archipelagos is still frozen. At 10/10
Environment and Climate Change Canada - Weather and Meteorology - Full resolution map

Check back in 2-4 weeks...






Notice in this expanded view of the NW Passage from yesterday, that the entire passage is covered with melt water (the light blue areas) and appears to consist mainly of floes frozen together with first year ice...

[senormechanico]

Originally Posted by jackdale

I just want to stabilize the climate by ceasing to dump waste CO2 into the atmosphere.

You can help a lot by trying to breathe as little as possible.
We appreciate your cooperation in this endeavor.

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by senormechanico

You can help a lot by trying to breathe as little as possible.
We appreciate your cooperation in this endeavor.

Since respiration is part of the natural CO2 cycle your comment is irrelevant.

Burning fossil fuels is not part of the natural CO2 cycle.

[senormechanico]

It must be a burden in your life to not understand humor.

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by senormechanico

It must be a burden in your life to not understand humor.

I also understand stale humour.

[Ribbit]

My biggest surprise in this thread, is that there's actually someone left in the World still silly enough to use Norton anti-virus.

[weavis]

Originally Posted by jackdale

Since respiration is part of the natural CO2 cycle your comment is irrelevant.

Burning fossil fuels is not part of the natural CO2 cycle.

What?!!!

In every part of mans existence, they have burned whatever was at hand and that .. er.. burned so they could cook and keep warm and heat water. Ireland still runs on peat.

That would be wood, coke, charcoal... lumps of black stuff in certain regions etc.

Right now, Im using 20lb of charcoal mixed with some lovely dead wood of uncertain age and making paella.

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by weavis

What?!!!

In every part of mans existence, they have burned whatever was at hand and that .. er.. burned so they could cook and keep warm and heat water. Ireland still runs on peat.

That would be wood, coke, charcoal... lumps of black stuff in certain regions etc.

Right now, Im using 20lb of charcoal mixed with some lovely dead wood of uncertain age and making paella.

The CO2 released from burning wood, charcoal etc. would have been released through decomposition or forest fires.

Very little coal was being used until the mid 18th century.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by SV THIRD DAY

Fighting MMGW is an issue of self control...do you have the self control to change your own lifestyle to one that uses less CO2 on a daily basis?

If you don't...then this is just a selfcongratulatory meaningless thread, not intended to help the problem, but to aggrandize. Sadly based on the lack of self control exhibited here, it's pretty obvious that many can't self regulate themselves nor reduce their own Carbon footprint.

Hey, it's the ole "can't talk about overeating if you're not thinner than Ghandi" argument! File it next to "Al Gore's a hypocrite cos he doesn't bike everywhere and live off-grid" argument, in the Pointless and Juvenile section.

[fryewe]

Originally Posted by jackdale

The CO2 released from burning wood, charcoal etc. would have been released through decomposition or forest fires.

Very little coal was being used until the mid 18th century.

Errr....that coal you mention? Didn't it start out as wood...that hadn't yet decomposed...and, when burning, does finally decompose during a chemical reaction with oxygen, while releasing heat and light?

A natural process...needing only a little concentrated heat to get it started.

Same with oil...unless you think crude formation is abiotic.

[Exile]

Originally Posted by jackdale

One of my favourite climate scientists.

https://youtu.be/PtrYNGs9oRM

Well-presented and useful, imho. Only "critique" is that she left out the role of negative feedback mechanisms, a critical factor it seems. I also think, respectfully, that she might want to work on her finale. Her closing is a plug for renewable energy which is fine, except stating that Texas has enough solar generation capacity to power the entire world 2.5x over is as realistic as your comment that we should simply stop "dumping CO2" into the atmosphere. I don't doubt the good intentions, but it only makes the skeptics that much more skeptical.

In her defense, however, I commend her emphasis on preparation, i.e. adaptation, which she appropriately prioritizes first.

[Exile]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Hey, it's the ole "can't talk about overeating if you're not thinner than Ghandi" argument! File it next to "Al Gore's a hypocrite cos he doesn't bike everywhere and live off-grid" argument, in the Pointless and Juvenile section.

Regardless, the larger point is that it will be extremely difficult to convince a sufficient number of people to cut back, and no amount of environmental rhetoric or taxation will sway those whose dependence on fossil fuels is non-discretionary. And that's just in the developed world. Good luck with swaying China, India, and countless other countries in the rapidly developing world who are finally benefitting so greatly from such cheap energy. Assuming the problem is as dire as many predict, the answer lies in new energy technologies, whether they be dramatic advancements in wind & solar, or more likely nuclear fission or fusion. No, not an "excuse" to refuse to reduce our own carbon emissions (btw, any luck with that one yet, L-E?), but a statement of how things are whether we like it or not. At this point in time I should add, since we cannot now foresee what future developments may bring.

The only thing I see as "pointless and juvenile" is your interpreting the post in question in such a superficial and facile way. The other "pointless and juvenile" exercise, imho, is the constant vilification of the fossil fuel industry when the focus & energies of the true believers should be on realistic, viable, and credible solutions. In the meantime, let the scientific process continue without lawsuits, prosecutions, and personal attacks on members of the science community, regardless of who is funding it or what side of the issue their research takes them to. Our best path forward is unfettered science through the time-proven peer review process, not suppression of opinions some political faction or another doesn't happen to approve of.