Page 1 of 7 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 96

Thread: Multiple NASA Studies Confirm Bedrock Heat Flow Behind Melting Polar Ice, Not...

  1. #1 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    73,649
    Thanks
    13,984
    Thanked 13,925 Times in 11,644 Posts
    Groans
    17,276
    Groaned 1,684 Times in 1,632 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5

    Default Multiple NASA Studies Confirm Bedrock Heat Flow Behind Melting Polar Ice, Not...

    This has a lot of links and I hope I got them all correct.

    Multiple NASA Studies Confirm Bedrock Heat Flow Behind Melting Polar Ice, Not Global Warming

    In what amounts to dissension from National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) climate change policy, a series of just-released studies by working-level scientists prove that geological and not atmospheric forces are responsible for melting of Earth’s polar ice sheets.



    Figure 1. The eruption of Antarctica’s Mount Erebus, one of the continent’s 149 active land volcanoes, many of which lie beneath miles of glacial ice.
    Photo: see here

    A review of these studies and their significance relative to what force or forces control the climate and climate-related events of Earth’s polar regions is as follows.

    NASA Antarctica Study October 30, 2015

    This research study authored by NASA Glaciologist Jay Zwally concluded that Antarctica is gaining, not losing, ice mass and thereby challenging the conclusions of many previous studies, most importantly the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) 2013 report (see the quote from the study below).

    “A new NASA study says that an increase in Antarctic snow accumulation that began 10,000 years ago is currently adding enough ice to the continent to outweigh the increased losses from its thinning glaciers.

    “The research challenges the conclusions of other studies, including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) 2013 report, which says that Antarctica is overall losing land ice.

    The conclusions of this NASA study were immediately challenged by numerous climate activist groups and biased media outlets (see here). These challenges have since been proven incorrect for several reasons.

    Statements by NASA Glaciologist Jay Zwally concerning his soon-to-be-published Antarctic follow-up study reconfirm that Antarctica is gaining, not losing ice.

    The results of this follow-up study are bolstered by two other NASA research studies.

    The first, dated January 1, 2018, shows that East Antarctica has for many years been accumulating huge amounts of snow that compact into ice and increasing overall ice mass (see here).

    The results of this follow-up study are bolstered by two other NASA research studies.

    The second NASA study released on July 19, 2018, showed that the atmosphere above the Antarctic Continent has been continuously cooling and not warming for many years (see here).

    Obviously, it’s impossible to melt Antarctica’s glaciers via atmospheric warming when the atmosphere is not warming.

    Lastly, a NASA study dated Feb. 20, 2018, concludes that outflow of East Antarctic glaciers into the ocean is stable and not increasing (see here). This is proof that East Antarctica’s ice mass is not being diminished by glacial outflow into adjacent oceans.

    Bottom line, research by NASA scientists clearly shows that the well-documented ice loss in West Antarctica is more than accommodated by ice gains in East Antarctica. Contrary to hundreds of pro-melting articles, Antarctica’s ice mass is increasing!

    NASA Antarctica Study November 7, 2017

    This research study entitled “Hot News from the Antarctic Underground“ investigated West Antarctica’s subglacial geology.

    It substantiates many previous research studies that have documented this region’s subglacial high-bedrock heat-flow, active faulting, and prevalent volcanism.

    Recent research by the University of Rhode Island scientists confirms the premises of a previous Climate Change Dispatch article that subglacial, volcanic heat-flow is melting West Antarctica’s Pine Island Glacier (see here).

    Many previous Climate Change Dispatch articles have reviewed West Antarctica’s subglacial mantle plume and the world-class fault system that is acting to bottom-melt this region’s glacial land sea ice (see here, here, and here).

    NASA Greenland Study August 1, 2018

    The results of this research study illustrated in Figure 2 confirm the very high geothermal bedrock heat-flow from Greenland’s massive subglacial Mantle Plume, which was originally documented in four previous research studies (see here, here, here, and here).

    A geothermal heat-flow cause for the melting of Greenland’s ice sheet has been the focus of numerous Climate Change Dispatch articles (see here, here, here, and here).


    Figure 2.) Geological time-frame movement of Earth’s outer crust across the stable deep inner-earth Greenland/Iceland mantle plume and superimposed in color the present-day anomalously high heat-flow rates. Photo credit see herehttps://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-45031592

    In summary, the NASA studies mentioned in this article have accelerated the ongoing demise of the once one-hundred-percent-settled-science status of global warming theory.

    It is now abundantly clear that even respected mainstream NASA geologists and glaciologists are advocating that formerly underappreciated geological forces working in concert with atmospheric forces are responsible for polar ice cap melting.

    Here we note that in many cases these geological forces are dominant and, in some cases, the complete cause of modern-day and ancient polar ice cap melting

    Knowing this brings into question other aspects of supposedly 100 percent settled climate dogma.

    Specifically, that man-made global warming is the root cause of other supposedly unnatural polar ice cap events such as alteration of marine and land animal migration patterns, anomalous plankton blooms, chemical alteration of adjacent ocean waters, alteration of polar area ocean currents, and changes in meteorological patterns.

    Many of these events are more likely the result of, or strongly influenced by, geologically induced heat and chemically charged heated fluid flow at the base of polar ice sheets or in adjacent oceans.

    Lastly, there is a quiet revolution occurring within NASA that will play out within the next year or two ending in the complete reconstruction of global warming theory.

    The remodeled version will reflect the now proven and significant climate influence of geological forces as per the 2014 Plate Climatology Theory.

    James Edward Kamis is a retired professional Geologist with 42 years of experience, a B.S. in Geology from Northern Illinois University (1973), an M.S. in geology from Idaho State University (1977), and a longtime member of AAPG who has always been fascinated by the connection between Geology and Climate. More than 14 years of research/observation have convinced him that the Earth’s Heat Flow Engine, which drives the outer crustal plates, is an important driver of the Earth’s climate as per his Plate Climatology Theory.
    SEDITION: incitement of resistance to or insurrection against lawful authority.


  2. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to USFREEDOM911 For This Post:

    countryboy (07-15-2019), Havana Moon (07-15-2019), Stretch (07-19-2019)

  3. #2 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    11,474
    Thanks
    291
    Thanked 6,053 Times in 3,869 Posts
    Groans
    17
    Groaned 1,220 Times in 1,112 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Everyone knows climate scientists have spent 40 years studying the wrong causes. It wouldn't have occurred to them over 40 years to consult geologists, CONSIDER the earth's core, other causes. "Screw the scientific method, we have an agenda."

    Sure why not?
    If only Trump had gotten BLOWJOBS from an intern,
    this would be over!



  4. The Following User Groans At Centerleftfl For This Awful Post:

    Havana Moon (07-18-2019)

  5. #3 | Top
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    11,759
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 7,717 Times in 5,330 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 357 Times in 341 Posts

    Default

    "multiple studies" now

    I VOTED FOR THE WHITE GUY THIS TIME

    C̶N̶N̶ SNN.... Shithole News Network

    WHERES RUTH

  6. #4 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    73,649
    Thanks
    13,984
    Thanked 13,925 Times in 11,644 Posts
    Groans
    17,276
    Groaned 1,684 Times in 1,632 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5

    Default

    I was sure this would generate more responses, at least from the global alarmists. LOL
    SEDITION: incitement of resistance to or insurrection against lawful authority.


  7. #5 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    37,411
    Thanks
    7,994
    Thanked 9,554 Times in 7,215 Posts
    Groans
    40
    Groaned 3,957 Times in 3,311 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Centerleftfl View Post
    Everyone knows climate scientists have spent 40 years studying the wrong causes. It wouldn't have occurred to them over 40 years to consult geologists, CONSIDER the earth's core, other causes. "Screw the scientific method, we have an agenda."

    Sure why not?
    Since Dumbfuck is blocked, I assume he referred to a plateclimatology.com article.

    They lied. He lied.

  8. The Following User Groans At domer76 For This Awful Post:

    Havana Moon (07-18-2019)

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to domer76 For This Post:

    guno (07-19-2019)

  10. #6 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    In my house
    Posts
    11,003
    Thanks
    1,285
    Thanked 3,574 Times in 2,729 Posts
    Groans
    4
    Groaned 253 Times in 240 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default

    Are you suggesting that leaking molten lava from the vast interior of the earth has more effect than some gasses in the atmosphere on temperature ?
    SURELY you dont expect anyone to buy that do you ?
    /humor
    ERIC CIARAMELLA whose name may not be spoken

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to Celticguy For This Post:

    Stretch (07-19-2019)

  12. #7 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    9,470
    Thanks
    1,833
    Thanked 2,438 Times in 2,105 Posts
    Groans
    11
    Groaned 111 Times in 107 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by USFREEDOM911 View Post
    This has a lot of links and I hope I got them all correct.

    Multiple NASA Studies Confirm Bedrock Heat Flow Behind Melting Polar Ice, Not Global Warming

    In what amounts to dissension from National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) climate change policy, a series of just-released studies by working-level scientists prove that geological and not atmospheric forces are responsible for melting of Earth’s polar ice sheets.



    Figure 1. The eruption of Antarctica’s Mount Erebus, one of the continent’s 149 active land volcanoes, many of which lie beneath miles of glacial ice.
    Photo: see here

    A review of these studies and their significance relative to what force or forces control the climate and climate-related events of Earth’s polar regions is as follows.

    NASA Antarctica Study October 30, 2015

    This research study authored by NASA Glaciologist Jay Zwally concluded that Antarctica is gaining, not losing, ice mass and thereby challenging the conclusions of many previous studies, most importantly the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) 2013 report (see the quote from the study below).

    “A new NASA study says that an increase in Antarctic snow accumulation that began 10,000 years ago is currently adding enough ice to the continent to outweigh the increased losses from its thinning glaciers.

    “The research challenges the conclusions of other studies, including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) 2013 report, which says that Antarctica is overall losing land ice.

    The conclusions of this NASA study were immediately challenged by numerous climate activist groups and biased media outlets (see here). These challenges have since been proven incorrect for several reasons.

    Statements by NASA Glaciologist Jay Zwally concerning his soon-to-be-published Antarctic follow-up study reconfirm that Antarctica is gaining, not losing ice.

    The results of this follow-up study are bolstered by two other NASA research studies.

    The first, dated January 1, 2018, shows that East Antarctica has for many years been accumulating huge amounts of snow that compact into ice and increasing overall ice mass (see here).

    The results of this follow-up study are bolstered by two other NASA research studies.

    The second NASA study released on July 19, 2018, showed that the atmosphere above the Antarctic Continent has been continuously cooling and not warming for many years (see here).

    Obviously, it’s impossible to melt Antarctica’s glaciers via atmospheric warming when the atmosphere is not warming.

    Lastly, a NASA study dated Feb. 20, 2018, concludes that outflow of East Antarctic glaciers into the ocean is stable and not increasing (see here). This is proof that East Antarctica’s ice mass is not being diminished by glacial outflow into adjacent oceans.

    Bottom line, research by NASA scientists clearly shows that the well-documented ice loss in West Antarctica is more than accommodated by ice gains in East Antarctica. Contrary to hundreds of pro-melting articles, Antarctica’s ice mass is increasing!

    NASA Antarctica Study November 7, 2017

    This research study entitled “Hot News from the Antarctic Underground“ investigated West Antarctica’s subglacial geology.

    It substantiates many previous research studies that have documented this region’s subglacial high-bedrock heat-flow, active faulting, and prevalent volcanism.

    Recent research by the University of Rhode Island scientists confirms the premises of a previous Climate Change Dispatch article that subglacial, volcanic heat-flow is melting West Antarctica’s Pine Island Glacier (see here).

    Many previous Climate Change Dispatch articles have reviewed West Antarctica’s subglacial mantle plume and the world-class fault system that is acting to bottom-melt this region’s glacial land sea ice (see here, here, and here).

    NASA Greenland Study August 1, 2018

    The results of this research study illustrated in Figure 2 confirm the very high geothermal bedrock heat-flow from Greenland’s massive subglacial Mantle Plume, which was originally documented in four previous research studies (see here, here, here, and here).

    A geothermal heat-flow cause for the melting of Greenland’s ice sheet has been the focus of numerous Climate Change Dispatch articles (see here, here, here, and here).


    Figure 2.) Geological time-frame movement of Earth’s outer crust across the stable deep inner-earth Greenland/Iceland mantle plume and superimposed in color the present-day anomalously high heat-flow rates. Photo credit see herehttps://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-45031592

    In summary, the NASA studies mentioned in this article have accelerated the ongoing demise of the once one-hundred-percent-settled-science status of global warming theory.

    It is now abundantly clear that even respected mainstream NASA geologists and glaciologists are advocating that formerly underappreciated geological forces working in concert with atmospheric forces are responsible for polar ice cap melting.

    Here we note that in many cases these geological forces are dominant and, in some cases, the complete cause of modern-day and ancient polar ice cap melting

    Knowing this brings into question other aspects of supposedly 100 percent settled climate dogma.

    Specifically, that man-made global warming is the root cause of other supposedly unnatural polar ice cap events such as alteration of marine and land animal migration patterns, anomalous plankton blooms, chemical alteration of adjacent ocean waters, alteration of polar area ocean currents, and changes in meteorological patterns.

    Many of these events are more likely the result of, or strongly influenced by, geologically induced heat and chemically charged heated fluid flow at the base of polar ice sheets or in adjacent oceans.

    Lastly, there is a quiet revolution occurring within NASA that will play out within the next year or two ending in the complete reconstruction of global warming theory.

    The remodeled version will reflect the now proven and significant climate influence of geological forces as per the 2014 Plate Climatology Theory.

    James Edward Kamis is a retired professional Geologist with 42 years of experience, a B.S. in Geology from Northern Illinois University (1973), an M.S. in geology from Idaho State University (1977), and a longtime member of AAPG who has always been fascinated by the connection between Geology and Climate. More than 14 years of research/observation have convinced him that the Earth’s Heat Flow Engine, which drives the outer crustal plates, is an important driver of the Earth’s climate as per his Plate Climatology Theory.
    It is not possible to measure the volume or mass of ice in Antarctica. NASA is just guessing.

  13. #8 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    9,470
    Thanks
    1,833
    Thanked 2,438 Times in 2,105 Posts
    Groans
    11
    Groaned 111 Times in 107 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Centerleftfl View Post
    Everyone knows climate scientists have spent 40 years studying the wrong causes. It wouldn't have occurred to them over 40 years to consult geologists, CONSIDER the earth's core, other causes. "Screw the scientific method, we have an agenda."

    Sure why not?
    Science is not a 'method' or a 'procedure'. Science is a set of falsifiable theories. There are NO theories of science about climate.
    It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth, either.
    Climate 'scientists' deny science and mathematics.

  14. #9 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    73,649
    Thanks
    13,984
    Thanked 13,925 Times in 11,644 Posts
    Groans
    17,276
    Groaned 1,684 Times in 1,632 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Into the Night View Post
    It is not possible to measure the volume or mass of ice in Antarctica. NASA is just guessing.
    Then how can the climate alarmists measure it and say it's melting??
    SEDITION: incitement of resistance to or insurrection against lawful authority.


  15. #10 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    9,470
    Thanks
    1,833
    Thanked 2,438 Times in 2,105 Posts
    Groans
    11
    Groaned 111 Times in 107 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by USFREEDOM911 View Post
    Then how can the climate alarmists measure it and say it's melting??
    They can't. They just say it's melting.

  16. #11 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    11,474
    Thanks
    291
    Thanked 6,053 Times in 3,869 Posts
    Groans
    17
    Groaned 1,220 Times in 1,112 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by USFREEDOM911 View Post
    I was sure this would generate more responses, at least from the global alarmists. LOL
    No one believes IT ISN'T TRUE anymore! NO ONE! Even YOU.

    Carter warned us. REAGAN ignored it. Simultaneously BIG OIL (the BIGGEST OIL) wrote their reports. (Their accuracy was beyond anything I would have believed could be predicted with such precision almost 40 years later).

    Shell and Exxon's secret 1980s climate change warnings


    Newly found documents from the 1980s show that fossil fuel companies privately predicted the global damage that would be caused by their products.

    Benjamin Franta - The Guardian

    Wed 19 Sep 2018 06.00 EDTLast modified on Wed 19 Sep 2018 19.55 EDT



    A Royal Dutch Shell logo. Photograph: Anna Gowthorpe/PA
    One day in 1961, an American economist named Daniel Ellsberg stumbled across a piece of paper with apocalyptic implications. Ellsberg, who was advising the US government on its secret nuclear war plans, had discovered a document that contained an official estimate of the death toll in a preemptive “first strike” on China and the Soviet Union: 300 million in those countries, and double that globally.

    Ellsberg was troubled that such a plan existed; years later, he tried to leak the details of nuclear annihilation to the public. Although his attempt failed, Ellsberg would become famous instead for leaking what came to be known as the Pentagon Papers – the US government’s secret history of its military intervention in Vietnam.


    America’s amoral military planning during the Cold War echoes the hubris exhibited by another cast of characters gambling with the fate of humanity. Recently, secret documents have been unearthed detailing what the energy industry knew about the links between their products and global warming. But, unlike the government’s nuclear plans, what the industry detailed was put into action.

    In the 1980s, oil companies like Exxon and Shell carried out internal assessments of the carbon dioxide released by fossil fuels, and forecast the planetary consequences of these emissions. In 1982, for example, Exxon predicted that by about 2060, CO2 levels would reach around 560 parts per million – double the preindustrial level – and that this would push the planet’s average temperatures up by about 2°C over then-current levels (and even more compared to pre-industrial levels).



    Exxon’s private prediction of the future growth of carbon dioxide levels (left axis) and global temperature relative to 1982 (right axis). Elsewhere in its report, Exxon noted that the most widely accepted science at the time indicated that doubling carbon dioxide levels would cause a global warming of 3°C. Illustration: 1982 Exxon internal briefing document. Later that decade, in 1988, an internal report by Shell projected similar effects but also found that CO2 could double even earlier, by 2030. Privately, these companies did not dispute the links between their products, global warming, and ecological calamity. On the contrary, their research confirmed the connections.

    Shell’s assessment foresaw a one-meter sea-level rise, and noted that warming could also fuel disintegration of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet, resulting in a worldwide rise in sea level of “five to six meters.” That would be enough to inundate entire low-lying countries.

    Shell’s analysts also warned of the “disappearance of specific ecosystems or habitat destruction,” predicted an increase in “runoff, destructive floods, and inundation of low-lying farmland,” and said that “new sources of freshwater would be required” to compensate for changes in precipitation. Global changes in air temperature would also “drastically change the way people live and work.” All told, Shell concluded, “the changes may be the greatest in recorded history.”

    For its part, Exxon warned of “potentially catastrophic events that must be considered.” Like Shell’s experts, Exxon’s scientists predicted devastating sea-level rise, and warned that the American Midwest and other parts of the world could become desert-like. Looking on the bright side, the company expressed its confidence that “this problem is not as significant to mankind as a nuclear holocaust or world famine.”...


    https://www.theguardian.com/environm...hange-warnings
    If only Trump had gotten BLOWJOBS from an intern,
    this would be over!



  17. The Following User Groans At Centerleftfl For This Awful Post:

    Havana Moon (07-18-2019)

  18. #12 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    11,474
    Thanks
    291
    Thanked 6,053 Times in 3,869 Posts
    Groans
    17
    Groaned 1,220 Times in 1,112 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Getin the ring View Post
    "multiple studies" now


    YEP like these multiple studies made by the OIL COMPANIES in the early 80s. 'We're wrecking the earth's atmosphere. But not to worry, it won't be as bad as say an atomic bomb.' That WAS stated in one of the reports.


    Shell and Exxon's secret 1980s climate change warnings


    Newly found documents from the 1980s show that fossil fuel companies privately predicted the global damage that would be caused by their products.

    The documents make for frightening reading. And the effect is all the more chilling in view of the oil giants’ refusal to warn the public
    about the damage that their own researchers predicted [in the early 80s]. Shell’s report, marked “confidential,” was
    first disclosed
    by a Dutch news organization earlier this year. Exxon’s study was not intended for external distribution, either; it was leaked in 2015.



    https://www.theguardian.com/environm...hange-warnings
    If only Trump had gotten BLOWJOBS from an intern,
    this would be over!



  19. The Following User Groans At Centerleftfl For This Awful Post:

    Havana Moon (07-20-2019)

  20. #13 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    7,750
    Thanks
    96
    Thanked 4,141 Times in 3,112 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 238 Times in 226 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Centerleftfl View Post
    Everyone knows climate scientists have spent 40 years studying the wrong causes. It wouldn't have occurred to them over 40 years to consult geologists, CONSIDER the earth's core, other causes. "Screw the scientific method, we have an agenda."

    Sure why not?
    That is precisely what the cultists have done. They constantly scream 'consensus!', tell is it primarily driven by men... all so the government trough continues to be filled with taxpayers dollars to fund the piggish cult morons that scream 'MAN MUST BE TO BLAME! (otherwise we would be out of jobs)'

  21. The Following User Says Thank You to Superfreak For This Post:

    Havana Moon (07-20-2019)

  22. #14 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    73,649
    Thanks
    13,984
    Thanked 13,925 Times in 11,644 Posts
    Groans
    17,276
    Groaned 1,684 Times in 1,632 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Centerleftfl View Post
    No one believes IT ISN'T TRUE anymore! NO ONE! Even YOU.

    Carter warned us. REAGAN ignored it. Simultaneously BIG OIL (the BIGGEST OIL) wrote their reports. (Their accuracy was beyond anything I would have believed could be predicted with such precision almost 40 years later).

    Shell and Exxon's secret 1980s climate change warnings


    Newly found documents from the 1980s show that fossil fuel companies privately predicted the global damage that would be caused by their products.

    Benjamin Franta - The Guardian

    Wed 19 Sep 2018 06.00 EDTLast modified on Wed 19 Sep 2018 19.55 EDT



    A Royal Dutch Shell logo. Photograph: Anna Gowthorpe/PA
    One day in 1961, an American economist named Daniel Ellsberg stumbled across a piece of paper with apocalyptic implications. Ellsberg, who was advising the US government on its secret nuclear war plans, had discovered a document that contained an official estimate of the death toll in a preemptive “first strike” on China and the Soviet Union: 300 million in those countries, and double that globally.

    Ellsberg was troubled that such a plan existed; years later, he tried to leak the details of nuclear annihilation to the public. Although his attempt failed, Ellsberg would become famous instead for leaking what came to be known as the Pentagon Papers – the US government’s secret history of its military intervention in Vietnam.


    America’s amoral military planning during the Cold War echoes the hubris exhibited by another cast of characters gambling with the fate of humanity. Recently, secret documents have been unearthed detailing what the energy industry knew about the links between their products and global warming. But, unlike the government’s nuclear plans, what the industry detailed was put into action.

    In the 1980s, oil companies like Exxon and Shell carried out internal assessments of the carbon dioxide released by fossil fuels, and forecast the planetary consequences of these emissions. In 1982, for example, Exxon predicted that by about 2060, CO2 levels would reach around 560 parts per million – double the preindustrial level – and that this would push the planet’s average temperatures up by about 2°C over then-current levels (and even more compared to pre-industrial levels).



    Exxon’s private prediction of the future growth of carbon dioxide levels (left axis) and global temperature relative to 1982 (right axis). Elsewhere in its report, Exxon noted that the most widely accepted science at the time indicated that doubling carbon dioxide levels would cause a global warming of 3°C. Illustration: 1982 Exxon internal briefing document. Later that decade, in 1988, an internal report by Shell projected similar effects but also found that CO2 could double even earlier, by 2030. Privately, these companies did not dispute the links between their products, global warming, and ecological calamity. On the contrary, their research confirmed the connections.

    Shell’s assessment foresaw a one-meter sea-level rise, and noted that warming could also fuel disintegration of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet, resulting in a worldwide rise in sea level of “five to six meters.” That would be enough to inundate entire low-lying countries.

    Shell’s analysts also warned of the “disappearance of specific ecosystems or habitat destruction,” predicted an increase in “runoff, destructive floods, and inundation of low-lying farmland,” and said that “new sources of freshwater would be required” to compensate for changes in precipitation. Global changes in air temperature would also “drastically change the way people live and work.” All told, Shell concluded, “the changes may be the greatest in recorded history.”

    For its part, Exxon warned of “potentially catastrophic events that must be considered.” Like Shell’s experts, Exxon’s scientists predicted devastating sea-level rise, and warned that the American Midwest and other parts of the world could become desert-like. Looking on the bright side, the company expressed its confidence that “this problem is not as significant to mankind as a nuclear holocaust or world famine.”...


    https://www.theguardian.com/environm...hange-warnings


    SEDITION: incitement of resistance to or insurrection against lawful authority.


  23. #15 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    England
    Posts
    77,939
    Thanks
    33,466
    Thanked 22,372 Times in 17,278 Posts
    Groans
    24,641
    Groaned 3,683 Times in 3,503 Posts
    Blog Entries
    29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Centerleftfl View Post
    No one believes IT ISN'T TRUE anymore! NO ONE! Even YOU.

    Carter warned us. REAGAN ignored it. Simultaneously BIG OIL (the BIGGEST OIL) wrote their reports. (Their accuracy was beyond anything I would have believed could be predicted with such precision almost 40 years later).

    Shell and Exxon's secret 1980s climate change warnings


    Newly found documents from the 1980s show that fossil fuel companies privately predicted the global damage that would be caused by their products.

    Benjamin Franta - The Guardian

    Wed 19 Sep 2018 06.00 EDTLast modified on Wed 19 Sep 2018 19.55 EDT



    A Royal Dutch Shell logo. Photograph: Anna Gowthorpe/PA
    One day in 1961, an American economist named Daniel Ellsberg stumbled across a piece of paper with apocalyptic implications. Ellsberg, who was advising the US government on its secret nuclear war plans, had discovered a document that contained an official estimate of the death toll in a preemptive “first strike” on China and the Soviet Union: 300 million in those countries, and double that globally.

    Ellsberg was troubled that such a plan existed; years later, he tried to leak the details of nuclear annihilation to the public. Although his attempt failed, Ellsberg would become famous instead for leaking what came to be known as the Pentagon Papers – the US government’s secret history of its military intervention in Vietnam.


    America’s amoral military planning during the Cold War echoes the hubris exhibited by another cast of characters gambling with the fate of humanity. Recently, secret documents have been unearthed detailing what the energy industry knew about the links between their products and global warming. But, unlike the government’s nuclear plans, what the industry detailed was put into action.

    In the 1980s, oil companies like Exxon and Shell carried out internal assessments of the carbon dioxide released by fossil fuels, and forecast the planetary consequences of these emissions. In 1982, for example, Exxon predicted that by about 2060, CO2 levels would reach around 560 parts per million – double the preindustrial level – and that this would push the planet’s average temperatures up by about 2°C over then-current levels (and even more compared to pre-industrial levels).



    Exxon’s private prediction of the future growth of carbon dioxide levels (left axis) and global temperature relative to 1982 (right axis). Elsewhere in its report, Exxon noted that the most widely accepted science at the time indicated that doubling carbon dioxide levels would cause a global warming of 3°C. Illustration: 1982 Exxon internal briefing document. Later that decade, in 1988, an internal report by Shell projected similar effects but also found that CO2 could double even earlier, by 2030. Privately, these companies did not dispute the links between their products, global warming, and ecological calamity. On the contrary, their research confirmed the connections.

    Shell’s assessment foresaw a one-meter sea-level rise, and noted that warming could also fuel disintegration of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet, resulting in a worldwide rise in sea level of “five to six meters.” That would be enough to inundate entire low-lying countries.

    Shell’s analysts also warned of the “disappearance of specific ecosystems or habitat destruction,” predicted an increase in “runoff, destructive floods, and inundation of low-lying farmland,” and said that “new sources of freshwater would be required” to compensate for changes in precipitation. Global changes in air temperature would also “drastically change the way people live and work.” All told, Shell concluded, “the changes may be the greatest in recorded history.”

    For its part, Exxon warned of “potentially catastrophic events that must be considered.” Like Shell’s experts, Exxon’s scientists predicted devastating sea-level rise, and warned that the American Midwest and other parts of the world could become desert-like. Looking on the bright side, the company expressed its confidence that “this problem is not as significant to mankind as a nuclear holocaust or world famine.”...


    https://www.theguardian.com/environm...hange-warnings
    Oh do shut the fuck up monotonous twat. Here is a long list of the failed predictions of 'climate experts'. Nobody but a total idiot uses the Guardian for accurate climate info, it is just the in-house journal for Greenpeace and the like.

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/04/...e-predictions/
    In rejecting their view [Spinoza, Leibnitz and Hegel], as I shall contend that we must, we are committing ourselves to the opinion that “truth” in empirical material has a meaning different from that which it bears in logic and mathematics.”

    Bertrand Russell, “An Inquiry Into Meaning & Truth” (1940)

  24. The Following User Says Thank You to Havana Moon For This Post:

    Stretch (07-19-2019)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-11-2018, 03:37 AM
  2. Polar Melting Scam In Complete Collapse
    By Havana Moon in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 49
    Last Post: 06-26-2018, 06:00 AM
  3. Studies confirm that racist fears are driving the Trump train
    By Legion Troll in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 06-07-2016, 12:18 PM
  4. NASA and NOAA Confirm Global Temperature Standstill Continues
    By Havana Moon in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 01-23-2014, 05:44 PM
  5. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 05-05-2013, 05:21 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •