It’s Not Like Nobody Told Us..

March 20, 2016


“The departures are what we would consider astronomical,” Blunden said. “It’s on land. It’s in the oceans. It’s in the upper atmosphere. It’s in the lower atmosphere. The Arctic had record low sea ice.”

“Everything everywhere is a record this month, except Antarctica,” Blunden said. “It’s insane.” – NOAA Climatologist Jessica Blunden, February 2016

Al Gore in the New York Times, March 19, 1989:

Just as a drug addict needs increasing doses to produce the same effect, our global appetite for the earth’s abundance grows each year. We transform the resources of the past into the pollution of the future, telescoping time for self-indulgence in the present.

In 1987, carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere began to surge with record annual increases. Global temperatures are also climbing: 1987 was the second hottest year on record; 1988 was the hottest. Scientists now predect our current course will raise world temperatures five degrees Celsius in our lifetimes. The last time there was such a shift, it was five degrees colder; New York City was under one kilometer of ice. If five degrees colder over thousands of years produces an ice age, what could five degrees warmer produce in a lifetime? In a classic experiment, a frog dropped in boiling water jumps out. The same frog, put in the water before it is slowly boiled, remains in the pot. Our environment is at the boiling point. Will we react?

The 1990’s are the decade of decision. Profound changes are required. We must create a new global compact for sustainable development -for example, trading debts for shared environmental stewardship. Our agenda must include the following:

* A worldwide ban in five years on chlorofluorocarbons, which simultaneously destroy the protective ozone layer and cause up to 20 percent of global warming.

* Rapid reductions in carbon dioxide emissions, through increased vehicle mileage standards, increased energy efficiency and development of alternative energy sources.

* A global halt to destruction of forests and swift implementation of worldwide reforestation programs.

* A ban within five years on packaging that is neither recyclable nor naturally degradable, a comprehensive waste minimization program and aggressive efforts to control emissions of methane from landfills and other sources.

* A series of global summit meetings to seek the unprecedented international cooperation the environmental crisis will demand.

In the 1940’s, as victory neared over the dark forces unleashed on Kristallnacht, Gen. Omar Bradley offered advice that is once again relevant to the challenge that confronts humanity: ”It is time we steered by the stars, not by the lights of each passing ship.”

26 Responses to “It’s Not Like Nobody Told Us..”

  1. pendantry Says:

    Cue the deniers pointing out that since Al Gore can’t spell ‘predict’ and gets it wrong about the boiling frog myth, he must therefore be wrong on everything else too.

    • dumboldguy Says:

      Since the deniers are always looking for something (ANYTHING) to bolster their ever-more-crumbling so-called “arguments”, they will continue to grasp at straws and point out that Gore’s predictions for global disaster by 2016 didn’t come true. Don’t forget that 2016 isn’t over yet—the Fat Lady won’t sing for another 9+ months, and the implications of the global temperature spike are scary as hell. Maybe major SHTF time will be delayed until 2017 or 2018 or 2020?—-so why rush to head it off? After all, we’ve done little since what Gore said 27 years ago and we’re still here aren’t we?

      And the boiling frog “myth” is a freakin’ metaphor, not pure science, and it DOES fit the behavior of humans in the face of the AGW crisis perfectly. It’s really all about human psychology and how capitalism and “free” markets are at the root of it all, not the science of climate change. Read Waking the Frog by Tom Rand for a good analysis (short—200pp and not too dense).

      • pendantry Says:

        So sad that you feel the need to argue.

        Yes, the boiling frog is a metaphor. It’s a metaphor that goes deeper still, since, being based not upon reality but upon a fiction, it suggests how deeply disturbed is the human psyche.

        • dumboldguy Says:

          What, pray tell, am I “arguing”, and why does it make you “SO sad”?

          If you cared to look up the experiments done with “boiling frogs”, you would find that there is an element of scientific truth in the “myth”. It seems to be highly rate dependent, and the modern scientists who dismissed it simply did so out of hand rather than conduct their own experiments or review earlier work.

          Heinzmann and Fratscher did some good work proving the hypothesis in the 1870’s, and Sedgwick reinforced them in the 1880’s. Look it up.

  2. witsendnj Says:

    So, “What we knew in 82” was produced in 2012, and there is not one iota of progress in fact, of course, things become progressively – exponentially – worse. At what point is hope going to be seen as a big fat lie?

    • Gingerbaker Says:

      Not one iota? The Chevy Bolt and Tesla 3 will be out soon. EV Charging stations are sprouting like mushrooms. PV and wind are at parity with fossil fuels. We are on the cusp of transforming our entire energy sector. Things are looking up.

      • dumboldguy Says:

        Yes, GB, very close to “not one iota”. Stop being a bright-sider and grasping at straws—-look it up and you will find the following:

        “EV sales dropped in 2015 amid a boom in SUV and truck sales spurred by rock bottom oil prices”.

        “American consumers bought 102,600 EVs in 2015, a 17 percent decrease from the previous year. The numbers are particularly bad for companies that entered the EV fad early — Nissan’s all-electric Leaf and Chevrolet’s Volt, for instance, sold 43 percent and 18 percent fewer vehicles, respectively, according to researcher Autodata”.

        “Low gas prices have urged customers to move steadily toward SUVs and trucks. Light duty trucks and mid-sized SUVs saw a 19 percent increase in sales in 2015, with SUVs in general seeing a 13 percent increase in sales”.

        Tesla stock took a big hit in February because sales didn’t meet projections. IMO, only the bright-siders have pushed it back up.

        As for EV charging stations “sprouting like mushrooms”, they too suffered a decrease in rate of deployment over the past couple of years. There are only ~10,000 of them compared to 120,000+ gas stations in the country.

        We are still looking up at the cusp.

        • grindupbaker Says:

          Cheer up. Land transportation is only 7% of CO2 source.

          • dumboldguy Says:

            “Land transportation is ONLY 7% of CO2 source”? How cheering! There are at present no electric planes or ships, and precious few electric trains, and until there are, and EV’s make more of an impact on the roads, “transportation” of all kinds is going to continue to be a significant source of CO2.

            In the meantime, talking about bigger CO2 sources, fossil fuels continue to provide 65+% of our electricity in the U.S., just as they have steadily for the past 10 years. Yes, coal is declining, but it is being replaced by natural gas—NG is cleaner but still produces CO2.

            Coal, Natural Gas, Petroleum
            2004— ~2,800,000 MWHr
            2104— ~2,738,000 MWHr

            Wind and Solar
            2004— ~15,000 MWHr
            2014— ~120,000 MWHr

            If anyone can’t do the math, W and S provide less than 1/20 of our electricity. That percentage is up over 800% in ten years, but that is not too inspiring, considering that fossil fuel use declined only ~2% over that same time span.

      • Don’t know how much this will contribute, but it looks interesting. I saw an ELF the other day in town.

        • Tom Bates Says:

          What you saw was an over priced one person motor scooter with an electric drive. You have to have at least two vehicles if you have a family so how does 40000 in vehicle cost save a person any money? The CO2 warming has actually been measured from 2000 to 2010, it was 2/10’s of a watt more, that translates to .08F more. If the CO2 increase in that period doubled the rise from 2000 would be .0848F. It will be a long time before the world warms from CO2. Per NASA the world is actually warming from changes in earths tilt and orbit, 25000 years of warmer.

          • Your math makes no sense. My family when I was growing up in the 1950s had ONE car. And since most trips are local, you don’t need more than a one or two person vehicle as a second. And where did that $40,000 number come from? The ELF doesn’t cost anywhere near that.

            And given your idiotic “analysis” of CO2, I can understand where you’re coming from. The world is waring from CO2, and it doesn’t take much to cause trouble. We’re already getting a crap load of trouble from the increases to date.

            Earth tilt, by the way, takes 25,000 years, as you pointed out. We’re talking decades. You might want to brush up on your math.

          • And by the way, the ELF is NOT a motor scooter. It’s a pedal vehicle. I suspect that you don’t ride a bike, so this technology isn’t familiar to you.

  3. indy222 Says:

    You guys all need to read the work of Tim Garrett. Peter’s right “it’s not like nobody told you”… in a bit of a different context. Gore said it himself, in his first paragraph.

    On the CFC ban and how this proves we can DO IT AGAIN…. sorry to rain on that notion, but it’s not the same. We could ban CFC’s because we found other refrigerants which did not destroy ozone. But we will have a very hard time not producing GHG’s with where the world is today. I’ve heard from the by-golly-we-canDOthis! policy people that if we just cut HFC’s and methane and NO2, we can make a “dramatic” cut in warming, because these have short half-lives in the atmosphere. They fail to realize that getting rid of NO2 means abandoning conventional agriculture, so we get skyrocketing food prices (read: riots, revolutions). If we try to replace HFC’s, we’ll find that ANY molecule which isn’t a simple diatomic (N2, O2) or single atom, will be a powerful GHG. So, yeah, you can get rid of the chlorine and save the ozone layer, but you can’t get rid of the IR absorption of complex molecules, because they are ALL complex molecules for modern industrial society.

  4. redskylite Says:

    I “like” to check the atmospheric CO2 monitoring to see how we are doing. If you haven’t already noticed do NOT check March 18th at NOAA’s ESRL (Daily Average Mauna Loa CO2). It is not good reading, someone needs to invent an Earth sized CO2 extraction machine pretty damn soon.

    Most fitting statement I’ve read sometimes is printed in the Soloman news, where a priest sums it up beautifully . .

    “The wealthy of Europe and Asia and America and Australia do not want to pay any more tax, do no want to lose the second car, the McMansion, the third refrigerator, the TV set in every room,” he wrote.

    “Let us be blunt and honest – in denying climate change, we are just defending our greed.

    “You hypocrites are killing the islands of my friends, my brothers, my home.”

    • Tom Bates Says:

      There is no significant rise in the ocean in the pacific. Per NOAA Johnston Atoll ocean rise trend is 3 inches in 100 years, Sydney is the same. The solomons are a collection of coral atolls built up on old volcanoes. Those volcanoes are sinking back into the sea just like the Hawaiian islands which are no longer active. Per several studies the coral is growing fast enough to keep the islands afloat and some are growing in land area. What several of the islands are doing is causing the land to sink, They are pumping out the ground water as the population explodes and interfering with the transport of coral sand by building jetties and dredging out the lagoons.

      • redskylite Says:

        I think that the Anglian Priest is aiming his anger at people like you, firstly I would not call an ordained Priest (with on-site experience) a liar. Secondly Sea Level rise is a long term thing, something you may have difficulty conceptualizing, it will bite us hard in the future. Certainly before the end of this Century.

        Data from SEAFRAME observation stations show a +7.7 mm/yr trend.

        Table 1: Sea-level trends
        Location Installation date Sea-level trend (mm/yr)
        Cook Islands Feb 2003 +5.5
        Federated States of Micronesia Dec 2001 +17.7
        Fiji Oct 1992 +2.9
        Kiribati Dec 1992 +2.9
        Marshall Islands May 1993 +5.2
        Nauru Jul 1993 +3.6
        Papua New Guinea Sept 1994 +8.0
        Samoa Feb 1993 +6.9
        Solomon Islands Jul 1994 +7.7

        I notice you like to criticize NASA, instead looking to sites like WUWT, but NASA GISS is saying the same as the Japanese agency, even little Hong Kong observatory stats align. Are you so arrogant that you only think the U.S is noticing changes to temperature. I suspect you are driven by values more in line with politics and finance than science. Please stop writing your myths from Watts and co here.

        Tonga Jan 1993 +8.6
        Tuvalu Mar 1993 +4.1
        Vanuatu Jan 1993 +5.3

      • redskylite Says:

        Skeptical Science. . .

        Climate Myth…

        Climate Myth

        Sea level rise is exaggerated

        “We are told sea level is rising and will soon swamp all of our cities. Everybody knows that the Pacific island of Tuvalu is sinking. …

        Around 1990 it became obvious the local tide-gauge did not agree – there was no evidence of ‘sinking.’ So scientists at Flinders University, Adelaide, set up new, modern, tide-gauges in 12 Pacific islands.

        Recently, the whole project was abandoned as there was no sign of a change in sea level at any of the 12 islands for the past 16 years.” (Vincent Gray).



        Gavin Schmidt (a climatologist, climate modeler and Director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York) investigated the claim that tide gauges on islands in the Pacific Ocean show no sea level rise and found that the data show a rising sea level trend at every single station.

  5. Tom Bates Says:

    As I read the posters I get the impression you are all lemmings marching off a cliff because somebody told you to march. Why not look up how Giss gets that steep rise from 1975 or 76 and ask yourself why no rise from 1935 to 1975, 40 years of increasing CO2 output. Why is Giss suddenly rising after 1975? Than ask yourself why 66 percent of Giss is an estimate. Why a lot of those grids have no actual temperatures measured in them, they are plugged from temperatures outside the grid. Why Giss throws out any temperature in the grid that is lower than surrounding temperatures and plugs in a higher estimate. It should be obvious that introduces a bias into the number. Than look up the RSS temperatures. the black line is the global temperature, you notice no rise in 18 plus years. STAR shows a decrease, UAH no rise either except for Feb after they introduced a program change in the beta version of the new software, Ratpac, shows no increase in 58 years, instead shows a sine wave function, up down up. If antarctica is gaining ice per NASA than something is wrong with Giss. Greenland gained land ice last year, something is wrong with Giss. Barrow Alaska, a data station in Giss was 7 degrees hotter in October 1911 than in October of 2015, something is wrong with Giss. What is wrong is rather easy to determine, Giss is heavily weighted to estimates in the arctic region, if the arctic is warmer and most of the grids in that region are estimates, all warmer, than the surface data is simply biased upward. We have a strong El Nino which is warming the arctic on the Pacific side, Giss is using that data to distort the entire temperature of the arctic and hence the world. I know you will all claim the science types know better than me as I am an auditor not a climate guy or gal with a bunch of papers published but when I audit I look for something not to agree with the data but for something that does not and see if that item will turn the whole financial paper on its head. Often that is the case as I pointed out in court in a Federal fraud case I was involved in. We know the world is warmer than in the depths of the little ice age 400 years ago, we also know it is warmer in the past unless trees grow under ice in Alaska a 1000 years old, vikings settled on a glacier in Greenland instead of a grass meadow, and people lived under glaciers 4000 years ago in europe. That consider one final datem. Al Gore flies by private jet, so does Dicaprio and Obama purchased a house on the beach in Hawaii which is supposed to be underwater very soon. None of those spokesmen are doing what they want us to do, there has to be a reason.

  6. redskylite Says:

    And Tom Bates how are you going to explain the Great barrier reef? was the damage caused by massaged stats from NASA GISS, coerced by NOAA scientists, in a grand conspiracy with Japan (and nearly all scientists everywhere, who have been shouting warnings for years). You should be deeply ashamed of yourself.

    Look at the mess the reef is in, just look. Can you do that ?

    Startling images reveal devastating coral bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef

    Startling images have emerged of devastating coral bleaching unfolding across parts of the Great Barrier Reef, as the marine park authority overseeing the environmental icon has raised its response to the highest level possible.

    The severe bleaching event has again prompted concern about the damage climate change is doing to the world heritage protected reef, one of Australia’s most important tourist sites, with scientists and green groups calling for Australia to lift its game in tackling global warming.

    “I have never seen coral this heavily bleached,” he said. “And we are seeing algae growing on parts, which means it has died.”.

  7. Are you guys still arguing with deniers as if that’s a thing to do? Come on, let Sarah Palin’s rant be the absolute LAST of it. These trolls are not serious but your distraction is, and that’s all they’re after. Take action. Find the nearest demonstration, gas station, fossil fuel facility, you name it, and picket, blockade it, and do everything you can to Shut. It. Down. Need help? #DemocracySpring #ClimateAction @RisingTide N.A., 350 dot org, Beyond Extreme Energy, Climate Mobilization, and even Citizen’s Climate Lobby, Greenpeace, Nature Conservancy, and Sierra Club for the more timid among you.
    Thank you Peter, for making the science so accessible and abundantly clear. “This is insane” is an understatement to the emergency at hand.

    • dumboldguy Says:

      Yes, take action! I decided to “take action” and check out a “fossil fuel facility” near my home a few months ago. Many petroleum and natural gas pipelines from TX to the Northeast occupy a right-of-way 1/2 mile from my home, and there are many tanks, valves, and pumps there. I had been curious about it for years, especially since the time we were all knocked out of our beds at 2 AM one night when a gas pipeline overpressured and the relief valve let go—-sounded like a 747 flying down the street.

      I decided to visit a part of the facility where gasoline was siphoned out and stored, mixed with ethanol, and then distributed around northern VA by tanker truck. Many dozens of tankers enter and leave each day, and the ethanol is brought in by truck—-a very busy place.

      Drove up to the gate, saw a phone box next to it, called in and stated I’d like to visit the site. The manager drove out to meet me—-he was a complete anal orifice, and I must admit I was not too pleasant either once he showed his colors. Never did get inside.

      A week later I answered a knock at the door to find a guy with a beard dressed in jeans and a plaid flannel shirt—-looked like the guys who are always trying to sell me firewood or offer to trim my trees for an outrageous price. He showed me TWO ID’s—-one as a VA State Police investigator, and another from the FBI showing that he was a member of an FBI anti-terrorism task force. I burst out laughing (at which he gave me a quizzical look) and invited him in, saying “This is going to be fun—too bad you had to waste the time, but since you’re here….”

      We had a nice long chat after we dealt with the “fossil fuel facility manager’s” A-holishness, mostly about the investigator’s job and what the country had to deal with regarding the tremendous number of vulnerable facilities, and I was not taken away in cuffs. As he left, I thanked him for his efforts to keep the country safe, again said it was too bad he had to waste his time, and that when he reported the results of his investigation back to the manager of the “fossil fuel facility” to be sure to tell him that I said he was even a bigger asshole than I first thought—-he chuckled but made no promises.

      I DID ascertain that he knew that I had accessed info about that “fossil fuel facility” on the internet (which I did after meeting the A-hole manager), so my emails and web activity were probably looked at by the FBI or NSA under provisions of the Patriot Act. IMO, it wouldn’t surprise me if the “gum-mint” was looking at all the groups you mention under “need help”, even those for the “timid”, so, as they used to say on Hill Street Blues, “Be careful out there”.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: