Freeze up coming,

[chuckChuck]

Blackpowder and Furrow,
In order to understand climate change you have to look at long term trends. One year in one region does not make a trend. In any case the article I posted above explains what happened in Greenland in 2016-2017. There was possibly a small ice mass increase or none at all depending on how much calving occurred. The long term trend clearly indicates shrinking.

I know you guys are politically opposed to to global warming but you can't deny or change the science that clearly shows it is happening.

It is pretty easy to see what has happened to the glaciers in Canada. If you go to the Colombia ice fields between banff and jasper there are signs put up that show the glaciers at different dates. The Athabaska glacier has shrunk 1.5 km since 1890! 5 metres per year. Does that indicate global cooling? Nope. Pretty easy to see and understand it is caused by warming.

So when you say it doesn't matter then look at the following estimates of potential sea level rise if the Greenland or Antarctic ice caps melt. One or both would put all most all the worlds coastal cities underwater!

https://nsidc.org/cryosphere/quickfacts/icesheets.html
Why are ice sheets important?

Ice sheets contain enormous quantities of frozen water. If the Greenland Ice Sheet melted, scientists estimate that sea level would rise about 6 meters (20 feet). If the Antarctic Ice Sheet melted, sea level would rise by about 60 meters (200 feet).

The Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets also influence weather and climate. Large high-altitude plateaus on the ice caps alter storm tracks and create cold downslope winds close to the ice surface.

In addition, the layers of ice blanketing Greenland and Antarctica contain a unique record of Earth's climate history.

[furrowtickler]

Point is the climate has always changed , for 1000's of years . Long before fossil fuels were burnt .
Most of us believe that it is currently way over hyped for political gain ... that's the issue.
You bring up one of the over hyped situations - the Greenland ice sheets , the only way they will ever totally melt is if the earth shifted on its axis and Greenland became in a more southern latitudes.
Yes they may loose some ice during a warm period but they will also gain ice over a cool period , like the little ice age several hundred years ago.
Pollutants from fossil fuels are not good for the environment, that's a fact . But a lot of tech already has reduced emissions dramatically with vehicles and farm machinery with def systems that cost us dearly already. Carbon taxes to fight "climate change" is fruitless. Its simply a wealth transfer from those that have no choice to burn fossil fuel now and in the immediate future to those who ride their bicycle to work . That's why the backlash from most of us.

[chuckChuck]

Point is the climate has always changed , for 1000's of years . Long before fossil fuels were burnt .
Most of us believe that it is currently way over hyped for political gain ... that's the issue.
You bring up one of the over hyped situations - the Greenland ice sheets , the only way they will ever totally melt is if the earth shifted on its axis and Greenland became in a more southern latitudes.
Yes they may loose some ice during a warm period but they will also gain ice over a cool period , like the little ice age several hundred years ago.
Pollutants from fossil fuels are not good for the environment, that's a fact . But a lot of tech already has reduced emissions dramatically with vehicles and farm machinery with def systems that cost us dearly already. Carbon taxes to fight "climate change" is fruitless. Its simply a wealth transfer from those that have no choice to burn fossil fuel now and in the immediate future to those who ride their bicycle to work . That's why the backlash from most of us.

There is no evidence that any period of global cooling is going to occur any time soon. On the contrary at current CO2 levels we are on track to significant warming which the data all shows. The risk is rapid out of control warming because once the ice is reduced reflecting less of the suns energy and the permafrost releases mega tonnes of carbon and methane we could see warming that will be catastrophic. Canada's arctic is seeing a lot of warming now more than other regions. This is a long term issue but changing carbon emissions has to start decades in advance. Almost every nation is aware of the issue and is in favour of reducing emissions. Actually reducing emissions is going to be very difficult and that is why there is a lot of talk and not much action because it is a huge change. Carbon taxes wont solve the problem alone but they are one of the tools that can be used. If you remember when gas was a 1.40 -1.50 per litre consumption dropped. So prices and taxes do affect consumption. Sales of big trucks dropped off and people purchased more fuel efficient cars.

[furrowtickler]

I see your point but you ignored the fact that we as farmers already invite a huge cost with def systems that dramatically reduce emissions. Also we can not reduce consumption much and will have to eat the full cost of the fairy tale tax with no way to pass it on .

[blackpowder]

So let it happen.
Plan for the change. Dont castrate your economy for the benefit of China. Legislating a change to the weather is folly.

An aquaintance was present at higher level AB govt meetings after C tax in. All present gleefully schemed how much of the expected $5B new income they could get. Fools and suckers. If i agree to your science will you agree to being a fool?

[chuckChuck]

So let it happen.
Plan for the change. Dont castrate your economy for the benefit of China. Legislating a change to the weather is folly.

An aquaintance was present at higher level AB govt meetings after C tax in. All present gleefully schemed how much of the expected $5B new income they could get. Fools and suckers. If i agree to your science will you agree to being a fool?

There is a good argument that not investing in low carbon technology will be bad for the economy as well. There are lots of jobs and investment happening in clean tech and renewables. We will still be producing and using oil and gas in the next decades even as we adopt more electric, hybrid and hydrogen fuel cell powered vehicles and renewables. It will be a transition not an abrupt change.

We also have to calculate the economic costs of global warming and increasing sea levels. Droughts, floods, huge changes that have a bill attached. So there are economic implications if we do little.

Fools are those who are resistant to change when it is obvious that continuing along a path that is not sustainable, will lead to severe problems. The science is not negotiable.

[chuckChuck]

I see your point but you ignored the fact that we as farmers already invite a huge cost with def systems that dramatically reduce emissions. Also we can not reduce consumption much and will have to eat the full cost of the fairy tale tax with no way to pass it on .

Agriculture can be largely exempted from carbon taxes with good policy if that is required. But agricultural practices will have to be changed to reduce emissions as agriculture is still a large emitter.

[furrowtickler]

Fools are those who say the Greenland ice sheet will melt and sea levels will rise dramatically because of it causing the world untold death and destruction.

[sumdumguy]

Tax chucky and his science peers so they shut the hell up !

Tax those begging to be taxed !

Ain't that the truth. If only they would put their money where their mouth is!

[fjlip]

Agriculture can be largely exempted from carbon taxes with good policy if that is required. But agricultural practices will have to be changed to reduce emissions as agriculture is still a large emitter.

WRONG! we are massive sequesters that NO climate change nazi will admit.