Coldest temp anomaly in the WORLD...here

[grassfarmer]

Think brown would be more appropriate, as in brown-outs in the electrical grid when they eliminate all reliable sources, brown plants and trees from lack of heat and CO2, brown soil blowing from tillage when chemicals are banned.

Might be a good slogan in fact. Chuck, do you want to use that?

"No thinking" might be a more appropriate slogan for some of you advocating this. You want to see brown grass and trees and soil blowing - just welcome on that increase in temperature and the increase in droughts it will bring with it. How are we going to be lacking C02? even if we were able to limit the INCREASE in global temperature to 2%, which looks unlikely at this moment, it would only be rolling CO2 levels back to a period when things were green and plants growing. To suggest otherwise is either scaremongering or stupidity.

[recapped]

"No thinking" might be a more appropriate slogan for some of you advocating this. You want to see brown grass and trees and soil blowing - just welcome on that increase in temperature and the increase in droughts it will bring with it. How are we going to be lacking C02? even if we were able to limit the INCREASE in global temperature to 2%, which looks unlikely at this moment, it would only be rolling CO2 levels back to a period when things were green and plants growing. To suggest otherwise is either scaremongering or stupidity.

Higher temperature will promote more evaporation from oceans resulting in more rain. Think about it for a moment.

[fjlip]

Higher temperature will promote more evaporation from oceans resulting in more rain. Think about it for a moment.

AKA, "pineapple express" drowning California is NOT COLD WET air.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

"No thinking" might be a more appropriate slogan for some of you advocating this. You want to see brown grass and trees and soil blowing - just welcome on that increase in temperature and the increase in droughts it will bring with it. How are we going to be lacking C02? even if we were able to limit the INCREASE in global temperature to 2%, which looks unlikely at this moment, it would only be rolling CO2 levels back to a period when things were green and plants growing. To suggest otherwise is either scaremongering or stupidity.

Earth has been steadily sequestering Carbon from the atmosphere faster than it is liberated for millions of years, down to approximately 240ppm by the beginning of the industrial revolution, and would have eventually approached the point where plant life ceases to be able to perform photosynthesis, at ~170ppm(sources vary). Until man started releasing fossil CO2 from hydrocarbons, which has led to a greener planet, a marginal improvement in temperature, and a host of other tangible benefits.

The bigger concern is how do we maintain these beneficial CO2 levels when we have moved on to more sustainable energy sources than combusting carbon containing fossil fuels.

[grassfarmer]

Higher temperature will promote more evaporation from oceans resulting in more rain. Think about it for a moment.

Distribution might be the problem though - it's not going to fall only on the driest areas that need it most - more likely it will lead to increased tropical cyclones and hurricanes in coastal areas.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Distribution might be the problem though - it's not going to fall only on the driest areas that need it most - more likely it will lead to increased tropical cyclones and hurricanes in coastal areas.

In spite of overwhelming real world evidence to the contrary(and to the eternal consternation of the ever present doomsday predictors who told us how much worse and more frequent hurricanes and cyclones would be by now).

But why not just assume that the results will be all bad, even while we are all benefiting from improved climate and CO2 levels. I challenge you once again to find evidence today of the detrimental effect of increased CO2 on crop yields anywhere.

[Oliver88]

More climate scientists question the carbon tax scam.

[chuckChuck]

https://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-lags-temperature.htm

CO2 lags temperature
"An article in Science magazine illustrated that a rise in carbon dioxide did not precede a rise in temperatures, but actually lagged behind temperature rises by 200 to 1000 years. A rise in carbon dioxide levels could not have caused a rise in temperature if it followed the temperature." (Joe Barton)

Earth’s climate has varied widely over its history, from ice ages characterized by large ice sheets covering many land areas, to warm periods with no ice at the poles. Several factors have affected past climate change, including solar variability, volcanic activity and changes in the composition of the atmosphere. Data from Antarctic ice cores reveals an interesting story for the past 400,000 years. During this period, CO2 and temperatures are closely correlated, which means they rise and fall together. However, based on Antarctic ice core data, changes in CO2 follow changes in temperatures by about 600 to 1000 years, as illustrated in Figure 1 below. This has led some to conclude that CO2 simply cannot be responsible for current global warming.

Figure 1: Vostok ice core records for carbon dioxide concentration and temperature change.

This statement does not tell the whole story. The initial changes in temperature during this period are explained by changes in the Earth’s orbit around the sun, which affects the amount of seasonal sunlight reaching the Earth’s surface. In the case of warming, the lag between temperature and CO2 is explained as follows: as ocean temperatures rise, oceans release CO2 into the atmosphere. In turn, this release amplifies the warming trend, leading to yet more CO2 being released. In other words, increasing CO2 levels become both the cause and effect of further warming. This positive feedback is necessary to trigger the shifts between glacials and interglacials as the effect of orbital changes is too weak to cause such variation. Additional positive feedbacks which play an important role in this process include other greenhouse gases, and changes in ice sheet cover and vegetation patterns.

A 2012 study by Shakun et al. looked at temperature changes 20,000 years ago (the last glacial-interglacial transition) from around the world and added more detail to our understanding of the CO2-temperature change relationship. They found that:

The Earth's orbital cycles triggered warming in the Arctic approximately 19,000 years ago, causing large amounts of ice to melt, flooding the oceans with fresh water.

This influx of fresh water then disrupted ocean current circulation, in turn causing a seesawing of heat between the hemispheres.

The Southern Hemisphere and its oceans warmed first, starting about 18,000 years ago. As the Southern Ocean warms, the solubility of CO2 in water falls. This causes the oceans to give up more CO2, releasing it into the atmosphere.

While the orbital cycles triggered the initial warming, overall, more than 90% of the glacial-interglacial warming occured after that atmospheric CO2 increase (Figure 2).

Shakun Fig 2a

Figure 2: Average global temperature (blue), Antarctic temperature (red), and atmospheric CO2 concentration (yellow dots). Source.

Basic rebuttal written by dana1981

[SASKFARMER3]

God Chuck Give it a rest already you'll burn out for the next weather change.

It weather its world its climate and it changes.

We had springs were seeding April 20th and years we start May 20th.

We have years the leaves are out already and grass is cut and years we have snow into May.

Give this bullshit a rest.

How do you guys wake up and not go back to bed because you're terrified of whats out their?

Its weather it changes and it's a cold year.

Crops might freeze in fall.

shit happens its farming and life in the north.

yea we are from the north is you haven't realized.

Its cold in winter and liveable in summer.

[Guest]

More climate scientists question the carbon tax scam.

oh no , gore , Leanardo , Suzuki and climate Barbie are much more qualified to comment on this than this quack , lol