A landmark report released on Sunday sets the clock ticking for humanity

[jazz]

the conversation is gone past the non believers by politicians.it is on policy only.No one will come out and say the scientists are wrong and I can prove it.

You do know that you can be not wrong but not right at the same time.

The physics of a pure greenhouse type climate change event are known. But the earth is not a greenhouse, nor is it a closed system and we dont know all the variables affecting the climate let alone how to correctly model them.

If we did, those 7 day forecasts would be rock solid.

[fjlip]

but, but , this has happened many times before
happened 150 years ago too
I am all for being cleaner , any real farmer is
too bad the ****ing gores , suzukis , movie stars , prime ministers , presidents, politicians , etc. , that are jet setting around the world in private jets weren't also ?
anyways don't you understand , it doesn't matter wtf you do here , India and China are the problem , if there is a problem
oh by the way did you shut your NG off ? Hope to hell you aren't drying grain with it or using it to keep your water pipes from freezing and breaking
because if there was a carbon tax , I guess you just leave your grain if you have any in the field
what a ****ing joke for someone that lives in this hostile climate , if in fact you do ?

YES YES who or what was to blame or the cause then??
The 30's was STUCK dry weather, the 50's was STUCK wet weather, 61 was stuck drought, 68 was hellish drawn out COLD wet harvest. 1974 was hell from seeding till harvest in November! Total lies and bullshit, weather has been stuck forever once in a while. SFA to do with CO2.

[chuckChuck]

You do know that you can be not wrong but not right at the same time.

The physics of a pure greenhouse type climate change event are known. But the earth is not a greenhouse, nor is it a closed system and we dont know all the variables affecting the climate let alone how to correctly model them.

If we did, those 7 day forecasts would be rock solid.

On several basic points you are wrong.

"The Earth is a closed system for matter

The Earth is made up of chemical elements – think of the periodic table. That is a list of all basic elemental materials on our planet. Because of gravity, matter (comprising all solids, liquids and gases) does not leave the system. It is a closed box. And, the laws of thermodynamics, long agreed by scientists, tell us that it’s impossible to destroy matter. So the chemical matter we have on Earth will always be here. The important question is, how are those chemicals organised?

The Earth is an open system for energy

It is accepted science that the Earth is an open system for energy. Energy radiates into the Earth’s system, mainly from the sun. Energy is then radiated back into space from the Earth, with the flows being regulated by the Earth’s atmosphere and ozone layer. This delicate balanced transfer of energy maintains the surface temperature at a level that is suited to the forms of life that have evolved and currently exist."


Climate scientists do have the data that proves rising CO2 levels correspond to higher global temperatures from long past eras.

And short term weather forecast models are steadily improving.

It is a mistake to compare short term weather forecast accuracy and variabilty with long term climate trends which can be confirmed by historical data and other methods.

[jazz]

On several basic points you are wrong.

"The Earth is a closed system for matter

The earth is not a closed system for matter or nor energy. Energy is radiated and absorbed from outside the earths boundaries and that is influences by many things, but matter also crosses that boundary as well. CO2 and methane actually escapes into space from the upper atmosphere.

And we get matter into our atmosphere as well. The earths magnetic field collects charged particle from the sun and we regularly pass through celestial dust and micrometer areas in our orbit.

[chuckChuck]

The FAO report commissioned by the very same UN just predicted Canada will be come agricultural eden as climate change shaves off our cold shoulder months.

So which is it.

Lets get honest here. Canada is already carbon neutral and farmers are managing one of the biggest carbon sinks in the world so people in china can pollute at will.

So not only am I supposed to send my money to china or poor people in canada, I get no credit for managing a carbon sink and the chinese use up those carbon credits to do whatever they want. Sorry...nope, not going to happen.

CO2 is only one of several heat trapping greenhouse gases.

The carbon cycle is well known. We may have large areas of forest, crops, grasslands and oceans that act as carbon sinks but they also release carbon in the carbon cycle. Our carbon sinks are not getting larger.

Canada can not be considered carbon neutral as carbon sinks such as forest and grasslands reach an equilibrium point. They can only absorb so much and they also continue to release carbon.

" If all sources are equal to all sinks, the carbon cycle can be said to be in equilibrium (or i
n balance) and there is no change in the size of the pools over time. Maintaining a steady amount of CO2 in the atmosphere helps maintain stable average temperatures at the global scale. However, because fossil fuel combustion and deforestation have increased CO2 inputs to the atmosphere without matching increases in the natural sinks that draw CO2 out of the atmosphere (oceans, forests, etc.), these activities have caused the size of the atmospheric carbon pool to increase."

There are also several really worrying feed back loops as temperatures increase.
1. Increasing numbers of forest fires will rapidly release large amounts of carbon.

2. The decline of arctic sea ice increases the absorption of the suns energy.

3. The thawing of the permafrost in the arctic and sub arctic releasing massive amounts of methane.

[chuckChuck]

The earth is not a closed system for matter or nor energy. Energy is radiated and absorbed from outside the earths boundaries and that is influences by many things, but matter also crosses that boundary as well. CO2 and methane actually escapes into space from the upper atmosphere.

And we get matter into our atmosphere as well. The earths magnetic field collects charged particle from the sun and we regularly pass through celestial dust and micrometer areas in our orbit.

How much methane and CO2 escape into space from earths atmosphere? Very very little.

"Earth's atmosphere is leaking. Every day, around 90 tonnes of material escapes from our planet's upper atmosphere and streams out into space. Although missions such as ESA's Cluster fleet have long been investigating this leakage, there are still many open questions. How and why is Earth losing its atmosphere – and how is this relevant in our hunt for life elsewhere in the Universe?

Given the expanse of our atmosphere, 90 tonnes per day amounts to a small leak. Earth's atmosphere weighs in at around five quadrillion (5 × 1015) tonnes, so we are in no danger of running out any time soon."

Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2016-07-curious-case-earth-leaking-atmosphere.html#jCp

Canada's annual greenhouse gas emissions are an estimated 704 mega tons in 2016 so I doubt that 90 tonnes of global atmospheric loss per day has any significant impact on CO2 levels.

The global atmosphere is in effect a closed system even if there is small leakage.

[jazz]

Canada is huge carbon sink and always will be. Our forests, ag land and freshwater sequester way more carbon than we emit.

https://business.financialpost.com/opinion/canada-may-already-be-carbon-neutral-so-why-are-we-keeping-it-a-secret Canada may already be carbon neutral

Why are we supposed to believe in climate change but not in our carbon sequestration. Its quietly and conveniently left off.

But even if you dont believe it. Canada still doesn't have a role to play here. Our emissions are smaller than most large corporations.

https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2017/jul/10/100-fossil-fuel-companies-investors-responsible-71-global-emissions-cdp-study-climate-change Just 100 companies responsible for 71% of global emissions

Stop buying china junk and you will trim double digits off global emissions. No panels or taxes required, just a vote for trump.

[chuckChuck]

Canada is huge carbon sink and always will be. Our forests, ag land and freshwater sequester way more carbon than we emit.

https://business.financialpost.com/opinion/canada-may-already-be-carbon-neutral-so-why-are-we-keeping-it-a-secret Canada may already be carbon neutral

Why are we supposed to believe in climate change but not in our carbon sequestration. Its quietly and conveniently left off.

But even if you dont believe it. Canada still doesn't have a role to play here. Our emissions are smaller than most large corporations.

https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2017/jul/10/100-fossil-fuel-companies-investors-responsible-71-global-emissions-cdp-study-climate-change Just 100 companies responsible for 71% of global emissions

Stop buying china junk and you will trim double digits off global emissions. No panels or taxes required, just a vote for trump.

Carbon sinks are important but they can't absorb all the extra carbon that is coming from the burning of fossil fuels. That is why the CO2 concentration is increasing in the atmosphere. If the carbon cycle was in equilibrium then CO2 concentrations would not be increasing.

Carbon sinks continue to release carbon as part of the cycle. The carbon cycle is out of sync because fossil fuels are adding more carbon dioxide on a massive scale and the oceans, forest, grasslands cannot absorb it all.

Canada is not an island in the atmosphere where what we do has no impact on the rest of the world. On a per capita basis, our emissions are some of the highest in the world. Just because we have lots of land with forest, crop and grassland carbon sinks, this does not mean that we can continue to contribute to the global carbon emissions from fossil fuels without consequences.

If we look back to measure the carbon sinks prior to European settlement you would find that deforestation and the cultivation of agricultural land have caused very significant transfers of carbon to the atmosphere. I doubt that we would be able to get back to the carbon sink state that existed before europeans came to North America.

[grassfarmer]

Carbon sinks are important but they can't absorb all the extra carbon that is coming from the burning of fossil fuels. That is why the CO2 concentration is increasing in the atmosphere. If the carbon cycle was in equilibrium then CO2 concentrations would not be increasing.

Carbon sinks continue to release carbon as part of the cycle. The carbon cycle is out of sync because fossil fuels are adding more carbon dioxide on a massive scale and the oceans, forest, grasslands cannot absorb it all.

Canada is not an island in the atmosphere where what we do has no impact on the rest of the world. On a per capita basis, our emissions are some of the highest in the world. Just because we have lots of land with forest, crop and grassland carbon sinks, this does not mean that we can continue to contribute to the global carbon emissions from fossil fuels without consequences.

If we look back to measure the carbon sinks prior to European settlement you would find that deforestation and the cultivation of agricultural land have caused very significant transfers of carbon to the atmosphere. I doubt that we would be able to get back to the carbon sink state that existed before europeans came to North America.

As clear, concise and sensible rebuttal as I've seen. Well done.

[samhill]

Well Chuck and Grass, you may be right re global warming. But politicos and elite wealthy are all about more tax and and subjugation of the populace. Our weather shows no indication of the dire straits claimed. The world pop grows, life is better than a century ago, by leaps and bounds.
There is no doubt that Canada is carbon neutral and possibly negative. Taxing Canada/Canadians is a joke and proves my statements.
History has global weather/climate ups and downs. And Chicken Littles run around more often now, and have been shown to be incorrect ala 1960/70’s predictions, but they have an agenda.
One needs to be sceptical of the of those wanting more of my money.
Many of us have faith in Mothrr Earths abilities.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

So, according to the troll's cut and paste, E=mc^2 is no longer valid. Which isn't a big surprise considering how many other laws of physics have been ignored to create the global warming hoax.

[jazz]

As clear, concise and sensible rebuttal as I've seen. Well done.

Yes, a clear rebuttle right along the lines of the Leap Manifesto.

In short, Canada is covered and already doing more than its share. Dont really care what china does and using our wealth ofset their emissions.

Its nice you dream of prairie grass and bison again, but that darn feeding 7 billion (soon to be 10B) people keeps getting in the way.