Climate change and other predictions of Imminent Doom

Advances in the investigation of the physical universe we live in.
User avatar
Typhoon
Posts: 27267
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm
Location: 関西

Re: Climate and the Anthropogenic Global Warming Controversy

Post by Typhoon »

"There seems to be an enormous cottage industry of scientists in ancillary subfields writing a lot of papers about climate change impacts, that dominate the climate change literature (and probably the funding, if it was tracked). Will any of these papers stand the test of time like the Manabe and Wetherald paper has? I suspect that nearly all these papers from the ancillary subfields implicitly assume (97% and all that) that recent climate change is attributed to humans (without having any first order understanding of climate dynamics and climate change attribution). Especially if humans turn out not to be the dominant cause of recent climate change and particularly extreme events, these publications will not stand the test of time and and the cottage industry of climate impacts will shrivel. We shall see."

Dr. Judith Curry

http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/warmlist.htm

Quite.
May the gods preserve and defend me from self-righteous altruists; I can defend myself from my enemies and my friends.
Simple Minded

Re: Climate and the Anthropogenic Global Warming Controversy

Post by Simple Minded »

NOAA: Record 117-Month Major Hurricane Drought Continues

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/kathlee ... -continues

Damn AGW!!! :x Er, uh, wait..... there's no connection between weather & climate, right?

I guessed I missed all the Peak Hurricane books.

http://www.indiaresource.org/issues/ene ... tofcc.html
User avatar
Doc
Posts: 12562
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 6:10 pm

Re: Climate and the Anthropogenic Global Warming Controversy

Post by Doc »

Simple Minded wrote:Is a mini ICE AGE on the way? Scientists warn the sun will 'go to sleep' in 2030 and could cause temperatures to plummet
New study claims to have cracked predicting solar cycles
Says that between 2030 and 2040 solar cycles will cancel each other out
Could lead to 'Maunder minimum' effect that saw River Thames freeze over

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... ummet.html

FINALLY! AGW is solved!!! :D
NO actually it isn't Now all those Global Warming Alarmist out there will have to burn coal to stay warm all the while insisting that we have to cut CO2 emissions before it is too late.
"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros
Simple Minded

Re: Climate and the Anthropogenic Global Warming Controversy

Post by Simple Minded »

Doc wrote:
NO actually it isn't Now all those Global Warming Alarmist out there will have to burn coal to stay warm all the while insisting that we have to cut CO2 emissions before it is too late.
You may be right. It might take decades for the propaganda to fade away, even in light of evidence, it may be more that people simply have to grow out of the belief in AGW, similar to growing out of a belief in Santa Claus.

More than a few parents I know say they are shocked at the amount of AGW nonsense that is worked into their kids homework and reading assignments. Even as young as age 6.
User avatar
Doc
Posts: 12562
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 6:10 pm

Re: Climate and the Anthropogenic Global Warming Controversy

Post by Doc »

Simple Minded wrote:
Doc wrote:
NO actually it isn't Now all those Global Warming Alarmist out there will have to burn coal to stay warm all the while insisting that we have to cut CO2 emissions before it is too late.
You may be right. It might take decades for the propaganda to fade away, even in light of evidence, it may be more that people simply have to grow out of the belief in AGW, similar to growing out of a belief in Santa Claus.

More than a few parents I know say they are shocked at the amount of AGW nonsense that is worked into their kids homework and reading assignments. Even as young as age 6.
Edumacation is a powerful thing
"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros
User avatar
Heracleum Persicum
Posts: 11574
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 7:38 pm

Re: Climate and the Anthropogenic Global Warming Controversy

Post by Heracleum Persicum »

There’s even less than people think there is.

California still doesn’t require that water pumped from underground be measured at all, much less factored into an overall assessment of total water resources

.
User avatar
Alexis
Posts: 1305
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2012 2:47 pm

Meanwhile, in France

Post by Alexis »

Meanwhile, in France, the Parliament has just voted a seven-upling of carbon tax within the next 15 years, from 14,5 euro per ton of CO2 this year to 100 euros in 2030, with e.g. 56 euros in 2022 and already 22 euros next year

See link (in French)

However, the price of the tax will need to be confirmed each year in Finances Law, so that plan may or may not be entirely applied as planned.

What strikes me is that for such a thing not to lead to severe competitive disadvantage wrt countries not applying similar taxes, a carbon tax on imports will have to be applied sooner rather than later. Such a tax would either need to be set up at the EU border - good luck to get all member countries on board for that - or at French border - goodbye integrated EU market then.

Anyway, developments will be interesting to watch. ;)

If I'm not mistaken, this may be the first time a country has planned increase of a carbon tax to such values within a relatively short time (7 years to quadrupling)?
User avatar
Alexis
Posts: 1305
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2012 2:47 pm

Well, France...

Post by Alexis »

... is not in the worse position to implement such a carbon tax.

I don't mean to say the impact will be small. However, about one third of energy - if memory serves - goes into power production, and that is already 80%+ nuclear here not to count 12% hydroelectrical. Therefore, sensitivity will definitly be smaller for French economy than it would be for many others.

Add in that France is among those countries where distances are small, like other Europeans and Japan for sure, but very much unlike the America / Russia / Canada / Australia / China / Brazil band, meaning that needs for transportation are smaller.

Truth be told, if carbon taxes became a rule of most economies, France could stand a relative economic advantage...



Obviously, I don't mean to say that this guy is being mischievous. You just have to look at him to understand he just can't ;) (*)

Image

(*) Or ?...
User avatar
Parodite
Posts: 5643
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 9:43 pm

Re: Climate and the Anthropogenic Global Warming Controversy

Post by Parodite »

Smart! :D

Image
Deep down I'm very superficial
User avatar
Doc
Posts: 12562
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 6:10 pm

Re: Meanwhile, in France

Post by Doc »

Alexis wrote:Meanwhile, in France, the Parliament has just voted a seven-upling of carbon tax within the next 15 years, from 14,5 euro per ton of CO2 this year to 100 euros in 2030, with e.g. 56 euros in 2022 and already 22 euros next year

See link (in French)

However, the price of the tax will need to be confirmed each year in Finances Law, so that plan may or may not be entirely applied as planned.

What strikes me is that for such a thing not to lead to severe competitive disadvantage wrt countries not applying similar taxes, a carbon tax on imports will have to be applied sooner rather than later. Such a tax would either need to be set up at the EU border - good luck to get all member countries on board for that - or at French border - goodbye integrated EU market then.

Anyway, developments will be interesting to watch. ;)

If I'm not mistaken, this may be the first time a country has planned increase of a carbon tax to such values within a relatively short time (7 years to quadrupling)?
Suicide isn't painless But it brings on many changes.

On the other hand:

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_an ... ears_.html
A Fracking Good Story

Carbon dioxide emissions in the U.S. are at their lowest level in 20 years. It’s not because of wind or solar power.
---
But, beyond this well-trodden battlefield, something amazing has happened: Carbon-dioxide emissions in the United States have dropped to their lowest level in 20 years. Estimating on the basis of data from the US Energy Information Agency from the first five months of 2012, this year’s expected CO2 emissions have declined by more than 800 million tons, or 14 percent from their peak in 2007.

The cause is an unprecedented switch to natural gas, which emits 45 percent less carbon per energy unit. The U.S. used to generate about half its electricity from coal, and roughly 20 percent from gas. Over the past five years, those numbers have changed, first slowly and now dramatically: In April of this year, coal’s share in power generation plummeted to just 32 percent, on par with gas.

America’s rapid switch to natural gas is the result of three decades of technological innovation, particularly the development of hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking,” which has opened up large new resources of previously inaccessible shale gas. Despite some legitimate concerns about safety, it is hard to overstate the overwhelming benefits.
So it is literally impossible to be taken seriously if one is against both "global Warming" and Fracking. AS the US has shown by leading the entire world in CO2 reduction by burn more natural gas.
"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros
Simple Minded

Re: Meanwhile, in France

Post by Simple Minded »

Doc wrote:
So it is literally impossible to be taken seriously if one is against both "global Warming" and Fracking. AS the US has shown by leading the entire world in CO2 reduction by burn more natural gas.
Careful Bro,

The Round Earthers will take this, and the non-extant rise of global temperature for almost 2 decades as proof that an increase in CO2 results in an increase in temperature.
User avatar
Alexis
Posts: 1305
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2012 2:47 pm

Re: Meanwhile, in France

Post by Alexis »

Doc wrote:So it is literally impossible to be taken seriously if one is against both "global Warming" and Fracking. AS the US has shown by leading the entire world in CO2 reduction by burn more natural gas.
Gas provides more energy relative to CO2 emission than coal.

That being said, it pales compared to the leader of the bunch, that is nuclear.

Also, the US may have lowered its CO2 emission, they continue to trail by a large way Europe and Japan when it comes to GDP / CO2 emission ratio. The US both consumes more energy and emits more CO2 to produce 1$ of GDP than these countries. Though admittedly China is much worse.
User avatar
Typhoon
Posts: 27267
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm
Location: 関西

Re: Meanwhile, in France

Post by Typhoon »

Alexis wrote:
Doc wrote:So it is literally impossible to be taken seriously if one is against both "global Warming" and Fracking. AS the US has shown by leading the entire world in CO2 reduction by burn more natural gas.
Gas provides more energy relative to CO2 emission than coal.

That being said, it pales compared to the leader of the bunch, that is nuclear.
Quite. France is one of the very few nations that got it's electricity production right.
However, did Franoe not announce a recent plan to reduce electricity generation via nuclear.
Alexis wrote:Also, the US may have lowered its CO2 emission, they continue to trail by a large way Europe and Japan when it comes to GDP / CO2 emission ratio. The US both consumes more energy and emits more CO2 to produce 1$ of GDP than these countries. Though admittedly China is much worse.
Well, Japan and Europe should make a renewed effort to decrease their GDP / CO2 ratio by increasing their CO2 production.

The plants of the planet will be grateful.
May the gods preserve and defend me from self-righteous altruists; I can defend myself from my enemies and my friends.
User avatar
Typhoon
Posts: 27267
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm
Location: 関西

Re: Climate and the Anthropogenic Global Warming Controversy

Post by Typhoon »

Spot the Vested Interest: The $1.5 Trillion Climate Change Industry
Climate Change Business Journal estimates the Climate Change Industry is a $1.5 Trillion dollar escapade, which means four billion dollars a day is spent on our quest to change the climate. That includes everything from carbon markets to carbon consulting, carbon sequestration, renewables, biofuels, green buildings and insipid cars. For comparison global retail sales online are worth around $1.5 trillion. So all the money wasted on the climate is equivalent to all the goods bought online.

The special thing about this industry is that it wouldn’t exist if it weren’t for an assumption about relative humidity that is probably wrong. As such, it’s the only major industry in the world dependent on consumer and voter ignorance. This is not just another vested interest in a political debate; it’s vested-on-steroids, a mere opinion poll away from extinction.
May the gods preserve and defend me from self-righteous altruists; I can defend myself from my enemies and my friends.
Simple Minded

Re: Climate and the Anthropogenic Global Warming Controversy

Post by Simple Minded »

Looking at the graph below, the solution seems obvious. Kill all humans over the age of 28. On their 29th birthday, everybody gets a free tour of the Soylent Green facility that Planned Parenthood operates.

Have you seen old people? They look like little repositories of entropy. Keeping them around can't be good for the environment.

I think the plan is sound, lack of results is probably proof we are not doing enough. Next step is kill everyone above mean income or networth......

http://patriotpost.us/opinion/36771

As the president reveals his plan to reduce greenhouse gases to save us from an apocalyptic atmosphere, I wish to remind people of three things:

1.) The true hockey stick of the fossil fuel era: Global progress in total population, personal wealth and life expectancy.

This is truly amazing. To show how fossil fuels played a roll in expanding the global pie, there are many more people alive today living longer and enjoying a higher GDP. One has to wonder if someone against fossil fuels is simply anti-progress. Ironic since many in the camp of anthropogenic global warming like to label themselves “progressive.” They’re certainly anti-statistic given something like this staring them in the face.

2.) The geological time scale of temperatures versus CO2.

As much as I struggle, I can’t see the linkage. Maybe it’s like one of those books where you have to stare at it and cross your eyes to see the picture.

3.) EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy admitted that the steps being taken would only prevent .01 degrees Celsius of warming, but it was the example that counted for the rest of the world.

This article sums that up pretty nicely.

This in addition to the fact that, in 2011, she admitted she did not know how much CO2 was in the atmosphere. And its lines of evidence for this are provably false!

Given the facts, I can’t help but wonder: Did policymakers ever take Economics 101, or a course in how to read a chart?

When I see simple questions that can raise doubts, if not outright debunk all this, it’s like watching the opening from the old Twilight Zone Series: “You are traveling through another dimension, a dimension not only of sight and sound but of mind. A journey into a wondrous land of imagination. Next stop, the Twilight Zone!”

Joe Bastardi is chief forecaster at WeatherBELL Analytics, a meteorological consulting firm.
Attachments
2015-08-03-64bb44fc.png
2015-08-03-64bb44fc.png (121.6 KiB) Viewed 1922 times
User avatar
Typhoon
Posts: 27267
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm
Location: 関西

Re: Climate and the Anthropogenic Global Warming Controversy

Post by Typhoon »

You poor American bastards . . .

WSJ | Climate-Change Putsch
Rarely do American Presidents display the raw willfulness that President Obama did Monday in rolling out his plan to reorganize the economy in the name of climate change. Without a vote in Congress or even much public debate, Mr. Obama is using his last 18 months to dictate U.S. energy choices for the next 20 or 30 years. This abuse of power is regulation without representation.

The so-called Clean Power Plan commands states to cut carbon emissions by 32% (from 2005 levels) by 2030. This final mandate is 9% steeper than the draft the Environmental Protection Agency issued in June 2014. The damage to growth, consumer incomes and U.S. competitiveness will be immense—assuming the rule isn’t tossed by the courts or rescinded by the next Administration.
May the gods preserve and defend me from self-righteous altruists; I can defend myself from my enemies and my friends.
User avatar
Nonc Hilaire
Posts: 6168
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:28 am

Re: Climate and the Anthropogenic Global Warming Controversy

Post by Nonc Hilaire »

Typhoon wrote:You poor American bastards . . .

WSJ | Climate-Change Putsch
Rarely do American Presidents display the raw willfulness that President Obama did Monday in rolling out his plan to reorganize the economy in the name of climate change. Without a vote in Congress or even much public debate, Mr. Obama is using his last 18 months to dictate U.S. energy choices for the next 20 or 30 years. This abuse of power is regulation without representation.

The so-called Clean Power Plan commands states to cut carbon emissions by 32% (from 2005 levels) by 2030. This final mandate is 9% steeper than the draft the Environmental Protection Agency issued in June 2014. The damage to growth, consumer incomes and U.S. competitiveness will be immense—assuming the rule isn’t tossed by the courts or rescinded by the next Administration.
Obama has expiated the idea of a lame duck president. He seems intent on installing executive orders he could not pass democratically. I expect his autonomous behavior to become more pronounced as his term wanes.
“Christ has no body now but yours. Yours are the eyes through which he looks with compassion on this world. Yours are the feet with which he walks among His people to do good. Yours are the hands through which he blesses His creation.”

Teresa of Ávila
User avatar
Typhoon
Posts: 27267
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm
Location: 関西

Re: Climate and the Anthropogenic Global Warming Controversy

Post by Typhoon »

Nonc Hilaire wrote:
Typhoon wrote:You poor American bastards . . .

WSJ | Climate-Change Putsch
Rarely do American Presidents display the raw willfulness that President Obama did Monday in rolling out his plan to reorganize the economy in the name of climate change. Without a vote in Congress or even much public debate, Mr. Obama is using his last 18 months to dictate U.S. energy choices for the next 20 or 30 years. This abuse of power is regulation without representation.

The so-called Clean Power Plan commands states to cut carbon emissions by 32% (from 2005 levels) by 2030. This final mandate is 9% steeper than the draft the Environmental Protection Agency issued in June 2014. The damage to growth, consumer incomes and U.S. competitiveness will be immense—assuming the rule isn’t tossed by the courts or rescinded by the next Administration.
Obama has expiated the idea of a lame duck president. He seems intent on installing executive orders he could not pass democratically. I expect his autonomous behavior to become more pronounced as his term wanes.
Knowing little about US POTUS "Executive Orders" thought I'd look up the history of their use.
What I found surprised me:

Image

I suppose there is more to it than just the number of, but also the nature, scope, and intent of.
May the gods preserve and defend me from self-righteous altruists; I can defend myself from my enemies and my friends.
Simple Minded

Re: Climate and the Anthropogenic Global Warming Controversy

Post by Simple Minded »

Typhoon wrote:Spot the Vested Interest: The $1.5 Trillion Climate Change Industry
Climate Change Business Journal estimates the Climate Change Industry is a $1.5 Trillion dollar escapade, which means four billion dollars a day is spent on our quest to change the climate. That includes everything from carbon markets to carbon consulting, carbon sequestration, renewables, biofuels, green buildings and insipid cars. For comparison global retail sales online are worth around $1.5 trillion. So all the money wasted on the climate is equivalent to all the goods bought online.

The special thing about this industry is that it wouldn’t exist if it weren’t for an assumption about relative humidity that is probably wrong. As such, it’s the only major industry in the world dependent on consumer and voter ignorance. This is not just another vested interest in a political debate; it’s vested-on-steroids, a mere opinion poll away from extinction.
Tulip bulb mania revisited.

When this scheme tanks, it is going to make most stock market crashes look like non events.
User avatar
Nonc Hilaire
Posts: 6168
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:28 am

Re: Climate and the Anthropogenic Global Warming Controversy

Post by Nonc Hilaire »

Traditionally, a lame duck POTUS spends the last two years doing international visits and securing diplomatic loose ends.

Obama seems to have a different plan. He is traveling, but is also trying to force a domestic agenda centered on making it difficult for his critics to untangle what he has done.
“Christ has no body now but yours. Yours are the eyes through which he looks with compassion on this world. Yours are the feet with which he walks among His people to do good. Yours are the hands through which he blesses His creation.”

Teresa of Ávila
User avatar
Heracleum Persicum
Posts: 11574
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 7:38 pm

Re: Climate and the Anthropogenic Global Warming Controversy

Post by Heracleum Persicum »

20150811155104.jpg
20150811155104.jpg (83.28 KiB) Viewed 1893 times
User avatar
Heracleum Persicum
Posts: 11574
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 7:38 pm

Re: Climate and the Anthropogenic Global Warming Controversy

Post by Heracleum Persicum »

image-883840-galleryV9-woeq.jpg
image-883840-galleryV9-woeq.jpg (40.97 KiB) Viewed 1885 times
.
image-882427-galleryV9-hroo.jpg
image-882427-galleryV9-hroo.jpg (89.88 KiB) Viewed 1885 times

.
User avatar
Doc
Posts: 12562
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 6:10 pm

Re: Climate and the Anthropogenic Global Warming Controversy

Post by Doc »

The insidious danger of "PENIS CHANGE" and other things

http://nypost.com/2015/08/15/ignore-the ... -hysteria/
Ignore the dire warnings about our lives because it’s just hysteria


By Kyle Smith

August 15, 2015 | 4:05pm

Remember the great penis scare of the 1990s?

Due to environmental toxins, sperm counts were in free fall, and the world was doomed.

Scandinavian researchers discovered that a nearly 50% decline in sperm counts had taken place over the last 50 years, probably because of “endocrine disruptors” that are everywhere in our poisonous, chemical-infested modern world, and Greenpeace used the study for fundraising under the slogan, “You’re not half the man your father was.”

Moreover, the penis was suddenly at increased risk of deformity: It was reported that there had been an explosion in instances of hypospadias, a common birth defect in which the urethral opening is in the wrong place on the penis.

Since we have to be terrified of something at all times, new fears have sprung up to replace the old ones.

Except none of the above was happening. Scary sperm-count studies have gone limp. A meta-review of 35 sperm-quality studies conducted in 2013 found that eight studies encompassing a total of 18,109 men found a decline in sperm quality, whereas 21 studies involving 112,386 men showed either no change or an increase in sperm quality.

Newspaper editors and TV producers quietly let the issue fade away without apology. Oh, and a 2009 report on the hypospadias data concluded, “the bulk of evidence refutes claims for an increase in hypospadias rates.”

So much for the great dong doom dirge.

The penis scare took its place alongside the DDT scare (banned in 1972, it was later found to be as carcinogenic as coffee by the International Agency for Research on Cancer), the overpopulation scare (in fact, the population is leveling out and will actually start to decline in about 50 years), the famine scare (despite a doubling of the world population since 1968, world food production has tripled, and today both Pakistan and India have so much grain that they export some).

But since we have to be terrified of something at all times, new fears have sprung up to replace the old ones: Now we’re worried about global warming, genetically modified food, vaccines and that old standby, cancer. (Cancer rates have fallen precipitously, while survival rates are way up.)

Meanwhile, as science journalist Ronald Bailey writes in “The End of Doom: Environmental Renewal in the Twenty-first Century” (Thomas Dunne Books), massive improvements in virtually all areas of human endeavor have simply gone ignored.


Modal Trigger


If there were a musical theme to what’s actually been happening to the world in the last 50 years, it wouldn’t be “A hard rain’s a gonna fall” but “Getting so much better all the time.”

Bailey has been trying to talk humanity off the ledge for more than two decades, and people won’t forgive him for it. When, in 1992, he brought to his editor an idea for a sober, evidence-based book about how humanity copes with environmental challenges, the editor replied regretfully, “Ron, we’ll publish your book and we’ll both make some money. But I want to tell you that if you had brought me a book predicting the end of the world, I could have made you a rich man.”

Environmentalist groups are, of course, in the same business as the folks who brought you the “Saw” movies. Their fundraising depends on it, and the media rarely go back to fact-check past predictions, instead blustering ahead with the next dire warning.

Bailey doesn’t claim that global challenges simply resolve themselves — although, as we have seen, some scares were fictitious, based on junk science to begin with.

The doomsayers simply never account for the role of human cooperation and ingenuity in confronting challenges. Remember the hole in the ozone layer? Chlorofluorocarbon refrigerants apparently floated up to the atmosphere and were eroding the protective ozone layer over Antarctica.

Some scares were fictitious, based on junk science to begin with.

Bailey believes apocalyptic forecasts were off-base, but after an international treaty phased out the CFCs, French researchers reported in 2013 that the ozone layer is recovering.

So will global warming, a much more complicated issue than CFCs, be resolved by cooperation or ingenuity? Ask yourself which science has seen more breakthroughs in the last few decades — political science or technology.

Politicians issue fatuous warnings about the dangers of global warming, which they vow to combat with even more absurd fantasies about immediately de-carbonizing the economy.

Back in 2008, Al Gore urged America to “commit to producing 100% of our electricity” from renewables within 10 years. It’s seven years later, and solar, geothermal and wind energy are providing 5% of our power.

Renewables will start to take over when their costs fall below the price of fossil-fuel based energy. It’s as simple as that. Solar energy, on current trends, could be as cheap as $24 per megawatt hour in a decade. That is far cheaper than the forecasts for fossil fuel costs.

Stanford tech guru and entrepreneur Vivek Wadhwa said last year that “there is little doubt that we are heading into an era of unlimited and almost free clean energy” thanks largely to the coming breakthroughs in solar.

For climate-change hysteria, that would be catastrophically good news. Bailey doesn’t wholly share Wadhwa’s optimism. But he adds, “Wagering against human ingenuity has always been a bad bet.”
"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros
User avatar
Heracleum Persicum
Posts: 11574
Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2012 7:38 pm

Re: Climate and the Anthropogenic Global Warming Controversy

Post by Heracleum Persicum »

.


How California Is Winning the Drought


California has won back every job lost in the Great Recession and set new employment records. In the past year, California created 462,000 jobs — nearly 9,000 a week. No other state came close.

The drought has inspired no Dust Bowl-style exodus. California’s population has grown faster even as the drought has deepened.

More than half the fruits and vegetables grown in the United States come from California farms, and last year, the third growing season of the drought, both farm employment and farm revenue increased slightly.

Amid all the nervous news, the most important California drought story is the one we aren’t noticing. California is weathering the drought with remarkable resilience, because the state has been getting ready for this drought for the past 20 years.


Much more @ link


Very good news


.
User avatar
Typhoon
Posts: 27267
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:42 pm
Location: 関西

Re: Climate and the Anthropogenic Global Warming Controversy

Post by Typhoon »

Heracleum Persicum wrote:
image-883840-galleryV9-woeq.jpg
.
image-882427-galleryV9-hroo.jpg

.
Some people have trouble with the concepts of evaporation and condensation . . . also known as rain.
May the gods preserve and defend me from self-righteous altruists; I can defend myself from my enemies and my friends.
Post Reply