Climate Change will be far, far, far worse than Covid so why aren’t we following the science in the same way?

15
318

Bill Gates has some terrifying truths, as bad as you think Covid is, oh the Climate Crisis will be vastly worse…

Bill Gates: Climate change could be more devastating than Covid-19 pandemic—this is what the US must do to prepare

“As awful as this pandemic is, climate change could be worse.” So says billionaire philanthropist Bill Gates in a recent blog post.

“A global crisis has shocked the world. It is causing a tragic number of deaths, making people afraid to leave home, and leading to economic hardship not seen in many generations. Its effects are rippling across the world,” Gates wrote. “Obviously, I am talking about COVID-19. But in just a few decades, the same description will fit another global crisis: climate change.”

…we are already seeing the temperate and stable climate descend into free fall…

TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com

A winter storm caused Texas’s power outage. Climate change likely caused the storm

The plight of millions of Americans freezing in Texas is heartbreaking, infuriating and a reminder of just how unprepared the U.S. is when it comes to dealing with the impacts of climate change. Right now, we’re living through a massive shuffling of the cards when it comes to our planet’s weather systems. In this interregnum between what came before and the end result of the Anthropocene’s massive transformation of the globe, the only constant will be unpredictability.

…and new modelling each year shows the worst case scenario rapidly becoming the only scenario…

Climate change: World on course for ‘metres of sea level rise’, scientists warn

Past predictions of sea level rises have turned out to be “on the money”, with scientists now warning we’re on track for “metres of sea level rise” close to the worst-case scenarios they can think of.

…we can listen to the best science when it comes to protecting us from Covid but are deaf to the science screaming at us that we urgently need to start adaptation for a far more dangerous weather climate.

Those with vested commercial interests to deny climate change fund the quack science and rely on ideological storm troopers like National Party & ACT voters to fight out of pure cultural spite. None of them can admit they have been wrong all this time and they will die in a ditch to minimize the impacts of Climate Change at all costs.

This is a cultural bitterness for them, further proof that the white bloke is being beaten down by a rainbow coalition of hippies. For them their denial is just a sad societal face saving exercise that no one is listening to any longer.

Climate deniers are creationists in an evolution conference and attempting to depoliticise this fight produces weak kneed nothings like the Climate Commission suggested earlier this month.

At some point we need to stop begging the NZ Right to accept climate change and just fucking tell them this is the way it is now, and if you don’t like, go get fucked.

We will no longer tolerate climate deniers as the planet burns before our eyes.

Climate deniers are to science what Qanon is to rational debate. The sooner the Climate Change Commission acknowledges that, the sooner we can force the radical adaption we will require to survive this.

Being carbon neutral in 30 years is not a solution, and if you think it is, you are part of the problem.

 

Increasingly having independent opinion in a mainstream media environment which mostly echo one another has become more important than ever, so if you value having an independent voice – please donate here.

If you can’t contribute but want to help, please always feel free to share our blogs on social media.

15 COMMENTS

  1. The human species has clearly been on a path to self-annihilation via environmental destruction and overburdening the Earth with pollution for a very long time. I worked that part out that part of the equation over two decades ago. And have been fought tooth and nail by the looters-and-polluters club for pointing out the obvious.

    I was naive 20 years ago and thought raising crucial issues of the times would elicit sane responses; I now know vested interest groups -particularly banks and corporations, but also opportunists- wield such enormous political and economic power, they decide what government policy will be and what local council policy will be.

    So now, after decades of inaction (or rather completely the wrong actions) the shit is hitting the fan big time, and Antonio Guterres, the head of the UN, has said EVERYTHING must change in the way societies operate because we are on a suicidal path:

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/feb/18/human-destruction-of-nature-is-senseless-and-suicidal-warns-un-chief

    I have little doubt Jacinda and Grant and company will ignore the whole matter and carry on promoting the bankers Ponzi scheme for as long as they can, regardless of the dire long-term consequences; to admit they have been wrong all along and that NZ is on entirely the wrong path would require more honesty and fortitude than has been demonstrated so far.

    As for the criminals that constitute National, ACT etc., well they are left with a predicament beyond their capability of wriggling out of, so obviously must ignore the whole matter of Planetary Meltdown and the path to self-annihilation, as must the NZ advertising-dependent mainstream media.

    ‘Interesting times’ get more ‘interesting’ by the day. And more scary.

    One thing is certain: no one in government, or even in parliament, will promote strategies such as Permaculture and Powerdown that would actually ameliorate the mess we are in and provide some hope for the future.

    Instead, we will be offered bullshit responses from the business community, determined that some form of business-as-usual will be maintained. So blind are these people they do not recognise that the biggest threat to business-as-usual is business-as-usual.

  2. I added the following to another thread late last night. But it fits here very well. Correct ‘American Script’ to Colonial Scrip.

    ‘When asked, in 1767, why the American colonies were doing so well, Benjamin Franklin let the cat out of the bag: “Why that is easy to explain. We issue our own currency, American script.”

    Not long after, the British bastards were demanding taxes be paid in precious metal coin, and that America script be abolished….leading to the America War of Independence.

    This resulted in the colonies being bankrupted, so they set up a ‘temporary’ Bank of America, which became too powerful, and formed links with the European bankers.

    In the 1830s President Andrew Jackson fought the bankers -who he described as ‘a pit of vipers’, and succeeded. But only by the skin of his teeth.

    His good work was gradually undone through the remainder of the nineteenth century, Lincoln, needing to fund the Northern armies, issued Greenbacks, created by the government. He was assassinated by an agent of the European bankers. The battle between independent and bankers raged on until the arch-traitor Woodrow Wilson facilitated the establishment of the Federal Reserve…which is neither federal, nor does it have reserves. The Fed gradually expanded its activities to the point of controlling pretty much everything financial in America, and half the world.

    Meanwhile, the Rothschild financial empire took control of NZ around 1875, via loans to build railways. By the First World war they had more-or-less complete control of NZ.

    More-or-less complete control of England by bankers was established in 1698, when the bankrupt British government permitted establishment of the Bank of England and began paying interest on loans.

    The bankers stranglehold will inevitably choke the life out of every nation they control. And will destroy most life on Earth in the process if we let them, via their infinite-growth-on-a-finite-planet narrative, required to service ever-expanding debts.’

  3. Great idea to swap “global warming” for “climate change” ; any extremes or trends can now prove the case. Infallible !
    We need to see the whole global picture for a few more years yet. But the whole northern hemisphere is pretty cold this winter, and we don’t seem to be having such a warm summer here either, though it’s hard to find records for this year. All google wants to tell about is how warm it was last year. Though when you get to Niwa’s actual records it was pretty normal.
    You probably won’t print this but at least you might read it.
    D J S

    • ‘But the whole northern hemisphere is pretty cold this winter,’

      Utter nonsense, David.

      https://arctic-news.blogspot.com/2021/02/more-extreme-weather.html

      I suggest you read the comments I have made with regard to disruption of the Jet Streams -a consequence of the rapid overheating of the Artic region and the buggering-up of the thermal gradient that used to keep the Jet Streams in place. That is the cause of the frigid air currently affecting much of America, and was first identified and made public by Dr Jennifer Francis in 2011. Or you could do some research (something I know you are loathe to do because you will discover abundant irrefutable evidence your bizarre narratives are completely wrong.)

      For your information, The Guardian abandoned both terms you referred to- “global warming” for “climate change”- in favour of Planetary Overheating, which is much more descriptive of what we have been witnessing.

      I prefer the term Planetary Meltdown, since that is what we are experiencing, and causing.

      Not the Arctic Sea Ice extent was at record low levels for months during 2020, and after a few weeks of exceeding the record-low 2012 extent is now once again below it.

      https://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/

      This portends very badly for the Northern Summer.

      And with atmospheric CO2 at a record high level for the time of year and still 3 months of seasonal increase to come, we can expect the Planetary Meltdown to accelerate over the coming months.

      Question for you David: do you look at any climate data or reports, or do you just make up your off-the-cuff comments just to annoy people?

      • Hi AFKTT you must have been reading some of Piers Corbyn’s Weather Action; he thinks the jet streams are an important factor, but he has quite different conclusions.
        “Question for you David: do you look at any climate data or reports, or do you just make up your off-the-cuff comments just to annoy people?”
        I totally accepted the warming concept for 30 years at least. I bought a fishing boat in 1986 selected as it was built at the beginning of motorisation and had the capacity in it’s hull design to sail. I converted it back to that dual function and re-powered with the most fuel efficient motor available. All my close contacts and friends completely accept the CO2 causing global warming concept. My assessment of what is happening has not been socially rewarding , but I am not prepared to pretend to believe what I doubt for social acceptance at home or on TDB.
        What happened about a year ago was that I was faced with a question about the effect of CO2 as a greenhouse gas as compared with Water vapour. While a IPCC article I was reading suggested WV was about 30 to 50 % as relevant as CO2, another article from the other side of the debate suggested WV was about 95% of the collective GH gasses and CO2 less than 3%. So I realised I had accepted the Idea of CO2 emissions causing global warming without knowing anything about it.
        So I soon found that CO2 was about 400ppm and WV was indeed about ten times as much by mass/number of molecules , so I thought CO2 must be much more effective molecule per molecule. But no. It turns out that WV is 1.6x as effective molecule by molecule as CO2 , so the 95% effectiveness of WV is conservative. I soon found that most of the people around me who had hitherto talked about and thought about Global warming didn’t know that WV was even a GH gas at all.
        From then on I read up a lot about it on both sides of the debate. and although i grant that the “CO2 emissions are causing a meltdown of the planet” narrative is winning hands down in the public arena ,I have found the alternative view much more rational.
        I don’t think our environment generally is being cared for nearly enough however. I a multitude of ways we are trashing it . i think that the global warming by CO2 emissions story , or “Planetary Heating” is fine, might be a false flag distraction of the world’s attention from real pollution that is rampant incl. nuclear , focusing us all onto the slight increase of a gas that is the essential component of life itself. And is at levels close to the minimum for terrestrial life to exist.
        D J S

        • Firstly the matter of water vapour, David.

          I have gone over that a dozen times at least, and with you. But it seems you choose not to get it.

          I’ll go though it again for the benefit of others who are not locked into denial or partial denial of reality.

          Yes, water vapour is very active in the infra-red, and does re-emit radiation it absorbs. Yes, it does act as a greenhouse gas, and Yes, it does exceed atmospheric CO2 by a huge factor.

          However, water vapour it can NEVER be a primary driver of heating because IT CHANGES PHASE according to the temperature. Water vapour pressure equals atmospheric pressure at 100oC. But at 0oC it is so close to zero it is negligible.

          Whilst water vapour is significant at ground level in temperate and tropical regions, beyond 2000 metres altitude it is insignificant everywhere in the world, c.f. formation of clouds.

          Carbon dioxide, on the other hand, is active throughout the entire depth of the atmosphere at all measured temperature, though it tends to concentrate in the lower atmosphere because of its molecular mass (44 versus 29 for air).

          Your statement: ‘focusing us all onto the slight increase of a gas that is the essential component of life itself’ is absurd.

          How can an increase from 230 ppm (the average over the past 800,000 years) to almost 420 ppm, an increase of approximately 190 ppm be described as ‘slight’? It is close to double, FFS!

          Don’t just glance at this graph;

          https://keelingcurve.ucsd.edu/wp-content/plugins/sio-bluemoon/graphs/co2_800k.png

          study it and remember it. We might make some progress then.

          With government giving zero attention to curbing emissions, (indeed their economic growth narratives require INCREASED EMISSIONS) we would break through 460 ppm (actual doubling) in less than 20 years, were it not for the collapse of industrial civilisation due to the abject failure of governments to even recognise peaking of oil extraction, let alone do anything to prepare for it!

          ‘i grant that the “CO2 emissions are causing a meltdown of the planet” narrative is winning hands down in the public arena ,I have found the alternative view much more rational’

          There are ‘no alternative views’ when it comes to infra-red spectroscopy (which I have studied to a very high level). All you do is demonstrate that you are irrational.

          • However, water vapour it can NEVER be a primary driver of heating because IT CHANGES PHASE according to the temperature.”
            “Carbon dioxide, on the other hand, is active throughout the entire depth of the atmosphere at all measured temperature, ”
            Exactly. Water is what controls the earth’s temperature at the surface. It absorbs huge amounts of energy to melt/ warm/ and evaporate, and when it then rises up to the upper levels of the troposphere and condenses it transfers that energy to the atmosphere at the level that it condenses , and a large proportion of that heat escapes into space. Thats how most heat leaves the earth.
            CO2 on the other hand remain inert through that temperature range and the small addition to the GH effect i submit is taken up by a slight energising of the water cycle that I believe is totally insignificant in comparison with the numerous and powerful other factors that constantly alter our climate. Both from within the Earth’s systems and from without.
            I your representation of the keeling curve graph you omit the temperature variation that is usually superimposed on it showing CO2 levels regularly rising and fallowing about 7 or 8 hundred years after the temperature rises and falls, showing that in the past CO2 atmospheric levels have been driven by temperature change , not the other way around . The fact that in the last short time the CO2 levels have risen more sharply than in the record is not surprising. Obviously the very recent levels have not been drawn from the ice samples as they take about 1000 years to seal off from the existing atmosphere at the drilling site that gives a record back this far. The fact that the air is not completely trapped for this length of time also means that any previous spikes in CO2 levels that you would expect to see, From the main Taupo eruption 23000 years ago , and the huge Toba eruption that is thought to have reduced the human population of the world to about ten thousand 75 000 years ago , would show up on that graph. But they do not, and our present spike will not either because the trapped air will have mixed into an average of the following 1000 years.
            Cheers Irrational D J S

            • Your stubborn refusal to accept scientific evidence and refute the findings of thousands of scientists is impressive. But your idiotic statements just further demonstrate how little you actually know about the topic you are so keen to argue about/.

              You wrote ‘CO2 on the other hand remain inert through that temperature range and the small addition to the GH effect i submit is taken up by a slight energising of the water cycle that I believe is totally insignificant in comparison with the numerous and powerful other factors that constantly alter our climate.’

              First I suggest you look up the meaning of inert because CO2 is FAR FROM INERT. It is highly active at all temperatures found on Earth.

              The inert gases are Neon, Argon, Xenon. There is far more Argon in the atmosphere than CO2. But it has no effect specturally because it IS inert.

              As I said, I studied this stuff to a very high level at university -spent several hours a week for a year on the theoretical aspects and using spectrometers- and later in life.

              ‘I your representation of the keeling curve graph you omit the temperature variation that is usually superimposed on it showing CO2 levels regularly rising and fallowing about 7 or 8 hundred years after the temperature rises and falls, showing that in the past CO2 atmospheric levels have been driven by temperature change , not the other way around .’

              WRONG AGAIN David. (Like when you first started down this denial of reality track and declared what the CO2 concentration was -to then be advised that you were out by a factor of 100!)

              Firstly it is not ‘my’ curve; it is a Scripps Institute curve. Second it is not a Keeling Curve. Keeling’s curve commences 1958, and records direct measurement of atmospheric CO2.

              You are correct in stating that CO2 increased after warming in the past. That is because the cycles were primarily driven by Earth orbit factors, not but volcanoes. Indeed, other than the Siberian Traps eruptions that wiped out 90% of life on this planet 252 million years ago, volcanoes have been insignificant.

              What is significant is the desquestering of billions of tonnes of sequestered carbon every year, and the transfer of that carbon into the atmosphere, and the overwhelming of natural systems -such as the conversion of silicates into carbonates- that previously were previously in balance with the relatively slow releases of CO2 from volcanoes.

              Let’s face, you almost nothing about this stuff and just argue for the sake of arguing.

              I’ve had enough. I’ve got better things to do that keep pointing you in the right direction, only for you to ignore that right direction and come up with your own bizarre theories on a topic you know so little about.

              Keep posting nonsense if you like. I think you will be the only one that believes in them.

    • Oh boy, a whole can of PRATTs!* It’s almost as if you are indulging in parody.

      > “Great idea to swap “global warming” for “climate change” ; any extremes or trends can now prove the case. Infallible !”

      The term Climate Change has been is use by the scientific community for many, many decades, your insinuation that it is a new term is fallacious and disingenuous.

      > “All google wants to tell about is how warm it was last year.”

      Don’t listen to google then, listen to the world’s scientific community, either primary sources or their representatives, like NASA for instance: https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

      > “We need to see the whole global picture for a few more years yet.”

      It’s been investigated for over a century. Multiple billions have been spent on research since the 1990s. NASA and and world’s scientific community disagree with you. The science is in and the salient conclusions have been drawn and understood for over twenty years.

      > “Though when you get to Niwa’s actual records it was pretty normal.”

      Where’s your analysis? What do NIWA have to say about it?

      * PRATT: point refuted a thousand times.

  4. Earth has had two stable states: 1. Hot House which has dominated its history for 440 million years and 2. Ice Age which has prevailed for the last 3 million years since the late Pliocene. The latter has had many interglacials such as we are currently leaving: we would be heading t’wards another major glaciation except our fossil fuel burning has triggered the climate t’wards its alternative stable state a new Hot House era with an eventual global average temperature of up to 20c compared with the current GAT.
    Our biosphere evolved in the ice ages and cannot adapt fast enough to survive the current rate of change which itself is lagging behind our forcing plus positive feedbacks. Once fully realised our own extinction is a certainty as our supporting habitat disappears.
    There is nothing we can do to stop this except don’t have children and powerdown and adapt to what’s coming including 7 metres sea level rise by 2070 refer Paul Beckwith. Those who are blind now will have their eyes opened this century if they live long enough. Australia last year Texas this year. Heating will ramp up strongly once we have ice free arctic all year round beginning 2021? or 2022? Our world of ice is going refer ” The end of Ice ” by Dahr Jamail. UC Irvine professor Eric Rignot is featured in this Emmy-winning HBO series VICE where he discusses his findings of Antarctica’s melting ice sheets and the global impact of sea level rise. He told VICE founder and producer Shane Smith that glaciers in West Antarctica’s Amudsen Sea have “passed the point of no return” and their disappearance could trigger the collapse of the entire West Antarctic ice sheet, which could raise global sea levels by up to five meters – or 15 feet. Such an event could severely submerge the world’s heavily populated coastal areas, and force us to redraw the world map as we know it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=plkkfEY9cGs

    • I cannot disagree with anything you have said, jay11. Indeed, we have known for well over a decade that the Earth flips between two states -cool and very hot- and that many the life forms existing today have evolved for the cool temperature range exhibited over the past 800,000 years, (at least) and cannot stand a 2oC rise in average temperature (the most optimistic of the UNIPCC scenarios).

      As for the higher end of UNIPCC scenarios of 4oC to 7oC rise, well only a few extant species can stand that sort of environment. And certainly not humans or any of the species we are dependent on. It’s curtains for the bulk of humanity even if, by some miracle, the rise can be kept to below 2oc. But I cannot see how that can possibly occur when practically every government on Earth is caught up in the bankers’ Ponzi scheme, and is focused on unsustainable growth above all else.

    • “parameter
      2.
      a limit or boundary which defines the scope of a particular process or activity.” These stable states are parameters within which a dynamic system operates. Think Big and you’ve got it! 🙂

  5. The fragile nature of the infrastructure of Industrial Civilisation has been clearly demonstrated in Texas over the past week or so:

    ‘Texas’ electrical system was “seconds or minutes” from collapsing and plunging the state into the dark for months, the power grid’s operators said Thursday while defending their decision to initiate controlled outages.’

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2021/feb/19/texas-storm-latest-news-today-power-outages-ted-cruz-cancun-trip-backlash

    Just as when hurricanes hit New Orleans, the system rapidly goes into collapse mode and people starve and die.

    ‘My colleague Nina Lakhani lays out how Texas is facing dwindling food supplies amid the ongoing storms and power problems:

    Food banks in Texas have gone into disaster mode as they ramp up operations to tackle a surge in hunger after unprecedented freezing conditions disrupted almost every part of the food supply chain in the state.

    Grocery stores are empty, school meal programs suspended, and deliveries disrupted by untreated, treacherous roads that have left millions of Texans trapped in precarious living conditions with dwindling food supplies.

    Even those who did stockpile before the Arctic conditions swept in have lost refrigerated groceries due to lengthy power cuts and cannot cook what food they do have without electricity or gas.’

    We are obviously going t witness a lot more of such incidents over the coming years as Planetary Overheating [as a consequence of overuse of fossil fuels] causes ever greater instability to climate systems and generate wilder and wilder weather events.

    The more-or-less total unconcern of politicians with respect to the future is criminal, as are the policies promoted by mainstream economists and the mainstream media.

    There is a kind of divine justice insofar as the US is in the front line for suffering increasingly severe conditions as a consequence of its refusal to act in the interests of the people on emissions, about 4% of the world population having generated about 25% of global emissions for many decades.

    New Zealand’s per capita emissions profile is also appalling, of course, and it is only the low population that has allowed NZ to get away with looting and polluting the environment for so long. But even here, surrounded by the ameliorating effect a a massive amount of cold water, climate-related events are becoming ever more costly, both in terms of the damage done to infrastructure and the effects on plant growth.

    As everyone here knows, I’m not holding my breath for sane policies to be being introduced by the money-lender-driven and consumption-driven Adern government. They’ll keep making everything that matters worse for as long as they can, and destroy their own progeny’s futures in the process..

    Daily CO2 (CO2.earth)
    Feb. 18, 2021 = 417.54 ppm
    Feb. 18, 2020 = 413.56 ppm

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.