Bolivia declares drought emergency

[ding]

So, if we are experiencing increasing number of droughts and extreme rainfall events, because we have had both before, it means nothing is happening. LOL Gotta love the intellect that kind of logic represents.

That's right. Weather is cyclical. I believe your problem is that you are experiencing confirmation bias. CO2 does not drive climate change, it reinforces climate change.

I believe that your problem is that you are just a flap yapper with negligible knowledge concerning AGW.

Is that so? The conditions which led to our modern icehouse world (i.e. bipolar glaciation) were polar regions isolated from the warm marine currents and atmospheric CO2 of 400 ppm. Conditions which still exist today. The glacial-interglacial cycles that our planet have been experiencing are triggered by Milankovitch cycles and reinforced by CO2 cyclicity with CO2 following temperature by 800 years.

 

[ding]

So you state. And the men and women who have degrees in physics state otherwise.

Yes, I state that and the men and women who have degrees in physics will tell you the exact same thing. They will tell you that there is a strong fluctuation in CO2 which correlates to changes in temperature and glacial - interglacial phases with CO2 decreasing in glacial periods due to increased CO2 sequestration by the colder waters of the oceans and CO2 peaking during each interglacial as temperatures increase leading to CO2 release from the warmer waters of the ocean. They will tell you that glacial-interglacial cycles are triggered by orbital forcing due to Milankovitch cycles which in turn affects temperatures (insolation) at 65 degrees North which is a critical location for triggering Northern Hemisphere glaciation. They will tell you that glacial-interglacial cycles are initially triggered by Milankovitch cycles and are reinforced by CO2 cyclicity with CO2 following temperature by 800 years.

 

[Crick]

Ding, have you met poster LaDexter? He believes that ice ages are controlled entirely by plate tectonics. He believes that when land is moved to the polar regions, it causes an ice age. His posts are quite easy to find. He will be asking one of a very few questions: why is the Antarctic colder than the Arctic? Why was Greenland covered with ice while North America ice free?. He believes that these questions throw all of us and all the field of natural science into a tizzy and reveal him as a uniquely brilliant individual on the scale of Newton, Galileo or Michaelangelo.

You're starting to remind us of him. How many times are we going to hear about "bipolar glaciation" and when are you planning on revealing what it actually says about the current situation?

 

[ding]

Ding, have you met poster LaDexter? He believes that ice ages are controlled entirely by plate tectonics. He believes that when land is moved to the polar regions, it causes an ice age. His posts are quite easy to find. He will be asking one of a very few questions: why is the Antarctic colder than the Arctic? Why was Greenland covered with ice while North America ice free?. He believes that these questions throw all of us and all the field of natural science into a tizzy and reveal him as a uniquely brilliant individual on the scale of Newton, Galileo or Michaelangelo.

You're starting to remind us of him. How many times are we going to hear about "bipolar glaciation" and when are you planning on revealing what it actually says about the current situation?

Can't say I have had the pleasure of knowing him. Do you make a lot of false equivalency arguments?

The oxygen isotope curve is well established for the Cenozoic and shows that the trend is for a COOLING earth. Over the last 5 million years there has been rapid cooling.

Climate models predict that extensive glaciation cannot occur at the South Pole until atmospheric CO2 reaches 750 ppm. Climate models predict that extensive glaciation cannot occur at the North Pole until atmospheric CO2 reaches 250 ppm.

Five million years ago the earth started going through glacial / interglacial cycles. The glacial / interglacial cycles of the past 5 million years were triggered by Milankovitch cycles. But before the glacial cycle could be triggered, two conditions needed to be met; the north and south poles had to be isolated from warm marine currents and atmospheric CO2 needed to be 400 ppm or less. These conditions still exist today.

The north pole is isolated by landmasses. The south pole is isolated because of Antarctica.

 

[ding]

Ding, have you met poster LaDexter? He believes that ice ages are controlled entirely by plate tectonics. He believes that when land is moved to the polar regions, it causes an ice age. His posts are quite easy to find. He will be asking one of a very few questions: why is the Antarctic colder than the Arctic? Why was Greenland covered with ice while North America ice free?. He believes that these questions throw all of us and all the field of natural science into a tizzy and reveal him as a uniquely brilliant individual on the scale of Newton, Galileo or Michaelangelo.

You're starting to remind us of him. How many times are we going to hear about "bipolar glaciation" and when are you planning on revealing what it actually says about the current situation?

The conditions which led to our modern icehouse world (i.e. bipolar glaciation) were polar regions isolated from the warm marine currents and atmospheric CO2 of 400 ppm. Conditions which still exist today. The glacial-interglacial cycles that our planet have been experiencing are triggered by Milankovitch cycles and reinforced by CO2 cyclicity with CO2 following temperature by 800 years.

 

[ding]

Ding, have you met poster LaDexter? He believes that ice ages are controlled entirely by plate tectonics. He believes that when land is moved to the polar regions, it causes an ice age. His posts are quite easy to find. He will be asking one of a very few questions: why is the Antarctic colder than the Arctic? Why was Greenland covered with ice while North America ice free?. He believes that these questions throw all of us and all the field of natural science into a tizzy and reveal him as a uniquely brilliant individual on the scale of Newton, Galileo or Michaelangelo.

You're starting to remind us of him. How many times are we going to hear about "bipolar glaciation" and when are you planning on revealing what it actually says about the current situation?

There is a GHG effect. This we know for sure, but the largest effect is at very low concentrations. That's because there is a logarithmic relationship between CO2 concentration and associated temperature. Which means that as CO2 concentration increases the incremental temperature associated with the CO2 increase diminishes. So a 120 ppm increase from 0 to 120 would have a much bigger impact (19.21 C) than a 120 ppm increase from 280 to 400 ppm (24.04 - 19.21 = 1.43 C)

 

[ding]

Ding, have you met poster LaDexter? He believes that ice ages are controlled entirely by plate tectonics. He believes that when land is moved to the polar regions, it causes an ice age. His posts are quite easy to find. He will be asking one of a very few questions: why is the Antarctic colder than the Arctic? Why was Greenland covered with ice while North America ice free?. He believes that these questions throw all of us and all the field of natural science into a tizzy and reveal him as a uniquely brilliant individual on the scale of Newton, Galileo or Michaelangelo.

You're starting to remind us of him. How many times are we going to hear about "bipolar glaciation" and when are you planning on revealing what it actually says about the current situation?

If that were true that CO2 drives climate change then there should have been an immediate decrease of 7C in temperature when CO2 dropped from 3500 ppm to less than 1000 ppm. There wasn't. It took 12 million years for that to occur. 12 million years. Since there was not the predicted response in temperature as calculated by the radiative forcing of CO2, then we know that other factors drove temperature change and that CO2 only reinforced that change.

 

[Crick]

I think you need to familiarize yourself with the rules around here. The number of different threads into which you have posted this graphic constitutes spamming the forum.

 

[Old Rocks]

So, if we are experiencing increasing number of droughts and extreme rainfall events, because we have had both before, it means nothing is happening. LOL Gotta love the intellect that kind of logic represents.

That's right. Weather is cyclical. I believe your problem is that you are experiencing confirmation bias. CO2 does not drive climate change, it reinforces climate change.

I believe that your problem is that you are just a flap yapper with negligible knowledge concerning AGW.

Is that so? The conditions which led to our modern icehouse world (i.e. bipolar glaciation) were polar regions isolated from the warm marine currents and atmospheric CO2 of 400 ppm. Conditions which still exist today. The glacial-interglacial cycles that our planet have been experiencing are triggered by Milankovitch cycles and reinforced by CO2 cyclicity with CO2 following temperature by 800 years.

Oh? So how fast has the Milankovitch Cycles moved in the last 150 years? After all, the CO2 has increased from 280 ppm to over 400+ ppm. How much has the orbit changed in the last 150 years? And what happened to the 800 year lag?

 

[esthermoon]

Bolivia declares drought emergency
Source: Yahoo News

Bolivia's government declared an emergency on Monday as the country suffers its worst drought in 25 years.

"The cabinet has approved a decree... to declare a national emergency due to the drought and the shortage of water in various regions of the country," President Evo Morales told reporters.

...

Morales said 2016 has been the hottest year in a century for the Andean nation.

The drought started two weeks ago and has caused shortages in seven of the country's 10 biggest cities.

Read more: Bolivia declares drought emergency





wow

What does the UN want to do to help Bolivia?
I didn't find anything about UN aid for the Bolivian people

 

[Old Rocks]

You keep repeating that the condition of CO2 being less than 400 ppm still exists today. No, it does not, we are above 400 ppm at present, and will be well above 400 ppm for a long time. And that is going to melt a lot of ice in the long run. And that long run is tens of generations of human beings. We certainly have not done them any favors.

 

[skookerasbil]

Dang the OP is such a moron!!! How about posting up a thread, "It rained today and I got wet!!"

Bed droughts have been happening all over the world since the beginning of time. Only the climate nutters are finding this out now!!

Dang this forum never disappoints!!

 

[ding]

I think you need to familiarize yourself with the rules around here. The number of different threads into which you have posted this graphic constitutes spamming the forum.

Then stop making ridiculous arguments that require me to set the record straight. Do you think it is possible for you to cry any harder? Go ahead and report me.

I'm not Dexter. I'm ding. I am not making Dexter's arguments. I am making my own. In fact, I have just laid them out and will continue to lay them out so that I may respond to ridiculous arguments like your own.

 

[Old Rocks]

Bolivia declares drought emergency
Source: Yahoo News

Bolivia's government declared an emergency on Monday as the country suffers its worst drought in 25 years.

"The cabinet has approved a decree... to declare a national emergency due to the drought and the shortage of water in various regions of the country," President Evo Morales told reporters.

...

Morales said 2016 has been the hottest year in a century for the Andean nation.

The drought started two weeks ago and has caused shortages in seven of the country's 10 biggest cities.

Read more: Bolivia declares drought emergency





wow

What does the UN want to do to help Bolivia?
I didn't find anything about UN aid for the Bolivian people

https://www.unicef.org/about/annualreport/files/Bolivia_2015_COAR.pdf

There has been constant UN aid to Bolivia for the past two decades.

 

[Old Rocks]

I think you need to familiarize yourself with the rules around here. The number of different threads into which you have posted this graphic constitutes spamming the forum.

Then stop making ridiculous arguments that require me to set the record straight. Do you think it is possible for you to cry any harder? Go ahead and report me.

I'm not Dexter. I'm ding. I am not making Dexter's arguments. I am making my own. In fact, I have just laid them out and will continue to lay them out so that I may respond to ridiculous arguments like your own.

I do believe that Arrhenius knocked your arguments in the head in 1896.

 

[ding]

I think you need to familiarize yourself with the rules around here. The number of different threads into which you have posted this graphic constitutes spamming the forum.

Then stop making ridiculous arguments that require me to set the record straight. Do you think it is possible for you to cry any harder? Go ahead and report me.

I'm not Dexter. I'm ding. I am not making Dexter's arguments. I am making my own. In fact, I have just laid them out and will continue to lay them out so that I may respond to ridiculous arguments like your own.

I do believe that Arrhenius knocked your arguments in the head in 1896.

I don't believe so. This data wasn't published back then, lol.

 

[ding]

So, if we are experiencing increasing number of droughts and extreme rainfall events, because we have had both before, it means nothing is happening. LOL Gotta love the intellect that kind of logic represents.

That's right. Weather is cyclical. I believe your problem is that you are experiencing confirmation bias. CO2 does not drive climate change, it reinforces climate change.

I believe that your problem is that you are just a flap yapper with negligible knowledge concerning AGW.

Is that so? The conditions which led to our modern icehouse world (i.e. bipolar glaciation) were polar regions isolated from the warm marine currents and atmospheric CO2 of 400 ppm. Conditions which still exist today. The glacial-interglacial cycles that our planet have been experiencing are triggered by Milankovitch cycles and reinforced by CO2 cyclicity with CO2 following temperature by 800 years.

Oh? So how fast has the Milankovitch Cycles moved in the last 150 years? After all, the CO2 has increased from 280 ppm to over 400+ ppm. How much has the orbit changed in the last 150 years? And what happened to the 800 year lag?

Apparently faster than the radiative forcing of CO2, lol. That took 12 million years for the temperature to finally reflect the drawdown of CO2 from 3500 ppm to 600 ppm.

 

[skookerasbil]

There is zero scientific links between climate change and drought.........it is nothing more than conjecture. Conjecture btw, pushed ONLY by climate alarmists!!!


Climate change ‘not a major influence’ on Brazil drought, study says | Carbon Brief


This study dealt the climate k00ks the big bumpy cucumber 3 times in one study!!

 

[Old Rocks]

I think you need to familiarize yourself with the rules around here. The number of different threads into which you have posted this graphic constitutes spamming the forum.

Then stop making ridiculous arguments that require me to set the record straight. Do you think it is possible for you to cry any harder? Go ahead and report me.

I'm not Dexter. I'm ding. I am not making Dexter's arguments. I am making my own. In fact, I have just laid them out and will continue to lay them out so that I may respond to ridiculous arguments like your own.

I do believe that Arrhenius knocked your arguments in the head in 1896.

I don't believe so. This data wasn't published back then, lol.

Oh my, seems you don't know who Svante Arrhenius was, or what his study was about. Simply, in 1896, he calculated that a doubling of the CO2 would raise the global temperature about 3 degrees C. That still looks like a good figure.

 

[ding]

I think you need to familiarize yourself with the rules around here. The number of different threads into which you have posted this graphic constitutes spamming the forum.

Then stop making ridiculous arguments that require me to set the record straight. Do you think it is possible for you to cry any harder? Go ahead and report me.

I'm not Dexter. I'm ding. I am not making Dexter's arguments. I am making my own. In fact, I have just laid them out and will continue to lay them out so that I may respond to ridiculous arguments like your own.

I do believe that Arrhenius knocked your arguments in the head in 1896.

I don't believe so. This data wasn't published back then, lol.

Oh my, seems you don't know who Svante Arrhenius was, or what his study was about. Simply, in 1896, he calculated that a doubling of the CO2 would raise the global temperature about 3 degrees C. That still looks like a good figure.

It looks like he was wrong and so are you.

Radiative forcing - Wikipedia

The doubling of CO2 results in a 1C increase. But since CO2 is not the driving force behind temperature change, even then it is not always realized. Which is why jack-a-napes like you have such a hard time explaining why it took 12 million years for the temperature to reflect the change from 3500 ppm to 600 ppm.