MESO-Rx
Anabolic Steroids
Climate Change
- Thread starter Michael Scally MD
- Start date
But, a few decades ago they were calling it global cooling, then global warming and now global climate change. some places I see record breaking flooding and some record breaking heat. the climate change enthusiasts blame global warming for the tornados. I've even heard them blame climate change for Islamic terrorist. some pretty whacky stuff going on. then you have al gore making almost a billion dollars on global warming and investing in a software company that was supposed to get contracts for the emissions models. etc, etc. there is plenty of ammo out there for the skeptics.
CdnGuy
New Member
Regardless who the president was or is that was necessary to keeping the economy a float. My point is if Trump doesn't work with the rest of the world. It will create a ripple effect, & not to mention potentially burning some bridges in the future.
CdnGuy
New Member
I can see why you back Trump now no offense dude. If you can honestly say you cant see things changing with the climate. That's scary man....
ronin17
New Member
I just wa
I know what you mean. There is a ton if misinformation out there. It doesn't make sense that one part of the country is in drought and you have record flooding in Texas. Or that you have record heat in the west and one of the biggest snowfalls in Pennsylvania. If you look at all of the totals though. Rainfall, temperature, snowfall. It is consistent throughout the world. Temperatures are rising, rainfall is decreasing, and oceans are rising. The data is there. It is in direct realation to ozone. You dont have to listen to cnn or fox or be a liberal or conservative to be on the right side of history here.
I know what you mean. There is a ton if misinformation out there. It doesn't make sense that one part of the country is in drought and you have record flooding in Texas. Or that you have record heat in the west and one of the biggest snowfalls in Pennsylvania. If you look at all of the totals though. Rainfall, temperature, snowfall. It is consistent throughout the world. Temperatures are rising, rainfall is decreasing, and oceans are rising. The data is there. It is in direct realation to ozone. You dont have to listen to cnn or fox or be a liberal or conservative to be on the right side of history here.
I can see why you back Trump now no offense dude. If you can honestly say you cant see things changing with the climate. That's scary man....
I'm not saying we shouldn't be doing our best to keep the planet happy. I'm moreso saying I don't trust the guys pushing this trillion dollar industry of global warming. they have their agen$a and it aint to keep the planet happy. there is plenty of misinformation coming from all sides.
I never backed trump. I didn't vote "for" trump. I voted against that evil criminal running against him. matter of fact, I almost voted hillary, but some of those wikileaks were just too much to over look.I can see why you back Trump now no offense dude. If you can honestly say you cant see things changing with the climate. That's scary man....
CdnGuy
New Member
Come on lol And people here have called me a "conspiracy theorist" ? LOL Bro fuck what anyone says just living on this planet every day you can witness the changes.
Whats, lol. man.... you got good eyes. what, they say the temp has raised a quarter of a degree in like a hundred years. you got mad skills.
CdnGuy
New Member
Question are residents in Miami worried about rising sea levels?
Growth in emission is typically expressed as a percentage increase or decrease on the previous year, or compared to a specific historical period. The new analysis finds global fossil fuel emissions grew by 0.7% in 2014, then held steady in 2015. Provisional data for 2016 predict a very small rise, of just 0.2%.
This is a notable slowdown in emission growth, compared to an average rate of 3.5% in the 2000s and 1.8% over the most recent decade, 2006-2015. ...
But as long as we’re emitting CO2, it continues to build up in the atmosphere – and it is doing so at record levels. As Prof Richard Betts explained in his guest post for Carbon Brief last week, 2016 will be the first full year in which atmospheric CO2 concentration stays above the 400 ppm milestone.
Rising concentrations mean rising temperatures. The WMO has confirmed that 2011-2015 was the hottest five-year period on record and it expects 2016 to be the hotter, beating 2015 into second place with a global average temperature of 1.2C above the long-term average. This will mean 16 of the 17 warmest years on record will have been since 2000.
Crowther TW, Todd-Brown KEO, Rowe CW, et al. Quantifying global soil carbon losses in response to warming. Nature 2016;540(7631):104-8. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v540/n7631/full/nature20150.html
The majority of the Earth’s terrestrial carbon is stored in the soil. If anthropogenic warming stimulates the loss of this carbon to the atmosphere, it could drive further planetary warming. Despite evidence that warming enhances carbon fluxes to and from the soil, the net global balance between these responses remains uncertain.
Here we present a comprehensive analysis of warming-induced changes in soil carbon stocks by assembling data from 49 field experiments located across North America, Europe and Asia. We find that the effects of warming are contingent on the size of the initial soil carbon stock, with considerable losses occurring in high-latitude areas. By extrapolating this empirical relationship to the global scale, we provide estimates of soil carbon sensitivity to warming that may help to constrain Earth system model projections.
Our empirical relationship suggests that global soil carbon stocks in the upper soil horizons will fall by 30 ± 30 petagrams of carbon to 203 ± 161 petagrams of carbon under one degree of warming, depending on the rate at which the effects of warming are realized. Under the conservative assumption that the response of soil carbon to warming occurs within a year, a business-as-usual climate scenario would drive the loss of 55 ± 50 petagrams of carbon from the upper soil horizons by 2050. This value is around 12–17 per cent of the expected anthropogenic emissions over this period. Despite the considerable uncertainty in our estimates, the direction of the global soil carbon response is consistent across all scenarios.
This provides strong empirical support for the idea that rising temperatures will stimulate the net loss of soil carbon to the atmosphere, driving a positive land carbon–climate feedback that could accelerate climate change.
The majority of the Earth’s terrestrial carbon is stored in the soil. If anthropogenic warming stimulates the loss of this carbon to the atmosphere, it could drive further planetary warming. Despite evidence that warming enhances carbon fluxes to and from the soil, the net global balance between these responses remains uncertain.
Here we present a comprehensive analysis of warming-induced changes in soil carbon stocks by assembling data from 49 field experiments located across North America, Europe and Asia. We find that the effects of warming are contingent on the size of the initial soil carbon stock, with considerable losses occurring in high-latitude areas. By extrapolating this empirical relationship to the global scale, we provide estimates of soil carbon sensitivity to warming that may help to constrain Earth system model projections.
Our empirical relationship suggests that global soil carbon stocks in the upper soil horizons will fall by 30 ± 30 petagrams of carbon to 203 ± 161 petagrams of carbon under one degree of warming, depending on the rate at which the effects of warming are realized. Under the conservative assumption that the response of soil carbon to warming occurs within a year, a business-as-usual climate scenario would drive the loss of 55 ± 50 petagrams of carbon from the upper soil horizons by 2050. This value is around 12–17 per cent of the expected anthropogenic emissions over this period. Despite the considerable uncertainty in our estimates, the direction of the global soil carbon response is consistent across all scenarios.
This provides strong empirical support for the idea that rising temperatures will stimulate the net loss of soil carbon to the atmosphere, driving a positive land carbon–climate feedback that could accelerate climate change.
Last edited:
Similar threads
