06-06-2024, 11:50 AM
This post was last modified 06-06-2024, 12:28 PM by IdeomotorPrisoner. 
This was a comment at ATS, and a previous thread, but I feel it should be done again in a non redundant setting.
A topical story, with my take on climate change. That kind of says "everyone is right and everyone is wrong" simultaneously.
Thread begin:
Climate change is coming, and your small island is sinking.
They can't keep the water back anymore, and this is the first of MANY Panamanian islands that are to be voluntarily evacuated.
The sea level rise is hard to dispute.
My dispute is the anthropogenic way we caused it to happen. We caused the melt off more recently.
I think, in a twisted Irony, our recognition of our hands in climate change brought on the actions which actually accelerated it.
I know the sulfur from coal and vehicle smog killed trees, but had they not selectively filtered the emissions they might not have thrown wacky concentrations of greenhouse vs. aerosols into the atmosphere for over 50 years running now.
So basically to save trees and people's lungs from adjacent burning coal, they attacked almost ALL aerosols, and a large portion of greenhouse gasses.
Then, you can line up a seemingly exponential acceleration starting pricely with the imposition of EPA exhaust regulations. The aggressive reduction in aerosols is coorlative to the rise in temperature. It lines up so well you can single out the mandating of CATALYTIC CONVERTORS as the most likely 'accelerant." In recent times that's become more pronounced. Almost ZERO aerosols are now released, meaning no matter how little greenhouse emissions they reduce it to, they are still adding to the already askew atmospheric concentrations. No matter how you attack it through regulation you just add to the problem that exists until you address the other loss of albedo.
It's getting to the point where purposely releasing aerosols in the upper atmosphere will be the ONLY way to stop this greenhouse imbalance. If it's about albedo, there's easier ways to do that. Like a single Mt. Tambora. Perhaps engineered volcanic cooling is an answer to climate change. Because all our effort combined amount to an engineered greenhouse effect as things stand now.
No one likes this explanation though, pro and con alike.
What are your opinions on the cause of anthropogenic Climate change? Does anthropogenic climate change exist? Could my insane idea to "play Mt. Tambora" cause a more devastating cold snap? Is it releasing tigers to get rid of rodents?
A topical story, with my take on climate change. That kind of says "everyone is right and everyone is wrong" simultaneously.
Thread begin:
Climate change is coming, and your small island is sinking.
They can't keep the water back anymore, and this is the first of MANY Panamanian islands that are to be voluntarily evacuated.
The sea level rise is hard to dispute.
My dispute is the anthropogenic way we caused it to happen. We caused the melt off more recently.
I think, in a twisted Irony, our recognition of our hands in climate change brought on the actions which actually accelerated it.
I know the sulfur from coal and vehicle smog killed trees, but had they not selectively filtered the emissions they might not have thrown wacky concentrations of greenhouse vs. aerosols into the atmosphere for over 50 years running now.
So basically to save trees and people's lungs from adjacent burning coal, they attacked almost ALL aerosols, and a large portion of greenhouse gasses.
Then, you can line up a seemingly exponential acceleration starting pricely with the imposition of EPA exhaust regulations. The aggressive reduction in aerosols is coorlative to the rise in temperature. It lines up so well you can single out the mandating of CATALYTIC CONVERTORS as the most likely 'accelerant." In recent times that's become more pronounced. Almost ZERO aerosols are now released, meaning no matter how little greenhouse emissions they reduce it to, they are still adding to the already askew atmospheric concentrations. No matter how you attack it through regulation you just add to the problem that exists until you address the other loss of albedo.
It's getting to the point where purposely releasing aerosols in the upper atmosphere will be the ONLY way to stop this greenhouse imbalance. If it's about albedo, there's easier ways to do that. Like a single Mt. Tambora. Perhaps engineered volcanic cooling is an answer to climate change. Because all our effort combined amount to an engineered greenhouse effect as things stand now.
No one likes this explanation though, pro and con alike.
What are your opinions on the cause of anthropogenic Climate change? Does anthropogenic climate change exist? Could my insane idea to "play Mt. Tambora" cause a more devastating cold snap? Is it releasing tigers to get rid of rodents?