|Relatable Warming Impact Articles & Studies10-11-2019 02:08|
|Hello - I am interested in collecting examples of climate change articles and studies that people can "relate to," for sharing with students and others who want to make a difference. In my experience, one of the things that makes global warming so difficult to address, is that it seems so, well, global. Almost like it's hopeless that any one person can make a difference. Which is not true, but it can seem that way to some people. An example of what I'm talking about is this study published by Penn state, as it is "relatable" to anglers because it translates complex climate science and projections in to an understandable impact - drive time to cooler streams that will hold brook trout. Are you aware of other examples? Thanks https://flyfishingfieldguides.com/conservation-alert-how-much-could-warming-affect-brook-trout-habitat/|
|It looks like the brook trout are going to have the opposite problem this week... The problem with Climate Change, is that they jumped right in, and made an assumption, before having all the facts. The over-marketed, cranked up the hype, and urgency, made a lot of astounding predictions. But, none of those predictions came to pass, the assumptions they made, weren't quite as dire as predicted, and most folks are willing to just let it pass, as a bad observation, poor science. Unfortunately, a lot of people bought the hype, invested a lot of time and money, resources into it, expecting to get rich. They stand to lose a great deal, if not everything, or continue to promote the need. Most people don't feel the same urgency, as when the who climate craze began, not as trendy, since it starting to hit their own bank accounts, as taxes rise to fight the phantom foe. It's sort of resting on which political candidates are pandering, and which have a financial interest to protect. The ones that get in office, and plan to protect their investments, will use our tax dollars, and always want more out of our paychecks. The planet is doing fine, and it's going to keeping doing great, for a long time. It's a political and financial problem. CO2 levels of 700-1000 ppm will be great for plants, and food production, and great for all living things. Weather patterns change every year. We never know what to expect, more than a day or two in advance, which isn't actual true either. The weather event is already happening, just moving in our direction.|
You've got a tall mountain to climb to establish cause and effect of AGW/CC on flyfishing habitats or anything else. It is not relatable.
You learn something new every day if you are lucky!
|I think you'll find that the IPCC avoids water vapor, and tries to keep the focus on GHGs, CO2 specifically. Water vapor is much more common, than actually all other GHGs combined. Yeah, they claim water vapor is a greenhouse gas, which isn't accurate either, it's a vapor, and it has some other interesting properties, which negate the 'greenhouse effect'. Warmer temperatures, more water vapor, the faster thermal energy can move, denser atmosphere. Water vapor cools, condenses, false back to the surface. The rapid 1 degree rise in global temperature, is really a computational error, from faulty data. Pretty much the entire population is energy dependent, and fossil fuels is the cheapest, most common, and most efficient. Cutting off fossil fuels, rapidly, is like putting humanities testicles in a vise, and in a very bad way.|
Water vapor will always increase in relation to surface temperature, and provide the appropriate cooling. No controlling it, surface water is quite plentiful...
|Anyone tried calculating & tracking their CO2 footprint over time?||8||29-10-2019 04:26|
|Two articles claiming more or less the opposite?(1% or 97% agree)||13||29-09-2019 01:41|
|Local Impact of Climate Change||0||01-06-2019 22:00|
|Climate impact self assessment||0||01-05-2019 00:50|
|How do we know how much money Chinese government paid CBC and CNN to post climate change articles every d||0||19-04-2019 18:54|