2018 saw a global revolt against climate change hysteria

[Anonymous]

https://www.blazingcatfur.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/electric-car-climate-change-agw-global-warming-400x288.jpg">

CC nails it.

[Thiel]

Canada's disconnected elites refuse to recognize: Canada's posturing doesn't resonate on the world stage. B.C. Premier John Horgan and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau insist that taxpayers pay ever-increasing carbon taxes to reduce emissions, while Canada produces just 1.6% of global emissions. The prime minister acknowledges an obvious fact:



"Even if Canada stopped everything tomorrow, and the other countries didn't have any solutions, it wouldn't make a big difference," Trudeau said on a Quebec talk show last October.

All of the sacrifices Trudeau and some premiers are forcing on the people who elected them are purely for show. They will not stop the climate from changing. It's refreshing to see some honesty from Trudeau for a change.

[Anonymous]

By Lorne Gunter of Sun News Media



Enviro alarmism

Melting icecaps is no cause for alarm



It sounds huge (and vaguely terrifying), which is how it's meant to sound.



Last week, several newspapers reported on a study from a NASA researcher that claimed in the past decade the Antarctic icecap has been melting six times faster than it used to. An "alarming" rate according to the Washington Post.



"The Antarctic lost 40 billion tons of melting ice to the ocean each year from 1979 to 1989. That figure rose to 252 billion tons lost per year beginning in 2009." That certainly does sound alarming!



Bring on the carbon tax



We must be on the cusp of a climate disaster with losses that size. The oceans will surely rise up and swallow us all. Is that nice Mr. Trudeau sure his carbon tax is high enough to save us?



But let's put the loss in context. And let's use gigatons because the numbers are more manageable. There are 1 billion tons in a gigaton.



For starters, the Antarctic is losing 252 gigatons of ice each year (supposedly). But Antarctica, where 90% or more of the world's glacial ice is stored, has 26,500,000 gigatons of ice.



The "alarming" melt is one one-thousandth of 1% each year.



That means that even if Antarctica added no new ice each year (and it does), the Antarctic ice-cap would not disappear for nearly 1,100 years.



But won't we all drown in the rising oceans before then? Won't the seas consume British Columbia and make Calgary a West Coast port (meaning Alberta won't need B.C.'S permission to build a pipeline to tidewater)?



Two-hundred and fifty-two gigatons of melt is only enough to raise sea levels by 0.7mm annually. Meaning in a century, this "alarming" yearly loss would raise sea levels by just seven centimetres, or about three inches.



And the sea level rise from this much melt is likely to be even smaller. As NASA itself points out, sea level has risen perhaps 7.6mm in the past 30 years. That's a rate of just 3 centimetres (a little more than one inch) per century.



But this most recent NASA study underlines the uncertainty of climate science. When anyone (such as our esteemed prime minister) claims the science is settled, it is not.



As recently as 2015, another NASA study using thousands of highly accurate satellite measurements over several decades, found that Antarctica was gaining more ice each year than it was losing.



"According to the new analysis of satellite data," NASA reported, "the Antarctic ice sheet showed a net gain of 112 billion tons of ice a year from 1992 to 2001. That net gain slowed to 82 billion tons of ice per year between 2003 and 2008."



Uncertainty



Also adding to the uncertainty is the fact no one knows for sure the source of the current melting (or slowing of ice growth), plus no one can be certain whether this a repeat of a past natural pattern or the result of current manmade activity, such as carbon emissions.



The authors of the most recent NASA study say the cause is warmer ocean currents reaching the Antarctic. But no one can say for sure whether that is the result of global warming or merely the kind of slight shifting of ocean currents that happens all the time.



Given that the amount of ice melting (one one-thousandth of a per cent per year) is tiny, it could well be within the range of natural fluctuation. Antarctica gains ice for a while, then loses some for a while. Then gains again.



Despite the desires of environmentalists and "green" politicians, it's probably not something to get alarmed about.

[Bricktop]

This is really interesting...reason, fact and logic!!!

[Anonymous]

This is really interesting...reason, fact and logic!!!

[Wazzzup]

They say the windchill here in the Chicago Illinois area is about -60 celsius (-75 fahrenheit) today, where is that global warming I was promised???

[Anonymous]

They say the windchill here in the Chicago Illinois area is about -60 celsius (-75 fahrenheit) today, where is that global warming I was promised???

And that's without a carbon tax.

[Bricktop]

They say the windchill here in the Chicago Illinois area is about -60 celsius (-75 fahrenheit) today, where is that global warming I was promised???

It's HERE.



This time last week it was 47.7C.



That's more than a 100C differential.



But that chill is even extending down as far as Australia.



25C here today. :642:

[Anonymous]

They say the windchill here in the Chicago Illinois area is about -60 celsius (-75 fahrenheit) today, where is that global warming I was promised???

It's HERE.



This time last week it was 47.7C.



That's more than a 100C differential.



But that chill is even extending down as far as Australia.



25C here today. :642:

 

[Bricktop]

What???



The pool water is COLD.

[Frood]

23 here. I've been napping on a recliner on the lawn.



Burrrrr. Needed a blanket.

[Bricktop]

Didn't you hear the warnings to stay inside until this cold wave blows over?

[Anonymous]

What???



The pool water is COLD.

Where's my tiny violin. I will play you a song.

[Bricktop]

Where's your compassion!!!

[Anonymous]

It was -42 when the taxi took me and the conductor to the head end of the train. It took a while to warm up the locomotive.