One of the climate feedback loops just went off the chart. Antarctic sea ice extent in southern hemisphere summers is highly variable, but it always recovers in the winter. Thus year it hasn't.
(*six sigma would be once in a billion years - actually five sigma.)
Its not so much the sea ice but the risk that the ice shelf on Antartica is now able to slide off on a massive scale. If that happens Canary Warf becomes Canary ponds.
The rise in sea level will probably become the UK's biggest headache in the future. There is evidence that the sea level during the last interglacial period - the last time temperatures were comparable to now - was around 6 to 9 metres higher than today. It takes a while* for all that water to warm and the ice to melt, so it won't be our problem. It'll be a nasty legacy for our children and grandchildren though.
* Having said that, there have been occasions in the past when tipping points have passed and the Earth's climate has changed very rapidly, as Richard Tyndall has pointed out. It's very difficult to know what these points might be and when they will be passed, but the warming of the Earth is unlikely to remain a smooth process.
I agree about the sudden tipping points and of course that is possible. But your contention that the last time temperatures were this warm was in the last interglacial is simply wrong. In both historical and pre-historical times we have seen temperatures significantly warmer than now. This does not inform what might happen going forward as such but making such obviously refutable errors doesn't help the debate.
While it was certainly a couple of degrees (Celsius) warmer than our pre-industrial recent history, and temperatures in Europe (and other part of the northern hemisphere) at the peak were still above present day, is that true of global mean surface temperatures, since the southern hemisphere looks to have been relatively cooler back then ?
One of the climate feedback loops just went off the chart. Antarctic sea ice extent in southern hemisphere summers is highly variable, but it always recovers in the winter. Thus year it hasn't.
(*six sigma would be once in a billion years - actually five sigma.)
Its not so much the sea ice but the risk that the ice shelf on Antartica is now able to slide off on a massive scale. If that happens Canary Warf becomes Canary ponds.
The rise in sea level will probably become the UK's biggest headache in the future. There is evidence that the sea level during the last interglacial period - the last time temperatures were comparable to now - was around 6 to 9 metres higher than today. It takes a while* for all that water to warm and the ice to melt, so it won't be our problem. It'll be a nasty legacy for our children and grandchildren though.
* Having said that, there have been occasions in the past when tipping points have passed and the Earth's climate has changed very rapidly, as Richard Tyndall has pointed out. It's very difficult to know what these points might be and when they will be passed, but the warming of the Earth is unlikely to remain a smooth process.
I agree about the sudden tipping points and of course that is possible. But your contention that the last time temperatures were this warm was in the last interglacial is simply wrong. In both historical and pre-historical times we have seen temperatures significantly warmer than now. This does not inform what might happen going forward as such but making such obviously refutable errors doesn't help the debate.
Hahahahaha. Bollocks. Not to put it too politiely.
Pure denial. Sad.
Nope. Based on knowledge. Something you obviously lack.
Local warmer periods, sure (e.g. MWP in North Atlantic may have been warmer than now) but I'm not aware of any convincing evidence of global temperatures higher than now at least in recorded history.
Care to elaborate?
(Locally warmer periods are of course important to get an idea of some local effects, but e.g. sea level would be different with more widespread warming compared to historic events)
ETA: And there's also dispute about MWP temps compared to today, of course. Depends where you look at, for a start
One of the climate feedback loops just went off the chart. Antarctic sea ice extent in southern hemisphere summers is highly variable, but it always recovers in the winter. Thus year it hasn't.
(*six sigma would be once in a billion years - actually five sigma.)
The problem with alarmism is when everything is a crisis nothing is.
It's a fair point, but when one is faced with orbital photos of Australia on fire in 2020 and Mediterranean islands on fire in 2023, one does start wondering if this hug-a-penguin green crap might actually have a bit of a point.
If the UK cut its carbon footprint to zero it would stop precisely nothing,
That's why I always throw my litter in the street, what difference does it make when 99.9% of litter is dropped by other people?
LOL
thats why we burn all that lignite in our coal fired power stations and have 7 of Europes top ten polluters on our land
Weve picked up our litter it would be nice if you Germans could do the same given you produce twice as much carbon as we do.
Deutschland - Spitzenverschmutzer
The German record is terrible. Obviously that is entirely my fault and I will never disagree with you again. Sorry.
Germany's record is terrible.
You lecture the rest of us while chugging out lignite emissions and buying Putins oil and gas. Your green agenda is going backwards because of public resistance to - heat pumps will go tits up here too - and you have closed down all your nuclear .
There are many places one could take a note of the green agenda, but Germany isnt really one of them.
Germany doesn't buy any Russian gas any more, does it? In fact, if you want to be really picky and look at the Enerdata stats, we've bought more Russian gas* than the Germans in 2023.
* Albeit we probably didn't know it was Russian, because we bought if from a UAE broker
You must be fairly desperate today Robert, Germany opened the floodgates on Russian gas many years ago and based its industry on it. It took a war to show the folly of it. Now the industry is looking exposed with even the head of the BDI saying things are looking gloomy.
They didnt base their energy on sustainable "green" under Merkel
I'm just pointing out that your criticism is a year out of date.
After all, you wrote "You lecture the rest of us while chugging out lignite emissions and buying Putins oil and gas".
One of the climate feedback loops just went off the chart. Antarctic sea ice extent in southern hemisphere summers is highly variable, but it always recovers in the winter. Thus year it hasn't.
(*six sigma would be once in a billion years - actually five sigma.)
The problem with alarmism is when everything is a crisis nothing is.
Its the same crisis. Its slow-acting but the effects are starting to get more severe and in greater frequency.
So what ? Nothing our government and environmentalists are suggesting will impact this.
The top ten polluters account for 67% of the carbon produced globally. China India Iran and Indonesia are all developing economies and will shove out more carbon in the next decade than the UK. The UK isnt even a top 10 polluter but number 17 and moving down the rankings.
Net zero is not an appropriate priority for us. We should be focussing policies of bio diversity, reducing plastics and liveability in a changed climate.
That's what everyone says.
Unless everyone starts to act, no one will.
Tosh.
The major economies are shifting to Asia and Africa. Their politicians are not going to recommend to their people they sit in abject poverty. Nigeria alone will have something like 750 million people by the end of this century, that popultaion growth plus a rising standard of living will dwarf anything the UK will do.
Nobody is going to follow the UK as they have their own priorities.
Tosh. First, you're a complete numpty if you think you can forecast populations for the end if this century. Second, they're going to discover relatively soon that they can grow their economies faster without fossil fuels. The point of wealthier countries leading that process is to accelerate the technology development.
You're a conservative Luddite.
Im not forecasting population Im using those provided by a variety of institutions including the United Nations who do this for a living. I suggestt you will find a lot of surprises as indeed I did when you start to go through them.
As for Luddite no. I dont have your big white Bwana approach to other nations, They will do what suits them and what makes them richer. We should do the same.
'They will do what suits them and what makes them richer. We should do the same.'
Probably true, because that is what humans do but it doesn't make it a good argument for what we should do though. You know famine, drought (and ironically) floods, mass migration, unbearable temperatures, possibly tipping us over into a cascading climate event. It isn't a good plan to do just nothing because they do just nothing.
I appreciate it may all be pointless but do you have children?
I have 3 ( all adults ) plus a grand child and another on the way.
@Alanbrooke, I have just realised I worded that last line badly and it sounded rude which it wasn't meant to be. I hope you didn't take it like that. Maybe it would have been better without the 'but' and with a '.'
In other words: I appreciate it may be pointless (to do anything)
And
Do you have children (need to think of their future)
And not asking you whether you had children was a pointless exercise.
One of the climate feedback loops just went off the chart. Antarctic sea ice extent in southern hemisphere summers is highly variable, but it always recovers in the winter. Thus year it hasn't.
(*six sigma would be once in a billion years - actually five sigma.)
Its not so much the sea ice but the risk that the ice shelf on Antartica is now able to slide off on a massive scale. If that happens Canary Warf becomes Canary ponds.
The rise in sea level will probably become the UK's biggest headache in the future. There is evidence that the sea level during the last interglacial period - the last time temperatures were comparable to now - was around 6 to 9 metres higher than today. It takes a while* for all that water to warm and the ice to melt, so it won't be our problem. It'll be a nasty legacy for our children and grandchildren though.
* Having said that, there have been occasions in the past when tipping points have passed and the Earth's climate has changed very rapidly, as Richard Tyndall has pointed out. It's very difficult to know what these points might be and when they will be passed, but the warming of the Earth is unlikely to remain a smooth process.
I agree about the sudden tipping points and of course that is possible. But your contention that the last time temperatures were this warm was in the last interglacial is simply wrong. In both historical and pre-historical times we have seen temperatures significantly warmer than now. This does not inform what might happen going forward as such but making such obviously refutable errors doesn't help the debate.
One of the climate feedback loops just went off the chart. Antarctic sea ice extent in southern hemisphere summers is highly variable, but it always recovers in the winter. Thus year it hasn't.
(*six sigma would be once in a billion years - actually five sigma.)
The problem with alarmism is when everything is a crisis nothing is.
It's a fair point, but when one is faced with orbital photos of Australia on fire in 2020 and Mediterranean islands on fire in 2023, one does start wondering if this hug-a-penguin green crap might actually have a bit of a point.
If the UK cut its carbon footprint to zero it would stop precisely nothing,
That's why I always throw my litter in the street, what difference does it make when 99.9% of litter is dropped by other people?
LOL
thats why we burn all that lignite in our coal fired power stations and have 7 of Europes top ten polluters on our land
Weve picked up our litter it would be nice if you Germans could do the same given you produce twice as much carbon as we do.
Deutschland - Spitzenverschmutzer
The German record is terrible. Obviously that is entirely my fault and I will never disagree with you again. Sorry.
Germany's record is terrible.
You lecture the rest of us while chugging out lignite emissions and buying Putins oil and gas. Your green agenda is going backwards because of public resistance to - heat pumps will go tits up here too - and you have closed down all your nuclear .
There are many places one could take a note of the green agenda, but Germany isnt really one of them.
Germany doesn't buy any Russian gas any more, does it? In fact, if you want to be really picky and look at the Enerdata stats, we've bought more Russian gas* than the Germans in 2023.
* Albeit we probably didn't know it was Russian, because we bought if from a UAE broker
You must be fairly desperate today Robert, Germany opened the floodgates on Russian gas many years ago and based its industry on it. It took a war to show the folly of it. Now the industry is looking exposed with even the head of the BDI saying things are looking gloomy.
They didnt base their energy on sustainable "green" under Merkel
I'm just pointing out that your criticism is a year out of date.
After all, you wrote "You lecture the rest of us while chugging out lignite emissions and buying Putins oil and gas".
One of the climate feedback loops just went off the chart. Antarctic sea ice extent in southern hemisphere summers is highly variable, but it always recovers in the winter. Thus year it hasn't.
(*six sigma would be once in a billion years - actually five sigma.)
The problem with alarmism is when everything is a crisis nothing is.
Its the same crisis. Its slow-acting but the effects are starting to get more severe and in greater frequency.
So what ? Nothing our government and environmentalists are suggesting will impact this.
The top ten polluters account for 67% of the carbon produced globally. China India Iran and Indonesia are all developing economies and will shove out more carbon in the next decade than the UK. The UK isnt even a top 10 polluter but number 17 and moving down the rankings.
Net zero is not an appropriate priority for us. We should be focussing policies of bio diversity, reducing plastics and liveability in a changed climate.
That's what everyone says.
Unless everyone starts to act, no one will.
Tosh.
The major economies are shifting to Asia and Africa. Their politicians are not going to recommend to their people they sit in abject poverty. Nigeria alone will have something like 750 million people by the end of this century, that popultaion growth plus a rising standard of living will dwarf anything the UK will do.
Nobody is going to follow the UK as they have their own priorities.
Tosh. First, you're a complete numpty if you think you can forecast populations for the end if this century. Second, they're going to discover relatively soon that they can grow their economies faster without fossil fuels. The point of wealthier countries leading that process is to accelerate the technology development.
You're a conservative Luddite.
Im not forecasting population Im using those provided by a variety of institutions including the United Nations who do this for a living. I suggestt you will find a lot of surprises as indeed I did when you start to go through them.
As for Luddite no. I dont have your big white Bwana approach to other nations, They will do what suits them and what makes them richer. We should do the same.
'They will do what suits them and what makes them richer. We should do the same.'
Probably true, because that is what humans do but it doesn't make it a good argument for what we should do though. You know famine, drought (and ironically) floods, mass migration, unbearable temperatures, possibly tipping us over into a cascading climate event. It isn't a good plan to do just nothing because they do just nothing.
I appreciate it may all be pointless but do you have children?
I have 3 ( all adults ) plus a grand child and another on the way.
@Alanbrooke, I have just realised I worded that last line badly and it sounded rude which it wasn't meant to be. I hope you didn't take it like that. Maybe it would have been better without the 'but' and with a '.'
In other words: I appreciate it may be pointless (to do anything)
And
Do you have children (need to think of their future)
And not asking you whether you had children was a pointless exercise.
Agggh - It is so easy to word things badly.
wouldnt worry about it , it takes a lot to offend me
One of the climate feedback loops just went off the chart. Antarctic sea ice extent in southern hemisphere summers is highly variable, but it always recovers in the winter. Thus year it hasn't.
(*six sigma would be once in a billion years - actually five sigma.)
Its not so much the sea ice but the risk that the ice shelf on Antartica is now able to slide off on a massive scale. If that happens Canary Warf becomes Canary ponds.
The rise in sea level will probably become the UK's biggest headache in the future. There is evidence that the sea level during the last interglacial period - the last time temperatures were comparable to now - was around 6 to 9 metres higher than today. It takes a while* for all that water to warm and the ice to melt, so it won't be our problem. It'll be a nasty legacy for our children and grandchildren though.
* Having said that, there have been occasions in the past when tipping points have passed and the Earth's climate has changed very rapidly, as Richard Tyndall has pointed out. It's very difficult to know what these points might be and when they will be passed, but the warming of the Earth is unlikely to remain a smooth process.
I agree about the sudden tipping points and of course that is possible. But your contention that the last time temperatures were this warm was in the last interglacial is simply wrong. In both historical and pre-historical times we have seen temperatures significantly warmer than now. This does not inform what might happen going forward as such but making such obviously refutable errors doesn't help the debate.
While it was certainly a couple of degrees (Celsius) warmer than our pre-industrial recent history, and temperatures in Europe (and other part of the northern hemisphere) at the peak were still above present day, is that true of global mean temperatures, since the southern hemisphere looks to have been relatively cooler back then ?
I don't think so. Comparing to that would still be warmest in ~120ka, which is the claim Richard is disputing.
On topic, Sunak will not call an election he expects to lose unless he expects things to get dramatically worse in the remaining period of the parliament.
As he would expect to lose unless the Tory polling recovers to at least near parity, and as he can have some confidence that the economy will improve through 2024 (though it won't necessarily feel like that to mortgage-holders and renters), that all points to Nov 2024 in my book.
Labour has now held a continuous double-digit lead in the polls for 10 months. That's the longest such period since pre-Iraq Blair and a measure of Labour's current dominance (one backed up by strong anti-Con tactical voting). Why on earth would he go early unless some unforeseeable event intervenes strongly to the Tories' advantage?
Agree.
Out of interest do you think he will even if 'he expects things will get dramatically worse'?
What is worse losing power say 6 months or a year earlier or hanging on and losing by a bigger margin. I don't know and suspect the answer is different for different people and what your personal motives are compared to your ambitions for your party or country.
I don't know. Even if you do expect things to get worse, there's still a natural tendency among many to wait if they also expect to lose now.
However, politicians are naturally optimistic and if they really do think they'll get battered in 6 months, then rolling the dice now might seem a worthwhile gamble, particularly if they think Labour's election machine weak and capable of being out-manouevred. Major went 3 months before he had to in 1992, even though trailing in the polls, partly in order to gain some initiative.
And while history might view an 'early', lost election as an error (not really that early if it's after 4.5 years), it would remember a landslide defeat 6 months later even less well.
Found a great Bulgarian restaurant slightly inland from the sea but full of locals - and thus serves simple Bulgarian food (quickly) at low prices.
Deep-fried aubergine with a tomato sauce and a Shepherd's salad. I also ordered Tarator soup and a sort of ham/cheese/potato hock with fresh bread, and lashings of Bulgarian beer at 90p a pint - even today.
I love JCB, and have a slightly grudging respect for the Bamfords. They're known as paying well, but also being 'tough' employers, and very quick to sack people in a downturn. Having said that, a couple of distant relatives have worked there for decades.
The country is better off for having them and their company; but that does not mean they're perfect. But on the whole I'd call them good. The lefties who *hate* them because Bamford gives money to the Conservative Party are just being utterly stupid.
Conservatives "hate" them for supporting Brexit
They wanted to make it easier for them to sell diggers in Brazil, by making it harder for everyone else to sell anything to Europe.
If you read the American tea leaves, it is possible that Washington is on the brink of UFO “Disclosure”
There will be Congressional hearings this week. Even Biden’s spokespeople have stopped 1. Joking about it or 2. Trying to ignore it. Suddenly they are serious and open
From a few days ago:
“NEW - White House on UFOs: "Some of these phenomena we know have already had an impact on our training ranges."”
I somehow suspect it isn't a £1.3m home in Hampshire. Not if you can afford a RR and helicopter and it appears to have a large plot, lake and covered swimming pool.
Date Price Address 22/10/2021 £1,100,000 Three Gables, Stapleford Lane, Durley, Southampton, SO32 2BU
£1.3M sounds about right to me. It's a substantial plot but all a bit disjointed to my mind.
Yep and Zoopla has it valued at under this so conceded @Pulpstar.
I must admit I was rather thrown by the 2 for sale ones you linked to. Wonder what the area is like?
Bloody noisy if this solicitor is using a helicopter. We always used to know when Robert Maxwell was using his helipad on top of the Mirror building.
Most of the helicopter flights round here seem to carry Lord Bamford and his entourage from their Cotswold 'farm' to their north-country factories, frequently interrupting breakfast or tea. I suppose I should console myself that they're actually doing something productive, unlike lawyers.
In the centre of Roccester, right by JCB, were a series of blocky and slightly down-at-heel blocks of lowrise flats. Bamford hated these, as they were clearly visible as he flew in to the helipad (*) at JCB. They're no longer there - I don't know if they were refaced/reroofed or demolished and rebuilt.
Bamfords have a great deal of power in the area, and own a massive amount of land. Thirty-five years ago, they got together with Alton Towers for a new road to be built between Rocester (where JCB's factory is) to Uttoxeter. Then when Alton Towers wanted it extending to Alton, Bamford objected...
(Incidentally, Alton Towers used to take so much cash during the holidays that it used to e flown out by helicopter every evening after the park closed, it being cheaper and safer than transporting it in secure van along the twisting country lanes.)
(*) Directly on the course of the old Uttoxeter to Ashbourne railway line.
We go for walks quite often around the lake that's just outside the factory. Nice atmosphere. No security. You can walk right past the front door of the enormous factory.
One of the climate feedback loops just went off the chart. Antarctic sea ice extent in southern hemisphere summers is highly variable, but it always recovers in the winter. Thus year it hasn't.
(*six sigma would be once in a billion years - actually five sigma.)
Its not so much the sea ice but the risk that the ice shelf on Antartica is now able to slide off on a massive scale. If that happens Canary Warf becomes Canary ponds.
The rise in sea level will probably become the UK's biggest headache in the future. There is evidence that the sea level during the last interglacial period - the last time temperatures were comparable to now - was around 6 to 9 metres higher than today. It takes a while* for all that water to warm and the ice to melt, so it won't be our problem. It'll be a nasty legacy for our children and grandchildren though.
* Having said that, there have been occasions in the past when tipping points have passed and the Earth's climate has changed very rapidly, as Richard Tyndall has pointed out. It's very difficult to know what these points might be and when they will be passed, but the warming of the Earth is unlikely to remain a smooth process.
I agree about the sudden tipping points and of course that is possible. But your contention that the last time temperatures were this warm was in the last interglacial is simply wrong. In both historical and pre-historical times we have seen temperatures significantly warmer than now. This does not inform what might happen going forward as such but making such obviously refutable errors doesn't help the debate.
While it was certainly a couple of degrees (Celsius) warmer than our pre-industrial recent history, and temperatures in Europe (and other part of the northern hemisphere) at the peak were still above present day, is that true of global mean temperatures, since the southern hemisphere looks to have been relatively cooler back then ?
I don't think so. Comparing to that would still be warmest in ~120ka, which is the claim Richard is disputing.
And of course surface/atmospheric temperatures only tell you so much. The oceans are such a massive heat sink, and the heat transfers mechanisms between deep ocean, ocean surface and atmosphere still so imperfectly understood, that there's a great deal of difficulty in comparing the global climate system then with the one today.
Apart from anything else, atmospheric CO2 was far lower - and we're comparing the then peak with our current point on an upward slope.
Hopefully our GE is before the US one, ours will be counted and should be paid out/losses known quite fast for political bettors whereas the USA is going to take forever to count theirs.
One of the climate feedback loops just went off the chart. Antarctic sea ice extent in southern hemisphere summers is highly variable, but it always recovers in the winter. Thus year it hasn't.
(*six sigma would be once in a billion years - actually five sigma.)
Its not so much the sea ice but the risk that the ice shelf on Antartica is now able to slide off on a massive scale. If that happens Canary Warf becomes Canary ponds.
The rise in sea level will probably become the UK's biggest headache in the future. There is evidence that the sea level during the last interglacial period - the last time temperatures were comparable to now - was around 6 to 9 metres higher than today. It takes a while* for all that water to warm and the ice to melt, so it won't be our problem. It'll be a nasty legacy for our children and grandchildren though.
* Having said that, there have been occasions in the past when tipping points have passed and the Earth's climate has changed very rapidly, as Richard Tyndall has pointed out. It's very difficult to know what these points might be and when they will be passed, but the warming of the Earth is unlikely to remain a smooth process.
I agree about the sudden tipping points and of course that is possible. But your contention that the last time temperatures were this warm was in the last interglacial is simply wrong. In both historical and pre-historical times we have seen temperatures significantly warmer than now. This does not inform what might happen going forward as such but making such obviously refutable errors doesn't help the debate.
While it was certainly a couple of degrees (Celsius) warmer than our pre-industrial recent history, and temperatures in Europe (and other part of the northern hemisphere) at the peak were still above present day, is that true of global mean temperatures, since the southern hemisphere looks to have been relatively cooler back then ?
I don't think so. Comparing to that would still be warmest in ~120ka, which is the claim Richard is disputing.
Yes, Richard's claim was that it has been significantly warmer than today both in recorded history and in pre-history since the Eemian intergalcial.
Hopefully our GE is before the US one, ours will be counted and should be paid out/losses known quite fast for political bettors whereas the USA is going to take forever to count theirs.
On the UFO's, some of the Congressmen and women involved tomorrow, are basically racing to get hold of some the information already provided to the US Inspector-General by tomorrow.
If they can't, there's a chance the process may take a lot longer.
@rcs1000 I've raised a point in discussion about Ukraine and Russian battlefield management systems and use of AI in theatre, which I think you may find interesting, or at least comprehensible. It covers things like YOLO5 and and the segment-anything model from Meta AI. I can nod and smile but this is more your area than mine
What realistically could Rishi do between now and next year to give the Tories a positive boost ahead of an election?
The sad but probably true answer is that doing nothing probably helps a bit. Make the government as invisible as possible allowing maximum scrutiny to fall on Labour.
There is almost nothing he can afford to give away now the fiscal situation has deteriorated so badly. So tax cuts or big spending boosts are out. He can wait for inflation to fall, as it certainly will, but prices will still be higher than before. “Stopping the boats” is one of those risky policies (like cutting crime) where if you fail your own targets you come off worse than if you’d never set them, and if you meet them everyone forgets the issue.
Finally, getting the economy moving again is great but it probably empowers people to dream of better things and decide it’s time for a change.
One of the climate feedback loops just went off the chart. Antarctic sea ice extent in southern hemisphere summers is highly variable, but it always recovers in the winter. Thus year it hasn't.
(*six sigma would be once in a billion years - actually five sigma.)
Its not so much the sea ice but the risk that the ice shelf on Antartica is now able to slide off on a massive scale. If that happens Canary Warf becomes Canary ponds.
The rise in sea level will probably become the UK's biggest headache in the future. There is evidence that the sea level during the last interglacial period - the last time temperatures were comparable to now - was around 6 to 9 metres higher than today. It takes a while* for all that water to warm and the ice to melt, so it won't be our problem. It'll be a nasty legacy for our children and grandchildren though.
* Having said that, there have been occasions in the past when tipping points have passed and the Earth's climate has changed very rapidly, as Richard Tyndall has pointed out. It's very difficult to know what these points might be and when they will be passed, but the warming of the Earth is unlikely to remain a smooth process.
I agree about the sudden tipping points and of course that is possible. But your contention that the last time temperatures were this warm was in the last interglacial is simply wrong. In both historical and pre-historical times we have seen temperatures significantly warmer than now. This does not inform what might happen going forward as such but making such obviously refutable errors doesn't help the debate.
The last three Julys on Earth have been the three warmest ever recorded. But, they may also be the warmest months to occur on our planet in about 120,000 years.
Bit of nuance. Uncertainty is important. Reconstructing past temperatures is hard. Take the use of tree ring data and the 'divergence'. If tree rings are a good proxy for temperature, why are they not working now?
We will see. From all the chat I'm expecting NOTHING that hasn't been alleged before, and ZERO actual evidence. Grusch himself has seen ZERO, he is relating takes told to him.
Keep believing folks, if it floats you boat, but don't expect an earth shattering revelation any time soon...
One of the climate feedback loops just went off the chart. Antarctic sea ice extent in southern hemisphere summers is highly variable, but it always recovers in the winter. Thus year it hasn't.
(*six sigma would be once in a billion years - actually five sigma.)
Its not so much the sea ice but the risk that the ice shelf on Antartica is now able to slide off on a massive scale. If that happens Canary Warf becomes Canary ponds.
The rise in sea level will probably become the UK's biggest headache in the future. There is evidence that the sea level during the last interglacial period - the last time temperatures were comparable to now - was around 6 to 9 metres higher than today. It takes a while* for all that water to warm and the ice to melt, so it won't be our problem. It'll be a nasty legacy for our children and grandchildren though.
* Having said that, there have been occasions in the past when tipping points have passed and the Earth's climate has changed very rapidly, as Richard Tyndall has pointed out. It's very difficult to know what these points might be and when they will be passed, but the warming of the Earth is unlikely to remain a smooth process.
I agree about the sudden tipping points and of course that is possible. But your contention that the last time temperatures were this warm was in the last interglacial is simply wrong. In both historical and pre-historical times we have seen temperatures significantly warmer than now. This does not inform what might happen going forward as such but making such obviously refutable errors doesn't help the debate.
The last three Julys on Earth have been the three warmest ever recorded. But, they may also be the warmest months to occur on our planet in about 120,000 years.
Bit of nuance. Uncertainty is important. Reconstructing past temperatures is hard. Take the use of tree ring data and the 'divergence'. If tree rings are a good proxy for temperature, why are they not working now?
It's worth reading beyond the first line of the article.
One of the climate feedback loops just went off the chart. Antarctic sea ice extent in southern hemisphere summers is highly variable, but it always recovers in the winter. Thus year it hasn't.
(*six sigma would be once in a billion years - actually five sigma.)
Its not so much the sea ice but the risk that the ice shelf on Antartica is now able to slide off on a massive scale. If that happens Canary Warf becomes Canary ponds.
The rise in sea level will probably become the UK's biggest headache in the future. There is evidence that the sea level during the last interglacial period - the last time temperatures were comparable to now - was around 6 to 9 metres higher than today. It takes a while* for all that water to warm and the ice to melt, so it won't be our problem. It'll be a nasty legacy for our children and grandchildren though.
* Having said that, there have been occasions in the past when tipping points have passed and the Earth's climate has changed very rapidly, as Richard Tyndall has pointed out. It's very difficult to know what these points might be and when they will be passed, but the warming of the Earth is unlikely to remain a smooth process.
I agree about the sudden tipping points and of course that is possible. But your contention that the last time temperatures were this warm was in the last interglacial is simply wrong. In both historical and pre-historical times we have seen temperatures significantly warmer than now. This does not inform what might happen going forward as such but making such obviously refutable errors doesn't help the debate.
The last three Julys on Earth have been the three warmest ever recorded. But, they may also be the warmest months to occur on our planet in about 120,000 years.
Bit of nuance. Uncertainty is important. Reconstructing past temperatures is hard. Take the use of tree ring data and the 'divergence'. If tree rings are a good proxy for temperature, why are they not working now?
Crazy talk - @FeersumEnjineeya has evidence of the temperature over the past 120,000 years. Evidence.
One of the climate feedback loops just went off the chart. Antarctic sea ice extent in southern hemisphere summers is highly variable, but it always recovers in the winter. Thus year it hasn't.
(*six sigma would be once in a billion years - actually five sigma.)
Its not so much the sea ice but the risk that the ice shelf on Antartica is now able to slide off on a massive scale. If that happens Canary Warf becomes Canary ponds.
The rise in sea level will probably become the UK's biggest headache in the future. There is evidence that the sea level during the last interglacial period - the last time temperatures were comparable to now - was around 6 to 9 metres higher than today. It takes a while* for all that water to warm and the ice to melt, so it won't be our problem. It'll be a nasty legacy for our children and grandchildren though.
* Having said that, there have been occasions in the past when tipping points have passed and the Earth's climate has changed very rapidly, as Richard Tyndall has pointed out. It's very difficult to know what these points might be and when they will be passed, but the warming of the Earth is unlikely to remain a smooth process.
I agree about the sudden tipping points and of course that is possible. But your contention that the last time temperatures were this warm was in the last interglacial is simply wrong. In both historical and pre-historical times we have seen temperatures significantly warmer than now. This does not inform what might happen going forward as such but making such obviously refutable errors doesn't help the debate.
The last three Julys on Earth have been the three warmest ever recorded. But, they may also be the warmest months to occur on our planet in about 120,000 years.
Bit of nuance. Uncertainty is important. Reconstructing past temperatures is hard. Take the use of tree ring data and the 'divergence'. If tree rings are a good proxy for temperature, why are they not working now?
Crazy talk - @FeersumEnjineeya has evidence of the temperature over the past 120,000 years. Evidence.
One of the climate feedback loops just went off the chart. Antarctic sea ice extent in southern hemisphere summers is highly variable, but it always recovers in the winter. Thus year it hasn't.
(*six sigma would be once in a billion years - actually five sigma.)
Its not so much the sea ice but the risk that the ice shelf on Antartica is now able to slide off on a massive scale. If that happens Canary Warf becomes Canary ponds.
The rise in sea level will probably become the UK's biggest headache in the future. There is evidence that the sea level during the last interglacial period - the last time temperatures were comparable to now - was around 6 to 9 metres higher than today. It takes a while* for all that water to warm and the ice to melt, so it won't be our problem. It'll be a nasty legacy for our children and grandchildren though.
* Having said that, there have been occasions in the past when tipping points have passed and the Earth's climate has changed very rapidly, as Richard Tyndall has pointed out. It's very difficult to know what these points might be and when they will be passed, but the warming of the Earth is unlikely to remain a smooth process.
I agree about the sudden tipping points and of course that is possible. But your contention that the last time temperatures were this warm was in the last interglacial is simply wrong. In both historical and pre-historical times we have seen temperatures significantly warmer than now. This does not inform what might happen going forward as such but making such obviously refutable errors doesn't help the debate.
The last three Julys on Earth have been the three warmest ever recorded. But, they may also be the warmest months to occur on our planet in about 120,000 years.
Bit of nuance. Uncertainty is important. Reconstructing past temperatures is hard. Take the use of tree ring data and the 'divergence'. If tree rings are a good proxy for temperature, why are they not working now?
It's worth reading beyond the first line of the article.
Even if you've also read the strapline? "The past few summers have been the warmest on Earth in a long, long time."
Then the first sentence: "The last three Julys on Earth have been the three warmest ever recorded."
(BBM). Oopsadaisy! Surely some mistake? I was going to ask what kind of average they were using and whether in theory it treats all points on the Earth's surface equally, but really when faced with an article like that, who cares? The editor surely didn't.
We will see. From all the chat I'm expecting NOTHING that hasn't been alleged before, and ZERO actual evidence. Grusch himself has seen ZERO, he is relating takes told to him.
Keep believing folks, if it floats you boat, but don't expect an earth shattering revelation any time soon...
A lot of it may depend on whether they can obtain names and information from the U.S. Inspector-General of Intelligence.
He seems to have collecting names and evidence for about three years now, with no official denials of this, and the previous IG working for Grusch.
One of the climate feedback loops just went off the chart. Antarctic sea ice extent in southern hemisphere summers is highly variable, but it always recovers in the winter. Thus year it hasn't.
(*six sigma would be once in a billion years - actually five sigma.)
Its not so much the sea ice but the risk that the ice shelf on Antartica is now able to slide off on a massive scale. If that happens Canary Warf becomes Canary ponds.
The rise in sea level will probably become the UK's biggest headache in the future. There is evidence that the sea level during the last interglacial period - the last time temperatures were comparable to now - was around 6 to 9 metres higher than today. It takes a while* for all that water to warm and the ice to melt, so it won't be our problem. It'll be a nasty legacy for our children and grandchildren though.
* Having said that, there have been occasions in the past when tipping points have passed and the Earth's climate has changed very rapidly, as Richard Tyndall has pointed out. It's very difficult to know what these points might be and when they will be passed, but the warming of the Earth is unlikely to remain a smooth process.
I agree about the sudden tipping points and of course that is possible. But your contention that the last time temperatures were this warm was in the last interglacial is simply wrong. In both historical and pre-historical times we have seen temperatures significantly warmer than now. This does not inform what might happen going forward as such but making such obviously refutable errors doesn't help the debate.
The last three Julys on Earth have been the three warmest ever recorded. But, they may also be the warmest months to occur on our planet in about 120,000 years.
Bit of nuance. Uncertainty is important. Reconstructing past temperatures is hard. Take the use of tree ring data and the 'divergence'. If tree rings are a good proxy for temperature, why are they not working now?
Crazy talk - @FeersumEnjineeya has evidence of the temperature over the past 120,000 years. Evidence.
I know a lot of work has been done on this, but its also really hard to be sure. We don't have a suit of thermometers recording back for the last 120,000 years. This is different from the clear observations of rising global temps in recent decades, with the clear link to man made effects. I know that some have sought to emphasize the current threat by comparing to past climate - the 'its worse now than its ever been approach'. The existence of a medieval warm period and a roman warm period have been challenged by some, and may not have been world wide events.
I am not sure this is a helpful approach. The measured data we have ought to be enough, as should the increasing impacts we see around the world.
In short, it may have been the warmest for 120,000 years, but I would put low confidence on that assertion.
One of the climate feedback loops just went off the chart. Antarctic sea ice extent in southern hemisphere summers is highly variable, but it always recovers in the winter. Thus year it hasn't.
(*six sigma would be once in a billion years - actually five sigma.)
Its not so much the sea ice but the risk that the ice shelf on Antartica is now able to slide off on a massive scale. If that happens Canary Warf becomes Canary ponds.
The rise in sea level will probably become the UK's biggest headache in the future. There is evidence that the sea level during the last interglacial period - the last time temperatures were comparable to now - was around 6 to 9 metres higher than today. It takes a while* for all that water to warm and the ice to melt, so it won't be our problem. It'll be a nasty legacy for our children and grandchildren though.
* Having said that, there have been occasions in the past when tipping points have passed and the Earth's climate has changed very rapidly, as Richard Tyndall has pointed out. It's very difficult to know what these points might be and when they will be passed, but the warming of the Earth is unlikely to remain a smooth process.
I agree about the sudden tipping points and of course that is possible. But your contention that the last time temperatures were this warm was in the last interglacial is simply wrong. In both historical and pre-historical times we have seen temperatures significantly warmer than now. This does not inform what might happen going forward as such but making such obviously refutable errors doesn't help the debate.
The last three Julys on Earth have been the three warmest ever recorded. But, they may also be the warmest months to occur on our planet in about 120,000 years.
Bit of nuance. Uncertainty is important. Reconstructing past temperatures is hard. Take the use of tree ring data and the 'divergence'. If tree rings are a good proxy for temperature, why are they not working now?
It's worth reading beyond the first line of the article.
Even if you've also read the strapline? "The past few summers have been the warmest on Earth in a long, long time."
Then the first sentence: "The last three Julys on Earth have been the three warmest ever recorded."
(BBM). Oopsadaisy! Surely some mistake? I was going to ask what kind of average they were using and whether in theory it treats all points on the Earth's surface equally, but really when faced with an article like that, who cares?
From the article:
"There's little doubt among scientists that we're now probably experiencing the warmest climate in some 120,000 years, even reaching above a particularly warm period around 7,000 years ago, during a post-ice age era called the Holocene.
"I agree entirely that it's very likely the last few summers have been the warmest in the last ~100,000-115,000 years," David Black, a paleoclimatologist at Stony Brook University, said over email. "It's very probable that we've begun to exceed the warmest part of the Holocene."
"It is safe to say that it's true," added Jennifer Marlon, a research scientist at Yale University's School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, in an interview. "You'll find a scientific consensus among experts even on that point now I'd bet, which says a lot."
Marlon noted that during that hotter time 7,000 years ago, only the northern hemisphere experienced some pretty warm summers, "but now we are warmer year round."
Back in 2013, Rahmstorf already argued that the current climate had already surpassed this warmest period of the Holocene. And in the last five years, the case has only grown stronger."
One of the climate feedback loops just went off the chart. Antarctic sea ice extent in southern hemisphere summers is highly variable, but it always recovers in the winter. Thus year it hasn't.
(*six sigma would be once in a billion years - actually five sigma.)
Its not so much the sea ice but the risk that the ice shelf on Antartica is now able to slide off on a massive scale. If that happens Canary Warf becomes Canary ponds.
The rise in sea level will probably become the UK's biggest headache in the future. There is evidence that the sea level during the last interglacial period - the last time temperatures were comparable to now - was around 6 to 9 metres higher than today. It takes a while* for all that water to warm and the ice to melt, so it won't be our problem. It'll be a nasty legacy for our children and grandchildren though.
* Having said that, there have been occasions in the past when tipping points have passed and the Earth's climate has changed very rapidly, as Richard Tyndall has pointed out. It's very difficult to know what these points might be and when they will be passed, but the warming of the Earth is unlikely to remain a smooth process.
I agree about the sudden tipping points and of course that is possible. But your contention that the last time temperatures were this warm was in the last interglacial is simply wrong. In both historical and pre-historical times we have seen temperatures significantly warmer than now. This does not inform what might happen going forward as such but making such obviously refutable errors doesn't help the debate.
The last three Julys on Earth have been the three warmest ever recorded. But, they may also be the warmest months to occur on our planet in about 120,000 years.
Bit of nuance. Uncertainty is important. Reconstructing past temperatures is hard. Take the use of tree ring data and the 'divergence'. If tree rings are a good proxy for temperature, why are they not working now?
It's worth reading beyond the first line of the article.
Even if you've also read the strapline? "The past few summers have been the warmest on Earth in a long, long time."
Then the first sentence: "The last three Julys on Earth have been the three warmest ever recorded."
(BBM). Oopsadaisy! Surely some mistake? I was going to ask what kind of average they were using and whether in theory it treats all points on the Earth's surface equally, but really when faced with an article like that, who cares?
yes. I think this is the point you are making, but: earth as a whole does not have summers. This is like thinking if you are sending an unmanned probe to check out the sun it would be best to go at night.
We will see. From all the chat I'm expecting NOTHING that hasn't been alleged before, and ZERO actual evidence. Grusch himself has seen ZERO, he is relating takes told to him.
Keep believing folks, if it floats you boat, but don't expect an earth shattering revelation any time soon...
A lot of it may depend on whether they can get names and information from the U.S. Inspector-General of Intelligence.
He seems to have collecting names and evidence for about three years now.
I just don't see anything beyond what we have seen many times before. Unless you subscribe to the X-files state within a state cover-up, its hard to see how this stuff hasn't come out, if there really are crashed UFO's with alien bodies.
Far more likely is the usual grift. There is money to be made writing books, and going on TV's shows talking shit.
We will see. From all the chat I'm expecting NOTHING that hasn't been alleged before, and ZERO actual evidence. Grusch himself has seen ZERO, he is relating takes told to him.
Keep believing folks, if it floats you boat, but don't expect an earth shattering revelation any time soon...
We will see. From all the chat I'm expecting NOTHING that hasn't been alleged before, and ZERO actual evidence. Grusch himself has seen ZERO, he is relating takes told to him.
Keep believing folks, if it floats you boat, but don't expect an earth shattering revelation any time soon...
Possibly.
And I’m not a confirmed believer in “ET” - as I’ve said a trillion times. My point is that something deeply weird is happening in Washington. And this latest chapter shows the weirdness intensifying
The number of esteemed DC people who are now openly speculating that we have probably encountered “non human intelligence” - or at least something totally inexplicable - is beyond counting
One of the climate feedback loops just went off the chart. Antarctic sea ice extent in southern hemisphere summers is highly variable, but it always recovers in the winter. Thus year it hasn't.
(*six sigma would be once in a billion years - actually five sigma.)
Its not so much the sea ice but the risk that the ice shelf on Antartica is now able to slide off on a massive scale. If that happens Canary Warf becomes Canary ponds.
The rise in sea level will probably become the UK's biggest headache in the future. There is evidence that the sea level during the last interglacial period - the last time temperatures were comparable to now - was around 6 to 9 metres higher than today. It takes a while* for all that water to warm and the ice to melt, so it won't be our problem. It'll be a nasty legacy for our children and grandchildren though.
* Having said that, there have been occasions in the past when tipping points have passed and the Earth's climate has changed very rapidly, as Richard Tyndall has pointed out. It's very difficult to know what these points might be and when they will be passed, but the warming of the Earth is unlikely to remain a smooth process.
I agree about the sudden tipping points and of course that is possible. But your contention that the last time temperatures were this warm was in the last interglacial is simply wrong. In both historical and pre-historical times we have seen temperatures significantly warmer than now. This does not inform what might happen going forward as such but making such obviously refutable errors doesn't help the debate.
The last three Julys on Earth have been the three warmest ever recorded. But, they may also be the warmest months to occur on our planet in about 120,000 years.
Bit of nuance. Uncertainty is important. Reconstructing past temperatures is hard. Take the use of tree ring data and the 'divergence'. If tree rings are a good proxy for temperature, why are they not working now?
It's worth reading beyond the first line of the article.
Even if you've also read the strapline? "The past few summers have been the warmest on Earth in a long, long time."
Then the first sentence: "The last three Julys on Earth have been the three warmest ever recorded."
(BBM). Oopsadaisy! Surely some mistake? I was going to ask what kind of average they were using and whether in theory it treats all points on the Earth's surface equally, but really when faced with an article like that, who cares?
Quibbling over whether it is the hottest year in 10 000 years, or 120 000 is like arguing about the bar bill on the Titanic.
The suggestion that this change and heating is purely coincidentally occuring immediately after 3 decades in which we doubled the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is risible.
Or perhaps it is all those UFOs buzzing about that is over heating our world?
One of the climate feedback loops just went off the chart. Antarctic sea ice extent in southern hemisphere summers is highly variable, but it always recovers in the winter. Thus year it hasn't.
(*six sigma would be once in a billion years - actually five sigma.)
Its not so much the sea ice but the risk that the ice shelf on Antartica is now able to slide off on a massive scale. If that happens Canary Warf becomes Canary ponds.
The rise in sea level will probably become the UK's biggest headache in the future. There is evidence that the sea level during the last interglacial period - the last time temperatures were comparable to now - was around 6 to 9 metres higher than today. It takes a while* for all that water to warm and the ice to melt, so it won't be our problem. It'll be a nasty legacy for our children and grandchildren though.
* Having said that, there have been occasions in the past when tipping points have passed and the Earth's climate has changed very rapidly, as Richard Tyndall has pointed out. It's very difficult to know what these points might be and when they will be passed, but the warming of the Earth is unlikely to remain a smooth process.
I agree about the sudden tipping points and of course that is possible. But your contention that the last time temperatures were this warm was in the last interglacial is simply wrong. In both historical and pre-historical times we have seen temperatures significantly warmer than now. This does not inform what might happen going forward as such but making such obviously refutable errors doesn't help the debate.
The last three Julys on Earth have been the three warmest ever recorded. But, they may also be the warmest months to occur on our planet in about 120,000 years.
Bit of nuance. Uncertainty is important. Reconstructing past temperatures is hard. Take the use of tree ring data and the 'divergence'. If tree rings are a good proxy for temperature, why are they not working now?
It's worth reading beyond the first line of the article.
Even if you've also read the strapline? "The past few summers have been the warmest on Earth in a long, long time."
Then the first sentence: "The last three Julys on Earth have been the three warmest ever recorded."
(BBM). Oopsadaisy! Surely some mistake? I was going to ask what kind of average they were using and whether in theory it treats all points on the Earth's surface equally, but really when faced with an article like that, who cares?
From the article:
"There's little doubt among scientists that we're now probably experiencing the warmest climate in some 120,000 years, even reaching above a particularly warm period around 7,000 years ago, during a post-ice age era called the Holocene.
"I agree entirely that it's very likely the last few summers have been the warmest in the last ~100,000-115,000 years," David Black, a paleoclimatologist at Stony Brook University, said over email. "It's very probable that we've begun to exceed the warmest part of the Holocene."
"It is safe to say that it's true," added Jennifer Marlon, a research scientist at Yale University's School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, in an interview. "You'll find a scientific consensus among experts even on that point now I'd bet, which says a lot."
Marlon noted that during that hotter time 7,000 years ago, only the northern hemisphere experienced some pretty warm summers, "but now we are warmer year round."
Back in 2013, Rahmstorf already argued that the current climate had already surpassed this warmest period of the Holocene. And in the last five years, the case has only grown stronger."
And their evidence? These are assertions. They may be right, but actually measuring this is not easy. Tree rings go back only so far, other methods further.
One of the climate feedback loops just went off the chart. Antarctic sea ice extent in southern hemisphere summers is highly variable, but it always recovers in the winter. Thus year it hasn't.
(*six sigma would be once in a billion years - actually five sigma.)
Its not so much the sea ice but the risk that the ice shelf on Antartica is now able to slide off on a massive scale. If that happens Canary Warf becomes Canary ponds.
The rise in sea level will probably become the UK's biggest headache in the future. There is evidence that the sea level during the last interglacial period - the last time temperatures were comparable to now - was around 6 to 9 metres higher than today. It takes a while* for all that water to warm and the ice to melt, so it won't be our problem. It'll be a nasty legacy for our children and grandchildren though.
* Having said that, there have been occasions in the past when tipping points have passed and the Earth's climate has changed very rapidly, as Richard Tyndall has pointed out. It's very difficult to know what these points might be and when they will be passed, but the warming of the Earth is unlikely to remain a smooth process.
I agree about the sudden tipping points and of course that is possible. But your contention that the last time temperatures were this warm was in the last interglacial is simply wrong. In both historical and pre-historical times we have seen temperatures significantly warmer than now. This does not inform what might happen going forward as such but making such obviously refutable errors doesn't help the debate.
The last three Julys on Earth have been the three warmest ever recorded. But, they may also be the warmest months to occur on our planet in about 120,000 years.
Bit of nuance. Uncertainty is important. Reconstructing past temperatures is hard. Take the use of tree ring data and the 'divergence'. If tree rings are a good proxy for temperature, why are they not working now?
Crazy talk - @FeersumEnjineeya has evidence of the temperature over the past 120,000 years. Evidence.
Actually, there is a great deal of hard evidence for temperature over that period. Just that interpreting it is subject to uncertainties.
We will see. From all the chat I'm expecting NOTHING that hasn't been alleged before, and ZERO actual evidence. Grusch himself has seen ZERO, he is relating takes told to him.
Keep believing folks, if it floats you boat, but don't expect an earth shattering revelation any time soon...
We will see. From all the chat I'm expecting NOTHING that hasn't been alleged before, and ZERO actual evidence. Grusch himself has seen ZERO, he is relating takes told to him.
Keep believing folks, if it floats you boat, but don't expect an earth shattering revelation any time soon...
Possibly.
And I’m not a confirmed believer in “ET” - as I’ve said a trillion times. My point is that something deeply weird is happening in Washington. And this latest chapter shows the weirdness intensifying
The number of esteemed DC people who are now openly speculating that we have probably encountered “non human intelligence” - or at least something totally inexplicable - is beyond counting
Why are they all doing it?
I think its easy to overdo the 'esteemed DC people' front. They are people just like our own politicos. We would see them for what they are if it was cranks from the House of Lords.
We will see. From all the chat I'm expecting NOTHING that hasn't been alleged before, and ZERO actual evidence. Grusch himself has seen ZERO, he is relating takes told to him.
Keep believing folks, if it floats you boat, but don't expect an earth shattering revelation any time soon...
A lot of it may depend on whether they can get names and information from the U.S. Inspector-General of Intelligence.
He seems to have collecting names and evidence for about three years now.
I just don't see anything beyond what we have seen many times before. Unless you subscribe to the X-files state within a state cover-up, its hard to see how this stuff hasn't come out, if there really are crashed UFO's with alien bodies.
Far more likely is the usual grift. There is money to be made writing books, and going on TV's shows talking shit.
I’m sorry, this explanation go longer even begins to explain the weirdness. Biden’s White House has been notably reserved on this issue to date, either playing dumb or laughing it off. Now suddenly they take it seriously too?
How does it benefit the White House Strategic Spokesman to say “there is stuff our pilots are encountering, we don’t know what it is, it affects their performance”
Why go beyond “no comment” or the laughing brush off this got before? He’s not gonna “write a book”
One of the climate feedback loops just went off the chart. Antarctic sea ice extent in southern hemisphere summers is highly variable, but it always recovers in the winter. Thus year it hasn't.
(*six sigma would be once in a billion years - actually five sigma.)
Its not so much the sea ice but the risk that the ice shelf on Antartica is now able to slide off on a massive scale. If that happens Canary Warf becomes Canary ponds.
The rise in sea level will probably become the UK's biggest headache in the future. There is evidence that the sea level during the last interglacial period - the last time temperatures were comparable to now - was around 6 to 9 metres higher than today. It takes a while* for all that water to warm and the ice to melt, so it won't be our problem. It'll be a nasty legacy for our children and grandchildren though.
* Having said that, there have been occasions in the past when tipping points have passed and the Earth's climate has changed very rapidly, as Richard Tyndall has pointed out. It's very difficult to know what these points might be and when they will be passed, but the warming of the Earth is unlikely to remain a smooth process.
I agree about the sudden tipping points and of course that is possible. But your contention that the last time temperatures were this warm was in the last interglacial is simply wrong. In both historical and pre-historical times we have seen temperatures significantly warmer than now. This does not inform what might happen going forward as such but making such obviously refutable errors doesn't help the debate.
The last three Julys on Earth have been the three warmest ever recorded. But, they may also be the warmest months to occur on our planet in about 120,000 years.
Bit of nuance. Uncertainty is important. Reconstructing past temperatures is hard. Take the use of tree ring data and the 'divergence'. If tree rings are a good proxy for temperature, why are they not working now?
It's worth reading beyond the first line of the article.
Even if you've also read the strapline? "The past few summers have been the warmest on Earth in a long, long time."
Then the first sentence: "The last three Julys on Earth have been the three warmest ever recorded."
(BBM). Oopsadaisy! Surely some mistake? I was going to ask what kind of average they were using and whether in theory it treats all points on the Earth's surface equally, but really when faced with an article like that, who cares?
From the article:
"There's little doubt among scientists that we're now probably experiencing the warmest climate in some 120,000 years, even reaching above a particularly warm period around 7,000 years ago, during a post-ice age era called the Holocene.
"I agree entirely that it's very likely the last few summers have been the warmest in the last ~100,000-115,000 years," David Black, a paleoclimatologist at Stony Brook University, said over email. "It's very probable that we've begun to exceed the warmest part of the Holocene."
"It is safe to say that it's true," added Jennifer Marlon, a research scientist at Yale University's School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, in an interview. "You'll find a scientific consensus among experts even on that point now I'd bet, which says a lot."
Marlon noted that during that hotter time 7,000 years ago, only the northern hemisphere experienced some pretty warm summers, "but now we are warmer year round."
Back in 2013, Rahmstorf already argued that the current climate had already surpassed this warmest period of the Holocene. And in the last five years, the case has only grown stronger."
And their evidence? These are assertions. They may be right, but actually measuring this is not easy. Tree rings go back only so far, other methods further.
The tree-ring record is fairly comprehensive to about 11,000 years ago.
Ultimately, it doesn't really matter if 5 July 7614 BC was a couple of hundredths of a degree warmer. What matters is the effect of climate change now on us here and into the future.
One of the climate feedback loops just went off the chart. Antarctic sea ice extent in southern hemisphere summers is highly variable, but it always recovers in the winter. Thus year it hasn't.
(*six sigma would be once in a billion years - actually five sigma.)
Its not so much the sea ice but the risk that the ice shelf on Antartica is now able to slide off on a massive scale. If that happens Canary Warf becomes Canary ponds.
The rise in sea level will probably become the UK's biggest headache in the future. There is evidence that the sea level during the last interglacial period - the last time temperatures were comparable to now - was around 6 to 9 metres higher than today. It takes a while* for all that water to warm and the ice to melt, so it won't be our problem. It'll be a nasty legacy for our children and grandchildren though.
* Having said that, there have been occasions in the past when tipping points have passed and the Earth's climate has changed very rapidly, as Richard Tyndall has pointed out. It's very difficult to know what these points might be and when they will be passed, but the warming of the Earth is unlikely to remain a smooth process.
I agree about the sudden tipping points and of course that is possible. But your contention that the last time temperatures were this warm was in the last interglacial is simply wrong. In both historical and pre-historical times we have seen temperatures significantly warmer than now. This does not inform what might happen going forward as such but making such obviously refutable errors doesn't help the debate.
The last three Julys on Earth have been the three warmest ever recorded. But, they may also be the warmest months to occur on our planet in about 120,000 years.
Bit of nuance. Uncertainty is important. Reconstructing past temperatures is hard. Take the use of tree ring data and the 'divergence'. If tree rings are a good proxy for temperature, why are they not working now?
Crazy talk - @FeersumEnjineeya has evidence of the temperature over the past 120,000 years. Evidence.
Now you just sound demented.
Presenting a Mashable article quoting scientists who themselves are (understandably) extremely mealy mouthed about global temperatures during prehistory, doesn't constitute evidence of anything except the ability to use Google search.
We will see. From all the chat I'm expecting NOTHING that hasn't been alleged before, and ZERO actual evidence. Grusch himself has seen ZERO, he is relating takes told to him.
Keep believing folks, if it floats you boat, but don't expect an earth shattering revelation any time soon...
A lot of it may depend on whether they can get names and information from the U.S. Inspector-General of Intelligence.
He seems to have collecting names and evidence for about three years now.
I just don't see anything beyond what we have seen many times before. Unless you subscribe to the X-files state within a state cover-up, its hard to see how this stuff hasn't come out, if there really are crashed UFO's with alien bodies.
Far more likely is the usual grift. There is money to be made writing books, and going on TV's shows talking shit.
I personally would say it's quite easy to see how information could have not come out. An ossified, compartmentalised bureaucracy, then protected by layers of fearsome secrecy legislation.
A large conspiracy, state-within-a-state, or anything like that, is not necessarily part of this sort of compartmentalisation. Something shut away and forgotten about by most, and then with very limited access, to only people who have specific cause to, by their job description, such, perhaps, as Grusch.
One of the climate feedback loops just went off the chart. Antarctic sea ice extent in southern hemisphere summers is highly variable, but it always recovers in the winter. Thus year it hasn't.
(*six sigma would be once in a billion years - actually five sigma.)
Its not so much the sea ice but the risk that the ice shelf on Antartica is now able to slide off on a massive scale. If that happens Canary Warf becomes Canary ponds.
The rise in sea level will probably become the UK's biggest headache in the future. There is evidence that the sea level during the last interglacial period - the last time temperatures were comparable to now - was around 6 to 9 metres higher than today. It takes a while* for all that water to warm and the ice to melt, so it won't be our problem. It'll be a nasty legacy for our children and grandchildren though.
* Having said that, there have been occasions in the past when tipping points have passed and the Earth's climate has changed very rapidly, as Richard Tyndall has pointed out. It's very difficult to know what these points might be and when they will be passed, but the warming of the Earth is unlikely to remain a smooth process.
I agree about the sudden tipping points and of course that is possible. But your contention that the last time temperatures were this warm was in the last interglacial is simply wrong. In both historical and pre-historical times we have seen temperatures significantly warmer than now. This does not inform what might happen going forward as such but making such obviously refutable errors doesn't help the debate.
The last three Julys on Earth have been the three warmest ever recorded. But, they may also be the warmest months to occur on our planet in about 120,000 years.
Bit of nuance. Uncertainty is important. Reconstructing past temperatures is hard. Take the use of tree ring data and the 'divergence'. If tree rings are a good proxy for temperature, why are they not working now?
It's worth reading beyond the first line of the article.
Even if you've also read the strapline? "The past few summers have been the warmest on Earth in a long, long time."
Then the first sentence: "The last three Julys on Earth have been the three warmest ever recorded."
(BBM). Oopsadaisy! Surely some mistake? I was going to ask what kind of average they were using and whether in theory it treats all points on the Earth's surface equally, but really when faced with an article like that, who cares?
From the article:
"There's little doubt among scientists that we're now probably experiencing the warmest climate in some 120,000 years, even reaching above a particularly warm period around 7,000 years ago, during a post-ice age era called the Holocene.
"I agree entirely that it's very likely the last few summers have been the warmest in the last ~100,000-115,000 years," David Black, a paleoclimatologist at Stony Brook University, said over email. "It's very probable that we've begun to exceed the warmest part of the Holocene."
"It is safe to say that it's true," added Jennifer Marlon, a research scientist at Yale University's School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, in an interview. "You'll find a scientific consensus among experts even on that point now I'd bet, which says a lot."
Marlon noted that during that hotter time 7,000 years ago, only the northern hemisphere experienced some pretty warm summers, "but now we are warmer year round."
Back in 2013, Rahmstorf already argued that the current climate had already surpassed this warmest period of the Holocene. And in the last five years, the case has only grown stronger."
And their evidence? These are assertions. They may be right, but actually measuring this is not easy. Tree rings go back only so far, other methods further.
The evidence would be the large number of research papers on the topic that each of the quoted scientists has published in scientific journals. Of course we can't be certain what the climate was like in the past, just as we cannot be certain about anything in science. But the evidence that we do have points towards the current global temperature now being higher than at any time since the Eemian interglacial.
One of the climate feedback loops just went off the chart. Antarctic sea ice extent in southern hemisphere summers is highly variable, but it always recovers in the winter. Thus year it hasn't.
(*six sigma would be once in a billion years - actually five sigma.)
Its not so much the sea ice but the risk that the ice shelf on Antartica is now able to slide off on a massive scale. If that happens Canary Warf becomes Canary ponds.
The rise in sea level will probably become the UK's biggest headache in the future. There is evidence that the sea level during the last interglacial period - the last time temperatures were comparable to now - was around 6 to 9 metres higher than today. It takes a while* for all that water to warm and the ice to melt, so it won't be our problem. It'll be a nasty legacy for our children and grandchildren though.
* Having said that, there have been occasions in the past when tipping points have passed and the Earth's climate has changed very rapidly, as Richard Tyndall has pointed out. It's very difficult to know what these points might be and when they will be passed, but the warming of the Earth is unlikely to remain a smooth process.
I agree about the sudden tipping points and of course that is possible. But your contention that the last time temperatures were this warm was in the last interglacial is simply wrong. In both historical and pre-historical times we have seen temperatures significantly warmer than now. This does not inform what might happen going forward as such but making such obviously refutable errors doesn't help the debate.
The last three Julys on Earth have been the three warmest ever recorded. But, they may also be the warmest months to occur on our planet in about 120,000 years.
Bit of nuance. Uncertainty is important. Reconstructing past temperatures is hard. Take the use of tree ring data and the 'divergence'. If tree rings are a good proxy for temperature, why are they not working now?
It's worth reading beyond the first line of the article.
Even if you've also read the strapline? "The past few summers have been the warmest on Earth in a long, long time."
Then the first sentence: "The last three Julys on Earth have been the three warmest ever recorded."
(BBM). Oopsadaisy! Surely some mistake? I was going to ask what kind of average they were using and whether in theory it treats all points on the Earth's surface equally, but really when faced with an article like that, who cares?
yes. I think this is the point you are making, but: earth as a whole does not have summers. This is like thinking if you are sending an unmanned probe to check out the sun it would be best to go at night.
That's not entirely true. Because of land being disproportionately concentrated in the northern hemisphere (by quite a long way), global temperatures peak in the northern summer and bottom out in its winter.
As I am often called a pessimist, though I think there are good reasons for pessimism on the subject of climate change and whether mankind will actually do anything to stop it. There is a bright note in that a sea level rise of several metres means I will be living in a beach front property.
One of the climate feedback loops just went off the chart. Antarctic sea ice extent in southern hemisphere summers is highly variable, but it always recovers in the winter. Thus year it hasn't.
(*six sigma would be once in a billion years - actually five sigma.)
Its not so much the sea ice but the risk that the ice shelf on Antartica is now able to slide off on a massive scale. If that happens Canary Warf becomes Canary ponds.
The rise in sea level will probably become the UK's biggest headache in the future. There is evidence that the sea level during the last interglacial period - the last time temperatures were comparable to now - was around 6 to 9 metres higher than today. It takes a while* for all that water to warm and the ice to melt, so it won't be our problem. It'll be a nasty legacy for our children and grandchildren though.
* Having said that, there have been occasions in the past when tipping points have passed and the Earth's climate has changed very rapidly, as Richard Tyndall has pointed out. It's very difficult to know what these points might be and when they will be passed, but the warming of the Earth is unlikely to remain a smooth process.
I agree about the sudden tipping points and of course that is possible. But your contention that the last time temperatures were this warm was in the last interglacial is simply wrong. In both historical and pre-historical times we have seen temperatures significantly warmer than now. This does not inform what might happen going forward as such but making such obviously refutable errors doesn't help the debate.
The last three Julys on Earth have been the three warmest ever recorded. But, they may also be the warmest months to occur on our planet in about 120,000 years.
Bit of nuance. Uncertainty is important. Reconstructing past temperatures is hard. Take the use of tree ring data and the 'divergence'. If tree rings are a good proxy for temperature, why are they not working now?
It's worth reading beyond the first line of the article.
Even if you've also read the strapline? "The past few summers have been the warmest on Earth in a long, long time."
Then the first sentence: "The last three Julys on Earth have been the three warmest ever recorded."
(BBM). Oopsadaisy! Surely some mistake? I was going to ask what kind of average they were using and whether in theory it treats all points on the Earth's surface equally, but really when faced with an article like that, who cares?
From the article:
"There's little doubt among scientists that we're now probably experiencing the warmest climate in some 120,000 years, even reaching above a particularly warm period around 7,000 years ago, during a post-ice age era called the Holocene.
"I agree entirely that it's very likely the last few summers have been the warmest in the last ~100,000-115,000 years," David Black, a paleoclimatologist at Stony Brook University, said over email. "It's very probable that we've begun to exceed the warmest part of the Holocene."
"It is safe to say that it's true," added Jennifer Marlon, a research scientist at Yale University's School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, in an interview. "You'll find a scientific consensus among experts even on that point now I'd bet, which says a lot."
Marlon noted that during that hotter time 7,000 years ago, only the northern hemisphere experienced some pretty warm summers, "but now we are warmer year round."
Back in 2013, Rahmstorf already argued that the current climate had already surpassed this warmest period of the Holocene. And in the last five years, the case has only grown stronger."
And their evidence? These are assertions. They may be right, but actually measuring this is not easy. Tree rings go back only so far, other methods further.
The tree-ring record is fairly comprehensive to about 11,000 years ago.
Ultimately, it doesn't really matter if 5 July 7614 BC was a couple of hundredths of a degree warmer. What matters is the effect of climate change now on us here and into the future.
Tree rings have issues though. The divergence in recent decades ought to trouble anyone who is using them to look at past temperatures. And how comprehensive is the cover of tree ring samples going back 11,000 years?
I totally agree that its irrelevant - we have really good measured evidence of temperature and CO2 concentrations, and can see the impacts around the world. Making claims like the hottest in 120,000 is a pointless distraction.
One of the climate feedback loops just went off the chart. Antarctic sea ice extent in southern hemisphere summers is highly variable, but it always recovers in the winter. Thus year it hasn't.
(*six sigma would be once in a billion years - actually five sigma.)
Its not so much the sea ice but the risk that the ice shelf on Antartica is now able to slide off on a massive scale. If that happens Canary Warf becomes Canary ponds.
The rise in sea level will probably become the UK's biggest headache in the future. There is evidence that the sea level during the last interglacial period - the last time temperatures were comparable to now - was around 6 to 9 metres higher than today. It takes a while* for all that water to warm and the ice to melt, so it won't be our problem. It'll be a nasty legacy for our children and grandchildren though.
* Having said that, there have been occasions in the past when tipping points have passed and the Earth's climate has changed very rapidly, as Richard Tyndall has pointed out. It's very difficult to know what these points might be and when they will be passed, but the warming of the Earth is unlikely to remain a smooth process.
I agree about the sudden tipping points and of course that is possible. But your contention that the last time temperatures were this warm was in the last interglacial is simply wrong. In both historical and pre-historical times we have seen temperatures significantly warmer than now. This does not inform what might happen going forward as such but making such obviously refutable errors doesn't help the debate.
The last three Julys on Earth have been the three warmest ever recorded. But, they may also be the warmest months to occur on our planet in about 120,000 years.
Bit of nuance. Uncertainty is important. Reconstructing past temperatures is hard. Take the use of tree ring data and the 'divergence'. If tree rings are a good proxy for temperature, why are they not working now?
It's worth reading beyond the first line of the article.
Even if you've also read the strapline? "The past few summers have been the warmest on Earth in a long, long time."
Then the first sentence: "The last three Julys on Earth have been the three warmest ever recorded."
(BBM). Oopsadaisy! Surely some mistake? I was going to ask what kind of average they were using and whether in theory it treats all points on the Earth's surface equally, but really when faced with an article like that, who cares?
yes. I think this is the point you are making, but: earth as a whole does not have summers. This is like thinking if you are sending an unmanned probe to check out the sun it would be best to go at night.
That's not entirely true. Because of land being disproportionately concentrated in the northern hemisphere (by quite a long way), global temperatures peak in the northern summer and bottom out in its winter.
Fair enough (and true despite earth being at aphelion in July), but I'd have put the qualification in the article.
We will see. From all the chat I'm expecting NOTHING that hasn't been alleged before, and ZERO actual evidence. Grusch himself has seen ZERO, he is relating takes told to him.
Keep believing folks, if it floats you boat, but don't expect an earth shattering revelation any time soon...
A lot of it may depend on whether they can get names and information from the U.S. Inspector-General of Intelligence.
He seems to have collecting names and evidence for about three years now.
I just don't see anything beyond what we have seen many times before. Unless you subscribe to the X-files state within a state cover-up, its hard to see how this stuff hasn't come out, if there really are crashed UFO's with alien bodies.
Far more likely is the usual grift. There is money to be made writing books, and going on TV's shows talking shit.
I personally would say it's quite easy to see how information could have not come out. An ossified, compartmentalised bureaucracy, then protected by layers of fearsome secrecy legislation.
A large conspiracy, state-within-a-state, or anything like that, is not necessarily part of this sort of compartmentalisation. Something shut away and forgotten about by most, and then with very limited access, to only people who have specific cause to, by their job description, such, perhaps, as Grusch.
I think that's just too Hollywood. Stuff leaks - proper stuff, not drunken bar tales.
We will see. From all the chat I'm expecting NOTHING that hasn't been alleged before, and ZERO actual evidence. Grusch himself has seen ZERO, he is relating takes told to him.
Keep believing folks, if it floats you boat, but don't expect an earth shattering revelation any time soon...
We will see. From all the chat I'm expecting NOTHING that hasn't been alleged before, and ZERO actual evidence. Grusch himself has seen ZERO, he is relating takes told to him.
Keep believing folks, if it floats you boat, but don't expect an earth shattering revelation any time soon...
Possibly.
And I’m not a confirmed believer in “ET” - as I’ve said a trillion times. My point is that something deeply weird is happening in Washington. And this latest chapter shows the weirdness intensifying
The number of esteemed DC people who are now openly speculating that we have probably encountered “non human intelligence” - or at least something totally inexplicable - is beyond counting
Why are they all doing it?
I think its easy to overdo the 'esteemed DC people' front. They are people just like our own politicos. We would see them for what they are if it was cranks from the House of Lords.
As I am often called a pessimist, though I think there are good reasons for pessimism on the subject of climate change and whether mankind will actually do anything to stop it. There is a bright note in that a sea level rise of several metres means I will be living in a beach front property.
Rather depends exactly how much it rises, and won't you be having rather a lot of people living in your garden shed?
One of the climate feedback loops just went off the chart. Antarctic sea ice extent in southern hemisphere summers is highly variable, but it always recovers in the winter. Thus year it hasn't.
(*six sigma would be once in a billion years - actually five sigma.)
Its not so much the sea ice but the risk that the ice shelf on Antartica is now able to slide off on a massive scale. If that happens Canary Warf becomes Canary ponds.
The rise in sea level will probably become the UK's biggest headache in the future. There is evidence that the sea level during the last interglacial period - the last time temperatures were comparable to now - was around 6 to 9 metres higher than today. It takes a while* for all that water to warm and the ice to melt, so it won't be our problem. It'll be a nasty legacy for our children and grandchildren though.
* Having said that, there have been occasions in the past when tipping points have passed and the Earth's climate has changed very rapidly, as Richard Tyndall has pointed out. It's very difficult to know what these points might be and when they will be passed, but the warming of the Earth is unlikely to remain a smooth process.
I agree about the sudden tipping points and of course that is possible. But your contention that the last time temperatures were this warm was in the last interglacial is simply wrong. In both historical and pre-historical times we have seen temperatures significantly warmer than now. This does not inform what might happen going forward as such but making such obviously refutable errors doesn't help the debate.
The last three Julys on Earth have been the three warmest ever recorded. But, they may also be the warmest months to occur on our planet in about 120,000 years.
Bit of nuance. Uncertainty is important. Reconstructing past temperatures is hard. Take the use of tree ring data and the 'divergence'. If tree rings are a good proxy for temperature, why are they not working now?
It's worth reading beyond the first line of the article.
Even if you've also read the strapline? "The past few summers have been the warmest on Earth in a long, long time."
Then the first sentence: "The last three Julys on Earth have been the three warmest ever recorded."
(BBM). Oopsadaisy! Surely some mistake? I was going to ask what kind of average they were using and whether in theory it treats all points on the Earth's surface equally, but really when faced with an article like that, who cares?
From the article:
"There's little doubt among scientists that we're now probably experiencing the warmest climate in some 120,000 years, even reaching above a particularly warm period around 7,000 years ago, during a post-ice age era called the Holocene.
"I agree entirely that it's very likely the last few summers have been the warmest in the last ~100,000-115,000 years," David Black, a paleoclimatologist at Stony Brook University, said over email. "It's very probable that we've begun to exceed the warmest part of the Holocene."
"It is safe to say that it's true," added Jennifer Marlon, a research scientist at Yale University's School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, in an interview. "You'll find a scientific consensus among experts even on that point now I'd bet, which says a lot."
Marlon noted that during that hotter time 7,000 years ago, only the northern hemisphere experienced some pretty warm summers, "but now we are warmer year round."
Back in 2013, Rahmstorf already argued that the current climate had already surpassed this warmest period of the Holocene. And in the last five years, the case has only grown stronger."
And their evidence? These are assertions. They may be right, but actually measuring this is not easy. Tree rings go back only so far, other methods further.
The evidence would be the large number of research papers on the topic that each of the quoted scientists has published in scientific journals. Of course we can't be certain what the climate was like in the past, just as we cannot be certain about anything in science. But the evidence that we do have points towards the current global temperature now being higher than at any time since the Eemian interglacial.
I think that the estimates of past temperatures have been a noble effort, but are not beyond criticism. Tree rings, and the divergence problem raises huge issues. If a tree ring from 1900 can infer temperature, why doesn't it work in 2015?
We will see. From all the chat I'm expecting NOTHING that hasn't been alleged before, and ZERO actual evidence. Grusch himself has seen ZERO, he is relating takes told to him.
Keep believing folks, if it floats you boat, but don't expect an earth shattering revelation any time soon...
A lot of it may depend on whether they can get names and information from the U.S. Inspector-General of Intelligence.
He seems to have collecting names and evidence for about three years now.
I just don't see anything beyond what we have seen many times before. Unless you subscribe to the X-files state within a state cover-up, its hard to see how this stuff hasn't come out, if there really are crashed UFO's with alien bodies.
Far more likely is the usual grift. There is money to be made writing books, and going on TV's shows talking shit.
I personally would say it's quite easy to see how information could have not come out. An ossified, compartmentalised bureaucracy, then protected by layers of fearsome secrecy legislation.
A large conspiracy, state-within-a-state, or anything like that, is not necessarily part of this sort of compartmentalisation. Something shut away and forgotten about by most, and then with very limited access, to only people who have specific cause to, by their job description, such, perhaps, as Grusch.
I think that's just too Hollywood. Stuff leaks - proper stuff, not drunken bar tales.
There have been a certain number of insider reports for years, but most of the people have been considered axiomatically and culturally crazy.
As the Slate article mentions, if any of this is true, it would be more than a paradigm shift, and more like a complete reordering of reality, for many people.
One of the climate feedback loops just went off the chart. Antarctic sea ice extent in southern hemisphere summers is highly variable, but it always recovers in the winter. Thus year it hasn't.
(*six sigma would be once in a billion years - actually five sigma.)
Its not so much the sea ice but the risk that the ice shelf on Antartica is now able to slide off on a massive scale. If that happens Canary Warf becomes Canary ponds.
The rise in sea level will probably become the UK's biggest headache in the future. There is evidence that the sea level during the last interglacial period - the last time temperatures were comparable to now - was around 6 to 9 metres higher than today. It takes a while* for all that water to warm and the ice to melt, so it won't be our problem. It'll be a nasty legacy for our children and grandchildren though.
* Having said that, there have been occasions in the past when tipping points have passed and the Earth's climate has changed very rapidly, as Richard Tyndall has pointed out. It's very difficult to know what these points might be and when they will be passed, but the warming of the Earth is unlikely to remain a smooth process.
I agree about the sudden tipping points and of course that is possible. But your contention that the last time temperatures were this warm was in the last interglacial is simply wrong. In both historical and pre-historical times we have seen temperatures significantly warmer than now. This does not inform what might happen going forward as such but making such obviously refutable errors doesn't help the debate.
The last three Julys on Earth have been the three warmest ever recorded. But, they may also be the warmest months to occur on our planet in about 120,000 years.
Bit of nuance. Uncertainty is important. Reconstructing past temperatures is hard. Take the use of tree ring data and the 'divergence'. If tree rings are a good proxy for temperature, why are they not working now?
It's worth reading beyond the first line of the article.
Even if you've also read the strapline? "The past few summers have been the warmest on Earth in a long, long time."
Then the first sentence: "The last three Julys on Earth have been the three warmest ever recorded."
(BBM). Oopsadaisy! Surely some mistake? I was going to ask what kind of average they were using and whether in theory it treats all points on the Earth's surface equally, but really when faced with an article like that, who cares?
From the article:
"There's little doubt among scientists that we're now probably experiencing the warmest climate in some 120,000 years, even reaching above a particularly warm period around 7,000 years ago, during a post-ice age era called the Holocene.
"I agree entirely that it's very likely the last few summers have been the warmest in the last ~100,000-115,000 years," David Black, a paleoclimatologist at Stony Brook University, said over email. "It's very probable that we've begun to exceed the warmest part of the Holocene."
"It is safe to say that it's true," added Jennifer Marlon, a research scientist at Yale University's School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, in an interview. "You'll find a scientific consensus among experts even on that point now I'd bet, which says a lot."
Marlon noted that during that hotter time 7,000 years ago, only the northern hemisphere experienced some pretty warm summers, "but now we are warmer year round."
Back in 2013, Rahmstorf already argued that the current climate had already surpassed this warmest period of the Holocene. And in the last five years, the case has only grown stronger."
And their evidence? These are assertions. They may be right, but actually measuring this is not easy. Tree rings go back only so far, other methods further.
The tree-ring record is fairly comprehensive to about 11,000 years ago.
Ultimately, it doesn't really matter if 5 July 7614 BC was a couple of hundredths of a degree warmer. What matters is the effect of climate change now on us here and into the future.
Tree rings have issues though. The divergence in recent decades ought to trouble anyone who is using them to look at past temperatures. And how comprehensive is the cover of tree ring samples going back 11,000 years?
I totally agree that its irrelevant - we have really good measured evidence of temperature and CO2 concentrations, and can see the impacts around the world. Making claims like the hottest in 120,000 is a pointless distraction.
It is important to understand the mechanisms behind past climate fluctuations if we are to accurately estimate the effects of mankind's activities on future climate.
As I am often called a pessimist, though I think there are good reasons for pessimism on the subject of climate change and whether mankind will actually do anything to stop it. There is a bright note in that a sea level rise of several metres means I will be living in a beach front property.
Rather depends exactly how much it rises, and won't you be having rather a lot of people living in your garden shed?
It wont rise past my house I doubt and nope don't have a garden shed so they can go live in london
One of the climate feedback loops just went off the chart. Antarctic sea ice extent in southern hemisphere summers is highly variable, but it always recovers in the winter. Thus year it hasn't.
(*six sigma would be once in a billion years - actually five sigma.)
Its not so much the sea ice but the risk that the ice shelf on Antartica is now able to slide off on a massive scale. If that happens Canary Warf becomes Canary ponds.
The rise in sea level will probably become the UK's biggest headache in the future. There is evidence that the sea level during the last interglacial period - the last time temperatures were comparable to now - was around 6 to 9 metres higher than today. It takes a while* for all that water to warm and the ice to melt, so it won't be our problem. It'll be a nasty legacy for our children and grandchildren though.
* Having said that, there have been occasions in the past when tipping points have passed and the Earth's climate has changed very rapidly, as Richard Tyndall has pointed out. It's very difficult to know what these points might be and when they will be passed, but the warming of the Earth is unlikely to remain a smooth process.
I agree about the sudden tipping points and of course that is possible. But your contention that the last time temperatures were this warm was in the last interglacial is simply wrong. In both historical and pre-historical times we have seen temperatures significantly warmer than now. This does not inform what might happen going forward as such but making such obviously refutable errors doesn't help the debate.
The last three Julys on Earth have been the three warmest ever recorded. But, they may also be the warmest months to occur on our planet in about 120,000 years.
Bit of nuance. Uncertainty is important. Reconstructing past temperatures is hard. Take the use of tree ring data and the 'divergence'. If tree rings are a good proxy for temperature, why are they not working now?
It's worth reading beyond the first line of the article.
Even if you've also read the strapline? "The past few summers have been the warmest on Earth in a long, long time."
Then the first sentence: "The last three Julys on Earth have been the three warmest ever recorded."
(BBM). Oopsadaisy! Surely some mistake? I was going to ask what kind of average they were using and whether in theory it treats all points on the Earth's surface equally, but really when faced with an article like that, who cares?
From the article:
"There's little doubt among scientists that we're now probably experiencing the warmest climate in some 120,000 years, even reaching above a particularly warm period around 7,000 years ago, during a post-ice age era called the Holocene.
"I agree entirely that it's very likely the last few summers have been the warmest in the last ~100,000-115,000 years," David Black, a paleoclimatologist at Stony Brook University, said over email. "It's very probable that we've begun to exceed the warmest part of the Holocene."
"It is safe to say that it's true," added Jennifer Marlon, a research scientist at Yale University's School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, in an interview. "You'll find a scientific consensus among experts even on that point now I'd bet, which says a lot."
Marlon noted that during that hotter time 7,000 years ago, only the northern hemisphere experienced some pretty warm summers, "but now we are warmer year round."
Back in 2013, Rahmstorf already argued that the current climate had already surpassed this warmest period of the Holocene. And in the last five years, the case has only grown stronger."
And their evidence? These are assertions. They may be right, but actually measuring this is not easy. Tree rings go back only so far, other methods further.
The tree-ring record is fairly comprehensive to about 11,000 years ago.
Ultimately, it doesn't really matter if 5 July 7614 BC was a couple of hundredths of a degree warmer. What matters is the effect of climate change now on us here and into the future.
Tree rings have issues though. The divergence in recent decades ought to trouble anyone who is using them to look at past temperatures. And how comprehensive is the cover of tree ring samples going back 11,000 years?
I totally agree that its irrelevant - we have really good measured evidence of temperature and CO2 concentrations, and can see the impacts around the world. Making claims like the hottest in 120,000 is a pointless distraction.
Tree rings are great if you can moderate for all the factors that affect growth, and have a wide geographical spread (for example - a 2023 UK tree ring will look very different to a 2023 Greek one). As you say, that's often not possible, and especially so for pre-history where the rings can't be cross-referenced against written records. I'm no expert but AIUI, the early samples invariably come from places where wood can survive for long periods underground (or underwater) without rotting or being eaten ie where there's very little oxygen, and while these are spread around the world, they're also clustered in climate zones. That said, all anyone can do is work with what they have.
I read the book below on the subject last year, which was interesting if a bit evangelistic on the subject (the author is a dendrochronologist so it's perhaps to be expected).
One of the climate feedback loops just went off the chart. Antarctic sea ice extent in southern hemisphere summers is highly variable, but it always recovers in the winter. Thus year it hasn't.
(*six sigma would be once in a billion years - actually five sigma.)
Its not so much the sea ice but the risk that the ice shelf on Antartica is now able to slide off on a massive scale. If that happens Canary Warf becomes Canary ponds.
The rise in sea level will probably become the UK's biggest headache in the future. There is evidence that the sea level during the last interglacial period - the last time temperatures were comparable to now - was around 6 to 9 metres higher than today. It takes a while* for all that water to warm and the ice to melt, so it won't be our problem. It'll be a nasty legacy for our children and grandchildren though.
* Having said that, there have been occasions in the past when tipping points have passed and the Earth's climate has changed very rapidly, as Richard Tyndall has pointed out. It's very difficult to know what these points might be and when they will be passed, but the warming of the Earth is unlikely to remain a smooth process.
I agree about the sudden tipping points and of course that is possible. But your contention that the last time temperatures were this warm was in the last interglacial is simply wrong. In both historical and pre-historical times we have seen temperatures significantly warmer than now. This does not inform what might happen going forward as such but making such obviously refutable errors doesn't help the debate.
The last three Julys on Earth have been the three warmest ever recorded. But, they may also be the warmest months to occur on our planet in about 120,000 years.
Bit of nuance. Uncertainty is important. Reconstructing past temperatures is hard. Take the use of tree ring data and the 'divergence'. If tree rings are a good proxy for temperature, why are they not working now?
It's worth reading beyond the first line of the article.
Even if you've also read the strapline? "The past few summers have been the warmest on Earth in a long, long time."
Then the first sentence: "The last three Julys on Earth have been the three warmest ever recorded."
(BBM). Oopsadaisy! Surely some mistake? I was going to ask what kind of average they were using and whether in theory it treats all points on the Earth's surface equally, but really when faced with an article like that, who cares?
From the article:
"There's little doubt among scientists that we're now probably experiencing the warmest climate in some 120,000 years, even reaching above a particularly warm period around 7,000 years ago, during a post-ice age era called the Holocene.
"I agree entirely that it's very likely the last few summers have been the warmest in the last ~100,000-115,000 years," David Black, a paleoclimatologist at Stony Brook University, said over email. "It's very probable that we've begun to exceed the warmest part of the Holocene."
"It is safe to say that it's true," added Jennifer Marlon, a research scientist at Yale University's School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, in an interview. "You'll find a scientific consensus among experts even on that point now I'd bet, which says a lot."
Marlon noted that during that hotter time 7,000 years ago, only the northern hemisphere experienced some pretty warm summers, "but now we are warmer year round."
Back in 2013, Rahmstorf already argued that the current climate had already surpassed this warmest period of the Holocene. And in the last five years, the case has only grown stronger."
And their evidence? These are assertions. They may be right, but actually measuring this is not easy. Tree rings go back only so far, other methods further.
The evidence would be the large number of research papers on the topic that each of the quoted scientists has published in scientific journals. Of course we can't be certain what the climate was like in the past, just as we cannot be certain about anything in science. But the evidence that we do have points towards the current global temperature now being higher than at any time since the Eemian interglacial.
I think that the estimates of past temperatures have been a noble effort, but are not beyond criticism. Tree rings, and the divergence problem raises huge issues. If a tree ring from 1900 can infer temperature, why doesn't it work in 2015?
The issue is, you and @FeersumEnjineeya are discussing a view on the climate. You believe one thing, he another; you are close or not close to agreeing a position.
Everyone else has exactly the same access to google the information that @FeersumEnjineeya has. But, as we are seeing with the reaction to the Just Stop Oilers, and a quick look at the M25 at any time of day, the broad mass of British people don't think it's a credible threat.
And when old Feersum starts saying: "you'll stop laughing when you have to swim to Tescos before long" then you can see why.
He (he?) is being terribly sincere and really cares about the planet warming. But by his very actions is turning people off the issue.
Will he have the last laugh, paddling aboard his rigid raider as we are all in water wings flailing around? Who can say. My money is on no.
We will see. From all the chat I'm expecting NOTHING that hasn't been alleged before, and ZERO actual evidence. Grusch himself has seen ZERO, he is relating takes told to him.
Keep believing folks, if it floats you boat, but don't expect an earth shattering revelation any time soon...
A lot of it may depend on whether they can get names and information from the U.S. Inspector-General of Intelligence.
He seems to have collecting names and evidence for about three years now.
I just don't see anything beyond what we have seen many times before. Unless you subscribe to the X-files state within a state cover-up, its hard to see how this stuff hasn't come out, if there really are crashed UFO's with alien bodies.
Far more likely is the usual grift. There is money to be made writing books, and going on TV's shows talking shit.
I personally would say it's quite easy to see how information could have not come out. An ossified, compartmentalised bureaucracy, then protected by layers of fearsome secrecy legislation.
A large conspiracy, state-within-a-state, or anything like that, is not necessarily part of this sort of compartmentalisation. Something shut away and forgotten about by most, and then with very limited access, to only people who have specific cause to, by their job description, such, perhaps, as Grusch.
I think that's just too Hollywood. Stuff leaks - proper stuff, not drunken bar tales.
Every month or so, @Leon and @WhisperingOracle whip themselves up in an orgy of excitement over the *next* news they're sure will come out. And each time, there's much heat but little light.
Little green men having the tech to travel vast distances to our planet, then being seen - or even crashing many times in just one or two countries - is truly extraordinary, and requires truly extraordinary evidence.
One of the climate feedback loops just went off the chart. Antarctic sea ice extent in southern hemisphere summers is highly variable, but it always recovers in the winter. Thus year it hasn't.
(*six sigma would be once in a billion years - actually five sigma.)
Its not so much the sea ice but the risk that the ice shelf on Antartica is now able to slide off on a massive scale. If that happens Canary Warf becomes Canary ponds.
The rise in sea level will probably become the UK's biggest headache in the future. There is evidence that the sea level during the last interglacial period - the last time temperatures were comparable to now - was around 6 to 9 metres higher than today. It takes a while* for all that water to warm and the ice to melt, so it won't be our problem. It'll be a nasty legacy for our children and grandchildren though.
* Having said that, there have been occasions in the past when tipping points have passed and the Earth's climate has changed very rapidly, as Richard Tyndall has pointed out. It's very difficult to know what these points might be and when they will be passed, but the warming of the Earth is unlikely to remain a smooth process.
I agree about the sudden tipping points and of course that is possible. But your contention that the last time temperatures were this warm was in the last interglacial is simply wrong. In both historical and pre-historical times we have seen temperatures significantly warmer than now. This does not inform what might happen going forward as such but making such obviously refutable errors doesn't help the debate.
The last three Julys on Earth have been the three warmest ever recorded. But, they may also be the warmest months to occur on our planet in about 120,000 years.
Bit of nuance. Uncertainty is important. Reconstructing past temperatures is hard. Take the use of tree ring data and the 'divergence'. If tree rings are a good proxy for temperature, why are they not working now?
It's worth reading beyond the first line of the article.
Even if you've also read the strapline? "The past few summers have been the warmest on Earth in a long, long time."
Then the first sentence: "The last three Julys on Earth have been the three warmest ever recorded."
(BBM). Oopsadaisy! Surely some mistake? I was going to ask what kind of average they were using and whether in theory it treats all points on the Earth's surface equally, but really when faced with an article like that, who cares?
From the article:
"There's little doubt among scientists that we're now probably experiencing the warmest climate in some 120,000 years, even reaching above a particularly warm period around 7,000 years ago, during a post-ice age era called the Holocene.
"I agree entirely that it's very likely the last few summers have been the warmest in the last ~100,000-115,000 years," David Black, a paleoclimatologist at Stony Brook University, said over email. "It's very probable that we've begun to exceed the warmest part of the Holocene."
"It is safe to say that it's true," added Jennifer Marlon, a research scientist at Yale University's School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, in an interview. "You'll find a scientific consensus among experts even on that point now I'd bet, which says a lot."
Marlon noted that during that hotter time 7,000 years ago, only the northern hemisphere experienced some pretty warm summers, "but now we are warmer year round."
Back in 2013, Rahmstorf already argued that the current climate had already surpassed this warmest period of the Holocene. And in the last five years, the case has only grown stronger."
"during a post-ice age era called the Holocene"
This is still the Holocene. I conclude the writer didn't know what they were talking about, as usual.
In the Middle Eocene there was no ice on the planet at all - not even in Antarctic regions - and it was a hell of a lot warmer than now.
I conclude that the Earth will be absolutely fine. 5 degrees warming will not make the planet uninhabitable for humans or wipe out life.
The main risk, therefore, is to society as it is now (and why should we expect to continue exactly as we are?) and to individual species that cannot move easily due to direct habitat loss.
As I am often called a pessimist, though I think there are good reasons for pessimism on the subject of climate change and whether mankind will actually do anything to stop it. There is a bright note in that a sea level rise of several metres means I will be living in a beach front property.
Rather depends exactly how much it rises, and won't you be having rather a lot of people living in your garden shed?
It wont rise past my house I doubt and nope don't have a garden shed so they can go live in london
We will see. From all the chat I'm expecting NOTHING that hasn't been alleged before, and ZERO actual evidence. Grusch himself has seen ZERO, he is relating takes told to him.
Keep believing folks, if it floats you boat, but don't expect an earth shattering revelation any time soon...
A lot of it may depend on whether they can get names and information from the U.S. Inspector-General of Intelligence.
He seems to have collecting names and evidence for about three years now.
I just don't see anything beyond what we have seen many times before. Unless you subscribe to the X-files state within a state cover-up, its hard to see how this stuff hasn't come out, if there really are crashed UFO's with alien bodies.
Far more likely is the usual grift. There is money to be made writing books, and going on TV's shows talking shit.
I personally would say it's quite easy to see how information could have not come out. An ossified, compartmentalised bureaucracy, then protected by layers of fearsome secrecy legislation.
A large conspiracy, state-within-a-state, or anything like that, is not necessarily part of this sort of compartmentalisation. Something shut away and forgotten about by most, and then with very limited access, to only people who have specific cause to, by their job description, such, perhaps, as Grusch.
I think that's just too Hollywood. Stuff leaks - proper stuff, not drunken bar tales.
There have been a certain number of insider reports for years, but most of the people have been considered axiomatically and culturally crazy.
As the Slate article mentions, if any of this is true, it would be more than a paradigm shift, and more like a complete reordering of reality, for many people.
The problem with so much of this is that UFO's and little green men who became grey aliens is that its a cultural phenomena. People in the middle ages saw things they didn't understand and thought it was angels. After the second world war we saw an explosion of things flying around (aeroplanes, then satellites) and people started to misidentify them. Arnold didn't see flying saucers, he described things skipping like a saucer, yet that story became the flying saucer genesis. And so throughout the fifties and sixties people saw saucer shapes.
TV and film play a part - Close Encounters of the Third Kind caused a huge upsurge in UFO sightings. And aliens became greys, something that followed through into the X-files. The X-files convinced people that a government could cover up a huge conspiracy (aliens and here, are malevalent and experimenting on humans). And now we see this playing out with with yet another grift merchant spinning tales.
Its possible Grusch believes what he has been told and is reporting. Its possible he is being played (i'd argue likely). But what is less likely is that alien races in all their different forms have been visiting the Earth since the 1940's with an ever changing shape and ever changing craft.
I'd love to be wrong. If aliens are here and it is revealed is will change EVERYTHING. But don't hold your breath.
The Tories have more manoeuvrability than Labour over green matters. This is coming out in many of today's headlines, and it was surely already clear to the leaderships of both parties from focus groups.
For much of the population, green is in the same field as woke. I'm not saying it should be, just that it is for many people. Many see it ALL as a moralising cum theatrical wagging of fingers: OK I'll just say yes so as not to make a fuss, but why TF are my grocery bills and rent payments going up, why TF should I borrow more money so as to buy a "new" car, so as to avoid paying "polluter" bills, so as to save the effing planet, why should I buy plastic bags for my kitchen bin when I used to get them free from the supermarket, and how come I've lost the hope I used to have for future generations? Conditions are ideal for the Tories to say when you get to the polling station vote for what you really think is in your personal interests and don't let any finger wagger tell you otherwise.
Meanwhile Keir Starmer had a good LGBT pride month. Fine, but how many votes did it win for Labour?
As I am often called a pessimist, though I think there are good reasons for pessimism on the subject of climate change and whether mankind will actually do anything to stop it. There is a bright note in that a sea level rise of several metres means I will be living in a beach front property.
Rather depends exactly how much it rises, and won't you be having rather a lot of people living in your garden shed?
It wont rise past my house I doubt and nope don't have a garden shed so they can go live in london
We will see. From all the chat I'm expecting NOTHING that hasn't been alleged before, and ZERO actual evidence. Grusch himself has seen ZERO, he is relating takes told to him.
Keep believing folks, if it floats you boat, but don't expect an earth shattering revelation any time soon...
A lot of it may depend on whether they can get names and information from the U.S. Inspector-General of Intelligence.
He seems to have collecting names and evidence for about three years now.
I just don't see anything beyond what we have seen many times before. Unless you subscribe to the X-files state within a state cover-up, its hard to see how this stuff hasn't come out, if there really are crashed UFO's with alien bodies.
Far more likely is the usual grift. There is money to be made writing books, and going on TV's shows talking shit.
I personally would say it's quite easy to see how information could have not come out. An ossified, compartmentalised bureaucracy, then protected by layers of fearsome secrecy legislation.
A large conspiracy, state-within-a-state, or anything like that, is not necessarily part of this sort of compartmentalisation. Something shut away and forgotten about by most, and then with very limited access, to only people who have specific cause to, by their job description, such, perhaps, as Grusch.
I think that's just too Hollywood. Stuff leaks - proper stuff, not drunken bar tales.
It’s ALREADY “to Hollywood”. It’s now crossed a line to a point where you can’t dismiss it “as a few grifters hoping to make money”
An honest analysis of the evidence - not the feeble videos and pics - but the behaviour of people close to the issue: is enough to prove that, many times over
For a scientist you are incredibly closed-minded. It’s a shame
Incidentally I see that lab leak has been slam dunked again. The guy who wrote the crucial and original Proximal Origins paper, virologist Kristian Andersen, was - we now know - privately saying “lab leak is so friggin likely, it looks engineered” even as he was publishing the “official” paper which claimed “there is no evidence whatsoever to believe in any lab origin, we can rule this out”
As I am often called a pessimist, though I think there are good reasons for pessimism on the subject of climate change and whether mankind will actually do anything to stop it. There is a bright note in that a sea level rise of several metres means I will be living in a beach front property.
Rather depends exactly how much it rises, and won't you be having rather a lot of people living in your garden shed?
It wont rise past my house I doubt and nope don't have a garden shed so they can go live in london
We will see. From all the chat I'm expecting NOTHING that hasn't been alleged before, and ZERO actual evidence. Grusch himself has seen ZERO, he is relating takes told to him.
Keep believing folks, if it floats you boat, but don't expect an earth shattering revelation any time soon...
A lot of it may depend on whether they can get names and information from the U.S. Inspector-General of Intelligence.
He seems to have collecting names and evidence for about three years now.
I just don't see anything beyond what we have seen many times before. Unless you subscribe to the X-files state within a state cover-up, its hard to see how this stuff hasn't come out, if there really are crashed UFO's with alien bodies.
Far more likely is the usual grift. There is money to be made writing books, and going on TV's shows talking shit.
I personally would say it's quite easy to see how information could have not come out. An ossified, compartmentalised bureaucracy, then protected by layers of fearsome secrecy legislation.
A large conspiracy, state-within-a-state, or anything like that, is not necessarily part of this sort of compartmentalisation. Something shut away and forgotten about by most, and then with very limited access, to only people who have specific cause to, by their job description, such, perhaps, as Grusch.
I think that's just too Hollywood. Stuff leaks - proper stuff, not drunken bar tales.
There have been a certain number of insider reports for years, but most of the people have been considered axiomatically and culturally crazy.
As the Slate article mentions, if any of this is true, it would be more than a paradigm shift, and more like a complete reordering of reality, for many people.
The problem with so much of this is that UFO's and little green men who became grey aliens is that its a cultural phenomena. People in the middle ages saw things they didn't understand and thought it was angels. After the second world war we saw an explosion of things flying around (aeroplanes, then satellites) and people started to misidentify them. Arnold didn't see flying saucers, he described things skipping like a saucer, yet that story became the flying saucer genesis. And so throughout the fifties and sixties people saw saucer shapes.
TV and film play a part - Close Encounters of the Third Kind caused a huge upsurge in UFO sightings. And aliens became greys, something that followed through into the X-files. The X-files convinced people that a government could cover up a huge conspiracy (aliens and here, are malevalent and experimenting on humans). And now we see this playing out with with yet another grift merchant spinning tales.
Its possible Grusch believes what he has been told and is reporting. Its possible he is being played (i'd argue likely). But what is less likely is that alien races in all their different forms have been visiting the Earth since the 1940's with an ever changing shape and ever changing craft.
I'd love to be wrong. If aliens are here and it is revealed is will change EVERYTHING. But don't hold your breath.
I've posted before a map of reported UFO sightings. They're massively weighted towards the Anglosphere.
We will see. From all the chat I'm expecting NOTHING that hasn't been alleged before, and ZERO actual evidence. Grusch himself has seen ZERO, he is relating takes told to him.
Keep believing folks, if it floats you boat, but don't expect an earth shattering revelation any time soon...
A lot of it may depend on whether they can get names and information from the U.S. Inspector-General of Intelligence.
He seems to have collecting names and evidence for about three years now.
I just don't see anything beyond what we have seen many times before. Unless you subscribe to the X-files state within a state cover-up, its hard to see how this stuff hasn't come out, if there really are crashed UFO's with alien bodies.
Far more likely is the usual grift. There is money to be made writing books, and going on TV's shows talking shit.
I personally would say it's quite easy to see how information could have not come out. An ossified, compartmentalised bureaucracy, then protected by layers of fearsome secrecy legislation.
A large conspiracy, state-within-a-state, or anything like that, is not necessarily part of this sort of compartmentalisation. Something shut away and forgotten about by most, and then with very limited access, to only people who have specific cause to, by their job description, such, perhaps, as Grusch.
I think that's just too Hollywood. Stuff leaks - proper stuff, not drunken bar tales.
There have been a certain number of insider reports for years, but most of the people have been considered axiomatically and culturally crazy.
As the Slate article mentions, if any of this is true, it would be more than a paradigm shift, and more like a complete reordering of reality, for many people.
The problem with so much of this is that UFO's and little green men who became grey aliens is that its a cultural phenomena. People in the middle ages saw things they didn't understand and thought it was angels. After the second world war we saw an explosion of things flying around (aeroplanes, then satellites) and people started to misidentify them. Arnold didn't see flying saucers, he described things skipping like a saucer, yet that story became the flying saucer genesis. And so throughout the fifties and sixties people saw saucer shapes.
TV and film play a part - Close Encounters of the Third Kind caused a huge upsurge in UFO sightings. And aliens became greys, something that followed through into the X-files. The X-files convinced people that a government could cover up a huge conspiracy (aliens and here, are malevalent and experimenting on humans). And now we see this playing out with with yet another grift merchant spinning tales.
Its possible Grusch believes what he has been told and is reporting. Its possible he is being played (i'd argue likely). But what is less likely is that alien races in all their different forms have been visiting the Earth since the 1940's with an ever changing shape and ever changing craft.
I'd love to be wrong. If aliens are here and it is revealed is will change EVERYTHING. But don't hold your breath.
Again, I would say the key is this ongoing bureaucratic process with the US Inspectorate of of Intelligence, missed by most. It's unlikely he's been investigating drunken bar-tales for three years.
As mentioned, I also think that may be the key to whether this week's hearings yield up any new information. It is interesting, though, as Leon mentions, that the White House is already subtly shifting its messaging on the subjrct.
As I am often called a pessimist, though I think there are good reasons for pessimism on the subject of climate change and whether mankind will actually do anything to stop it. There is a bright note in that a sea level rise of several metres means I will be living in a beach front property.
Rather depends exactly how much it rises, and won't you be having rather a lot of people living in your garden shed?
It wont rise past my house I doubt and nope don't have a garden shed so they can go live in london
"It wont rise past my house I doubt"
Didn't know you lived on a boat, Pagan
I am 60 metres above sea level so it is unlikely
Complete melting of antarctica would do it. As you say, unlikely.
We will see. From all the chat I'm expecting NOTHING that hasn't been alleged before, and ZERO actual evidence. Grusch himself has seen ZERO, he is relating takes told to him.
Keep believing folks, if it floats you boat, but don't expect an earth shattering revelation any time soon...
A lot of it may depend on whether they can get names and information from the U.S. Inspector-General of Intelligence.
He seems to have collecting names and evidence for about three years now.
I just don't see anything beyond what we have seen many times before. Unless you subscribe to the X-files state within a state cover-up, its hard to see how this stuff hasn't come out, if there really are crashed UFO's with alien bodies.
Far more likely is the usual grift. There is money to be made writing books, and going on TV's shows talking shit.
I personally would say it's quite easy to see how information could have not come out. An ossified, compartmentalised bureaucracy, then protected by layers of fearsome secrecy legislation.
A large conspiracy, state-within-a-state, or anything like that, is not necessarily part of this sort of compartmentalisation. Something shut away and forgotten about by most, and then with very limited access, to only people who have specific cause to, by their job description, such, perhaps, as Grusch.
I think that's just too Hollywood. Stuff leaks - proper stuff, not drunken bar tales.
Every month or so, @Leon and @WhisperingOracle whip themselves up in an orgy of excitement over the *next* news they're sure will come out. And each time, there's much heat but little light.
Little green men having the tech to travel vast distances to our planet, then being seen - or even crashing many times in just one or two countries - is truly extraordinary, and requires truly extraordinary evidence.
There isn't any. Occam's razor applies.
There is of course the explanation that it is a bunch of drunk teenage aliens out for a laugh. Let's go and find the guy who lives by himself and buzz him. You know the guy everyone thinks is a bit weird. Let's fly across the bow of a USAF plane but in such a way that any video is blurred.
One of the climate feedback loops just went off the chart. Antarctic sea ice extent in southern hemisphere summers is highly variable, but it always recovers in the winter. Thus year it hasn't.
(*six sigma would be once in a billion years - actually five sigma.)
Its not so much the sea ice but the risk that the ice shelf on Antartica is now able to slide off on a massive scale. If that happens Canary Warf becomes Canary ponds.
The rise in sea level will probably become the UK's biggest headache in the future. There is evidence that the sea level during the last interglacial period - the last time temperatures were comparable to now - was around 6 to 9 metres higher than today. It takes a while* for all that water to warm and the ice to melt, so it won't be our problem. It'll be a nasty legacy for our children and grandchildren though.
* Having said that, there have been occasions in the past when tipping points have passed and the Earth's climate has changed very rapidly, as Richard Tyndall has pointed out. It's very difficult to know what these points might be and when they will be passed, but the warming of the Earth is unlikely to remain a smooth process.
I agree about the sudden tipping points and of course that is possible. But your contention that the last time temperatures were this warm was in the last interglacial is simply wrong. In both historical and pre-historical times we have seen temperatures significantly warmer than now. This does not inform what might happen going forward as such but making such obviously refutable errors doesn't help the debate.
The last three Julys on Earth have been the three warmest ever recorded. But, they may also be the warmest months to occur on our planet in about 120,000 years.
Bit of nuance. Uncertainty is important. Reconstructing past temperatures is hard. Take the use of tree ring data and the 'divergence'. If tree rings are a good proxy for temperature, why are they not working now?
It's worth reading beyond the first line of the article.
Even if you've also read the strapline? "The past few summers have been the warmest on Earth in a long, long time."
Then the first sentence: "The last three Julys on Earth have been the three warmest ever recorded."
(BBM). Oopsadaisy! Surely some mistake? I was going to ask what kind of average they were using and whether in theory it treats all points on the Earth's surface equally, but really when faced with an article like that, who cares?
From the article:
"There's little doubt among scientists that we're now probably experiencing the warmest climate in some 120,000 years, even reaching above a particularly warm period around 7,000 years ago, during a post-ice age era called the Holocene.
"I agree entirely that it's very likely the last few summers have been the warmest in the last ~100,000-115,000 years," David Black, a paleoclimatologist at Stony Brook University, said over email. "It's very probable that we've begun to exceed the warmest part of the Holocene."
"It is safe to say that it's true," added Jennifer Marlon, a research scientist at Yale University's School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, in an interview. "You'll find a scientific consensus among experts even on that point now I'd bet, which says a lot."
Marlon noted that during that hotter time 7,000 years ago, only the northern hemisphere experienced some pretty warm summers, "but now we are warmer year round."
Back in 2013, Rahmstorf already argued that the current climate had already surpassed this warmest period of the Holocene. And in the last five years, the case has only grown stronger."
And their evidence? These are assertions. They may be right, but actually measuring this is not easy. Tree rings go back only so far, other methods further.
The evidence would be the large number of research papers on the topic that each of the quoted scientists has published in scientific journals. Of course we can't be certain what the climate was like in the past, just as we cannot be certain about anything in science. But the evidence that we do have points towards the current global temperature now being higher than at any time since the Eemian interglacial.
I think that the estimates of past temperatures have been a noble effort, but are not beyond criticism. Tree rings, and the divergence problem raises huge issues. If a tree ring from 1900 can infer temperature, why doesn't it work in 2015?
The issue is, you and @FeersumEnjineeya are discussing a view on the climate. You believe one thing, he another; you are close or not close to agreeing a position.
Everyone else has exactly the same access to google the information that @FeersumEnjineeya has. But, as we are seeing with the reaction to the Just Stop Oilers, and a quick look at the M25 at any time of day, the broad mass of British people don't think it's a credible threat.
And when old Feersum starts saying: "you'll stop laughing when you have to swim to Tescos before long" then you can see why.
He (he?) is being terribly sincere and really cares about the planet warming. But by his very actions is turning people off the issue.
Will he have the last laugh, paddling aboard his rigid raider as we are all in water wings flailing around? Who can say. My money is on no.
I think most of us think it is a highly credible threat but fuck it, life goes on.
As I am often called a pessimist, though I think there are good reasons for pessimism on the subject of climate change and whether mankind will actually do anything to stop it. There is a bright note in that a sea level rise of several metres means I will be living in a beach front property.
Rather depends exactly how much it rises, and won't you be having rather a lot of people living in your garden shed?
It wont rise past my house I doubt and nope don't have a garden shed so they can go live in london
"It wont rise past my house I doubt"
Didn't know you lived on a boat, Pagan
I am 60 metres above sea level so it is unlikely
I'm expecting to own a beach house on the edge of Lake Humber, when it returns.
One of the climate feedback loops just went off the chart. Antarctic sea ice extent in southern hemisphere summers is highly variable, but it always recovers in the winter. Thus year it hasn't.
(*six sigma would be once in a billion years - actually five sigma.)
Its not so much the sea ice but the risk that the ice shelf on Antartica is now able to slide off on a massive scale. If that happens Canary Warf becomes Canary ponds.
The rise in sea level will probably become the UK's biggest headache in the future. There is evidence that the sea level during the last interglacial period - the last time temperatures were comparable to now - was around 6 to 9 metres higher than today. It takes a while* for all that water to warm and the ice to melt, so it won't be our problem. It'll be a nasty legacy for our children and grandchildren though.
* Having said that, there have been occasions in the past when tipping points have passed and the Earth's climate has changed very rapidly, as Richard Tyndall has pointed out. It's very difficult to know what these points might be and when they will be passed, but the warming of the Earth is unlikely to remain a smooth process.
I agree about the sudden tipping points and of course that is possible. But your contention that the last time temperatures were this warm was in the last interglacial is simply wrong. In both historical and pre-historical times we have seen temperatures significantly warmer than now. This does not inform what might happen going forward as such but making such obviously refutable errors doesn't help the debate.
The last three Julys on Earth have been the three warmest ever recorded. But, they may also be the warmest months to occur on our planet in about 120,000 years.
Bit of nuance. Uncertainty is important. Reconstructing past temperatures is hard. Take the use of tree ring data and the 'divergence'. If tree rings are a good proxy for temperature, why are they not working now?
It's worth reading beyond the first line of the article.
Even if you've also read the strapline? "The past few summers have been the warmest on Earth in a long, long time."
Then the first sentence: "The last three Julys on Earth have been the three warmest ever recorded."
(BBM). Oopsadaisy! Surely some mistake? I was going to ask what kind of average they were using and whether in theory it treats all points on the Earth's surface equally, but really when faced with an article like that, who cares?
From the article:
"There's little doubt among scientists that we're now probably experiencing the warmest climate in some 120,000 years, even reaching above a particularly warm period around 7,000 years ago, during a post-ice age era called the Holocene.
"I agree entirely that it's very likely the last few summers have been the warmest in the last ~100,000-115,000 years," David Black, a paleoclimatologist at Stony Brook University, said over email. "It's very probable that we've begun to exceed the warmest part of the Holocene."
"It is safe to say that it's true," added Jennifer Marlon, a research scientist at Yale University's School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, in an interview. "You'll find a scientific consensus among experts even on that point now I'd bet, which says a lot."
Marlon noted that during that hotter time 7,000 years ago, only the northern hemisphere experienced some pretty warm summers, "but now we are warmer year round."
Back in 2013, Rahmstorf already argued that the current climate had already surpassed this warmest period of the Holocene. And in the last five years, the case has only grown stronger."
"during a post-ice age era called the Holocene"
This is still the Holocene. I conclude the writer didn't know what they were talking about, as usual.
In the Middle Eocene there was no ice on the planet at all - not even in Antarctic regions - and it was a hell of a lot warmer than now.
I conclude that the Earth will be absolutely fine. 5 degrees warming will not make the planet uninhabitable for humans or wipe out life.
Evidence that it's already getting too hot for some humans to think logically?
Probably not, as some humans are incapable of that at any temperature.
We will see. From all the chat I'm expecting NOTHING that hasn't been alleged before, and ZERO actual evidence. Grusch himself has seen ZERO, he is relating takes told to him.
Keep believing folks, if it floats you boat, but don't expect an earth shattering revelation any time soon...
A lot of it may depend on whether they can get names and information from the U.S. Inspector-General of Intelligence.
He seems to have collecting names and evidence for about three years now.
I just don't see anything beyond what we have seen many times before. Unless you subscribe to the X-files state within a state cover-up, its hard to see how this stuff hasn't come out, if there really are crashed UFO's with alien bodies.
Far more likely is the usual grift. There is money to be made writing books, and going on TV's shows talking shit.
I personally would say it's quite easy to see how information could have not come out. An ossified, compartmentalised bureaucracy, then protected by layers of fearsome secrecy legislation.
A large conspiracy, state-within-a-state, or anything like that, is not necessarily part of this sort of compartmentalisation. Something shut away and forgotten about by most, and then with very limited access, to only people who have specific cause to, by their job description, such, perhaps, as Grusch.
I think that's just too Hollywood. Stuff leaks - proper stuff, not drunken bar tales.
Every month or so, @Leon and @WhisperingOracle whip themselves up in an orgy of excitement over the *next* news they're sure will come out. And each time, there's much heat but little light.
Little green men having the tech to travel vast distances to our planet, then being seen - or even crashing many times in just one or two countries - is truly extraordinary, and requires truly extraordinary evidence.
There isn't any. Occam's razor applies.
There is of course the explanation that it is a bunch of drunk teenage aliens out for a laugh. Let's go and find the guy who lives by himself and buzz him. You know the guy everyone thinks is a bit weird. Let's fly across the bow of a USAF plane but in such a way that any video is blurred.
The HHGTTG idea.
As also seen (in a way) in the brilliant film Morons from Outer Space.
We will see. From all the chat I'm expecting NOTHING that hasn't been alleged before, and ZERO actual evidence. Grusch himself has seen ZERO, he is relating takes told to him.
Keep believing folks, if it floats you boat, but don't expect an earth shattering revelation any time soon...
A lot of it may depend on whether they can get names and information from the U.S. Inspector-General of Intelligence.
He seems to have collecting names and evidence for about three years now.
I just don't see anything beyond what we have seen many times before. Unless you subscribe to the X-files state within a state cover-up, its hard to see how this stuff hasn't come out, if there really are crashed UFO's with alien bodies.
Far more likely is the usual grift. There is money to be made writing books, and going on TV's shows talking shit.
I personally would say it's quite easy to see how information could have not come out. An ossified, compartmentalised bureaucracy, then protected by layers of fearsome secrecy legislation.
A large conspiracy, state-within-a-state, or anything like that, is not necessarily part of this sort of compartmentalisation. Something shut away and forgotten about by most, and then with very limited access, to only people who have specific cause to, by their job description, such, perhaps, as Grusch.
I think that's just too Hollywood. Stuff leaks - proper stuff, not drunken bar tales.
Every month or so, @Leon and @WhisperingOracle whip themselves up in an orgy of excitement over the *next* news they're sure will come out. And each time, there's much heat but little light.
Little green men having the tech to travel vast distances to our planet, then being seen - or even crashing many times in just one or two countries - is truly extraordinary, and requires truly extraordinary evidence.
There isn't any. Occam's razor applies.
There is of course the explanation that it is a bunch of drunk teenage aliens out for a laugh. Let's go and find the guy who lives by himself and buzz him. You know the guy everyone thinks is a bit weird. Let's fly across the bow of a USAF plane but in such a way that any video is blurred.
The distances between stars are vast. The tech needed to traverse those distances would require a phenomenal vastness of engineering. If any aliens happened to head our way in some sort of intergenerational ark it would be very very clear and very very obvious.
Is the US UFO thing like the films where the UFOs all land in California? Is it because the US is the only airforce where its pilots are briefed to look out for flying saucers.
Or do the aliens really want to make America great (again) and hence are singling them out for special treatment?
We will see. From all the chat I'm expecting NOTHING that hasn't been alleged before, and ZERO actual evidence. Grusch himself has seen ZERO, he is relating takes told to him.
Keep believing folks, if it floats you boat, but don't expect an earth shattering revelation any time soon...
A lot of it may depend on whether they can get names and information from the U.S. Inspector-General of Intelligence.
He seems to have collecting names and evidence for about three years now.
I just don't see anything beyond what we have seen many times before. Unless you subscribe to the X-files state within a state cover-up, its hard to see how this stuff hasn't come out, if there really are crashed UFO's with alien bodies.
Far more likely is the usual grift. There is money to be made writing books, and going on TV's shows talking shit.
I personally would say it's quite easy to see how information could have not come out. An ossified, compartmentalised bureaucracy, then protected by layers of fearsome secrecy legislation.
A large conspiracy, state-within-a-state, or anything like that, is not necessarily part of this sort of compartmentalisation. Something shut away and forgotten about by most, and then with very limited access, to only people who have specific cause to, by their job description, such, perhaps, as Grusch.
I think that's just too Hollywood. Stuff leaks - proper stuff, not drunken bar tales.
Every month or so, @Leon and @WhisperingOracle whip themselves up in an orgy of excitement over the *next* news they're sure will come out. And each time, there's much heat but little light.
Little green men having the tech to travel vast distances to our planet, then being seen - or even crashing many times in just one or two countries - is truly extraordinary, and requires truly extraordinary evidence.
There isn't any. Occam's razor applies.
There is of course the explanation that it is a bunch of drunk teenage aliens out for a laugh. Let's go and find the guy who lives by himself and buzz him. You know the guy everyone thinks is a bit weird. Let's fly across the bow of a USAF plane but in such a way that any video is blurred.
The HHGTTG idea.
As also seen (in a way) in the brilliant film Morons from Outer Space.
The former is almost certainly where I got that from.
We will see. From all the chat I'm expecting NOTHING that hasn't been alleged before, and ZERO actual evidence. Grusch himself has seen ZERO, he is relating takes told to him.
Keep believing folks, if it floats you boat, but don't expect an earth shattering revelation any time soon...
A lot of it may depend on whether they can get names and information from the U.S. Inspector-General of Intelligence.
He seems to have collecting names and evidence for about three years now.
I just don't see anything beyond what we have seen many times before. Unless you subscribe to the X-files state within a state cover-up, its hard to see how this stuff hasn't come out, if there really are crashed UFO's with alien bodies.
Far more likely is the usual grift. There is money to be made writing books, and going on TV's shows talking shit.
I personally would say it's quite easy to see how information could have not come out. An ossified, compartmentalised bureaucracy, then protected by layers of fearsome secrecy legislation.
A large conspiracy, state-within-a-state, or anything like that, is not necessarily part of this sort of compartmentalisation. Something shut away and forgotten about by most, and then with very limited access, to only people who have specific cause to, by their job description, such, perhaps, as Grusch.
I think that's just too Hollywood. Stuff leaks - proper stuff, not drunken bar tales.
There have been a certain number of insider reports for years, but most of the people have been considered axiomatically and culturally crazy.
As the Slate article mentions, if any of this is true, it would be more than a paradigm shift, and more like a complete reordering of reality, for many people.
The problem with so much of this is that UFO's and little green men who became grey aliens is that its a cultural phenomena. People in the middle ages saw things they didn't understand and thought it was angels. After the second world war we saw an explosion of things flying around (aeroplanes, then satellites) and people started to misidentify them. Arnold didn't see flying saucers, he described things skipping like a saucer, yet that story became the flying saucer genesis. And so throughout the fifties and sixties people saw saucer shapes.
TV and film play a part - Close Encounters of the Third Kind caused a huge upsurge in UFO sightings. And aliens became greys, something that followed through into the X-files. The X-files convinced people that a government could cover up a huge conspiracy (aliens and here, are malevalent and experimenting on humans). And now we see this playing out with with yet another grift merchant spinning tales.
Its possible Grusch believes what he has been told and is reporting. Its possible he is being played (i'd argue likely). But what is less likely is that alien races in all their different forms have been visiting the Earth since the 1940's with an ever changing shape and ever changing craft.
I'd love to be wrong. If aliens are here and it is revealed is will change EVERYTHING. But don't hold your breath.
I've posted before a map of reported UFO sightings. They're massively weighted towards the Anglosphere.
Why are aliens so interested in the Anglosphere? Or is it, as you suggest, a cultural phenomena?
They seem to be mainly concentrated in the U.S. It's possible there could be two concurrently true explanations for that, from both ends of the epistemological spectrum.
The U.S. is the country the most soaked culturally in U.F.O. lore, and from any outsider's perspective, is clearly the country with the most advanced technological level.
We will see. From all the chat I'm expecting NOTHING that hasn't been alleged before, and ZERO actual evidence. Grusch himself has seen ZERO, he is relating takes told to him.
Keep believing folks, if it floats you boat, but don't expect an earth shattering revelation any time soon...
A lot of it may depend on whether they can get names and information from the U.S. Inspector-General of Intelligence.
He seems to have collecting names and evidence for about three years now.
I just don't see anything beyond what we have seen many times before. Unless you subscribe to the X-files state within a state cover-up, its hard to see how this stuff hasn't come out, if there really are crashed UFO's with alien bodies.
Far more likely is the usual grift. There is money to be made writing books, and going on TV's shows talking shit.
I personally would say it's quite easy to see how information could have not come out. An ossified, compartmentalised bureaucracy, then protected by layers of fearsome secrecy legislation.
A large conspiracy, state-within-a-state, or anything like that, is not necessarily part of this sort of compartmentalisation. Something shut away and forgotten about by most, and then with very limited access, to only people who have specific cause to, by their job description, such, perhaps, as Grusch.
I think that's just too Hollywood. Stuff leaks - proper stuff, not drunken bar tales.
There have been a certain number of insider reports for years, but most of the people have been considered axiomatically and culturally crazy.
As the Slate article mentions, if any of this is true, it would be more than a paradigm shift, and more like a complete reordering of reality, for many people.
The problem with so much of this is that UFO's and little green men who became grey aliens is that its a cultural phenomena. People in the middle ages saw things they didn't understand and thought it was angels. After the second world war we saw an explosion of things flying around (aeroplanes, then satellites) and people started to misidentify them. Arnold didn't see flying saucers, he described things skipping like a saucer, yet that story became the flying saucer genesis. And so throughout the fifties and sixties people saw saucer shapes.
We will see. From all the chat I'm expecting NOTHING that hasn't been alleged before, and ZERO actual evidence. Grusch himself has seen ZERO, he is relating takes told to him.
Keep believing folks, if it floats you boat, but don't expect an earth shattering revelation any time soon...
A lot of it may depend on whether they can get names and information from the U.S. Inspector-General of Intelligence.
He seems to have collecting names and evidence for about three years now.
I just don't see anything beyond what we have seen many times before. Unless you subscribe to the X-files state within a state cover-up, its hard to see how this stuff hasn't come out, if there really are crashed UFO's with alien bodies.
Far more likely is the usual grift. There is money to be made writing books, and going on TV's shows talking shit.
I personally would say it's quite easy to see how information could have not come out. An ossified, compartmentalised bureaucracy, then protected by layers of fearsome secrecy legislation.
A large conspiracy, state-within-a-state, or anything like that, is not necessarily part of this sort of compartmentalisation. Something shut away and forgotten about by most, and then with very limited access, to only people who have specific cause to, by their job description, such, perhaps, as Grusch.
I think that's just too Hollywood. Stuff leaks - proper stuff, not drunken bar tales.
It’s ALREADY “to Hollywood”. It’s now crossed a line to a point where you can’t dismiss it “as a few grifters hoping to make money”
An honest analysis of the evidence - not the feeble videos and pics - but the behaviour of people close to the issue: is enough to prove that, many times over
For a scientist you are incredibly closed-minded. It’s a shame
Incidentally I see that lab leak has been slam dunked again. The guy who wrote the crucial and original Proximal Origins paper, virologist Kristian Andersen, was - we now know - privately saying “lab leak is so friggin likely, it looks engineered” even as he was publishing the “official” paper which claimed “there is no evidence whatsoever to believe in any lab origin, we can rule this out”
Lol
There is nothing close minded about looking at evidence and finding it wanting. I've been a Fortean since I was in my early teens, literally obsessed with ghosts, UFO's, bigfoot, the Loch Ness monster and so on, I have seen the stuff that's happening now about UAPS happen before. Luis Elizondo, MJ12, Blue Book. Its all there, and its all the same. I think what we are seeing is just a new set of people taking an interest, people who probably don't have the background awareness of all of the above.
We will see. From all the chat I'm expecting NOTHING that hasn't been alleged before, and ZERO actual evidence. Grusch himself has seen ZERO, he is relating takes told to him.
Keep believing folks, if it floats you boat, but don't expect an earth shattering revelation any time soon...
A lot of it may depend on whether they can get names and information from the U.S. Inspector-General of Intelligence.
He seems to have collecting names and evidence for about three years now.
I just don't see anything beyond what we have seen many times before. Unless you subscribe to the X-files state within a state cover-up, its hard to see how this stuff hasn't come out, if there really are crashed UFO's with alien bodies.
Far more likely is the usual grift. There is money to be made writing books, and going on TV's shows talking shit.
I personally would say it's quite easy to see how information could have not come out. An ossified, compartmentalised bureaucracy, then protected by layers of fearsome secrecy legislation.
A large conspiracy, state-within-a-state, or anything like that, is not necessarily part of this sort of compartmentalisation. Something shut away and forgotten about by most, and then with very limited access, to only people who have specific cause to, by their job description, such, perhaps, as Grusch.
I think that's just too Hollywood. Stuff leaks - proper stuff, not drunken bar tales.
Every month or so, @Leon and @WhisperingOracle whip themselves up in an orgy of excitement over the *next* news they're sure will come out. And each time, there's much heat but little light.
Little green men having the tech to travel vast distances to our planet, then being seen - or even crashing many times in just one or two countries - is truly extraordinary, and requires truly extraordinary evidence.
There isn't any. Occam's razor applies.
There is of course the explanation that it is a bunch of drunk teenage aliens out for a laugh. Let's go and find the guy who lives by himself and buzz him. You know the guy everyone thinks is a bit weird. Let's fly across the bow of a USAF plane but in such a way that any video is blurred.
Obviously this racism as everybody loves a flash solicitor.
High-flying London lawyers and sleepy countryside villages are not always the happiest of combinations, especially when the criminal law specialist really wants to take to the air.
Mayus Karia bills himself as a “ferocious litigator” but the residents of Durley, in Hampshire, will doubtless have a litany of other names for the solicitor-advocate, who has triggered a row over plans to make frequent helicopter landings at his six-bedroom £1.3 million home.
Neighbours in the village, which has a population of about 1,000, have objected to having their “peace ended” by the “flash” lawyer.
The dispute started when Karia, who qualified as a solicitor in 2005 and is said on his law firm’s website to have an “unrivalled . . . sixth sense in litigation”, won permission to construct a helipad in his back garden.
Officials at Winchester city council originally granted him only two personal use round trips a month between the hours of 8am and 6pm. However, local authority planning application documents show that last month Karia applied for unrestricted use to allow multiple landings and take-offs.
In the application, an agent for Karia said the lawyer needed “a loosening of the restriction to allow flexibility of irregular visits by some clients . . .”
Karia, a father of three, who charges between £1,000 and £1,200 an hour for legal advice, is said by neighbours to drive an SUV Rolls-Royce, while his firm, London Litigation Partnership Solicitors, describes him as “a ferocious and meticulous litigator”. His firm’s website goes on to liken his legal skills to “the genius of Field Marshal Montgomery in the battlefield”.
We will see. From all the chat I'm expecting NOTHING that hasn't been alleged before, and ZERO actual evidence. Grusch himself has seen ZERO, he is relating takes told to him.
Keep believing folks, if it floats you boat, but don't expect an earth shattering revelation any time soon...
A lot of it may depend on whether they can get names and information from the U.S. Inspector-General of Intelligence.
He seems to have collecting names and evidence for about three years now.
I just don't see anything beyond what we have seen many times before. Unless you subscribe to the X-files state within a state cover-up, its hard to see how this stuff hasn't come out, if there really are crashed UFO's with alien bodies.
Far more likely is the usual grift. There is money to be made writing books, and going on TV's shows talking shit.
I personally would say it's quite easy to see how information could have not come out. An ossified, compartmentalised bureaucracy, then protected by layers of fearsome secrecy legislation.
A large conspiracy, state-within-a-state, or anything like that, is not necessarily part of this sort of compartmentalisation. Something shut away and forgotten about by most, and then with very limited access, to only people who have specific cause to, by their job description, such, perhaps, as Grusch.
I think that's just too Hollywood. Stuff leaks - proper stuff, not drunken bar tales.
Every month or so, @Leon and @WhisperingOracle whip themselves up in an orgy of excitement over the *next* news they're sure will come out. And each time, there's much heat but little light.
Little green men having the tech to travel vast distances to our planet, then being seen - or even crashing many times in just one or two countries - is truly extraordinary, and requires truly extraordinary evidence.
There isn't any. Occam's razor applies.
There is of course the explanation that it is a bunch of drunk teenage aliens out for a laugh. Let's go and find the guy who lives by himself and buzz him. You know the guy everyone thinks is a bit weird. Let's fly across the bow of a USAF plane but in such a way that any video is blurred.
The distances are too vast. If any aliens happened to head our way in some sort of ark ship it would be very very clear and very very obvious.
What about the ant in the sand below the Mohave desert theory.
There are ants three metres below in the sand happily living out their lives with their colonies and whatnot and no human ever found them hence humans don't exist.
We will see. From all the chat I'm expecting NOTHING that hasn't been alleged before, and ZERO actual evidence. Grusch himself has seen ZERO, he is relating takes told to him.
Keep believing folks, if it floats you boat, but don't expect an earth shattering revelation any time soon...
A lot of it may depend on whether they can get names and information from the U.S. Inspector-General of Intelligence.
He seems to have collecting names and evidence for about three years now.
I just don't see anything beyond what we have seen many times before. Unless you subscribe to the X-files state within a state cover-up, its hard to see how this stuff hasn't come out, if there really are crashed UFO's with alien bodies.
Far more likely is the usual grift. There is money to be made writing books, and going on TV's shows talking shit.
I personally would say it's quite easy to see how information could have not come out. An ossified, compartmentalised bureaucracy, then protected by layers of fearsome secrecy legislation.
A large conspiracy, state-within-a-state, or anything like that, is not necessarily part of this sort of compartmentalisation. Something shut away and forgotten about by most, and then with very limited access, to only people who have specific cause to, by their job description, such, perhaps, as Grusch.
I think that's just too Hollywood. Stuff leaks - proper stuff, not drunken bar tales.
Every month or so, @Leon and @WhisperingOracle whip themselves up in an orgy of excitement over the *next* news they're sure will come out. And each time, there's much heat but little light.
Little green men having the tech to travel vast distances to our planet, then being seen - or even crashing many times in just one or two countries - is truly extraordinary, and requires truly extraordinary evidence.
There isn't any. Occam's razor applies.
There is of course the explanation that it is a bunch of drunk teenage aliens out for a laugh. Let's go and find the guy who lives by himself and buzz him. You know the guy everyone thinks is a bit weird. Let's fly across the bow of a USAF plane but in such a way that any video is blurred.
Has anyone checked whether the witnesses all have names starting with early letters in the galactic alphabet?
We will see. From all the chat I'm expecting NOTHING that hasn't been alleged before, and ZERO actual evidence. Grusch himself has seen ZERO, he is relating takes told to him.
Keep believing folks, if it floats you boat, but don't expect an earth shattering revelation any time soon...
A lot of it may depend on whether they can get names and information from the U.S. Inspector-General of Intelligence.
He seems to have collecting names and evidence for about three years now.
I just don't see anything beyond what we have seen many times before. Unless you subscribe to the X-files state within a state cover-up, its hard to see how this stuff hasn't come out, if there really are crashed UFO's with alien bodies.
Far more likely is the usual grift. There is money to be made writing books, and going on TV's shows talking shit.
I personally would say it's quite easy to see how information could have not come out. An ossified, compartmentalised bureaucracy, then protected by layers of fearsome secrecy legislation.
A large conspiracy, state-within-a-state, or anything like that, is not necessarily part of this sort of compartmentalisation. Something shut away and forgotten about by most, and then with very limited access, to only people who have specific cause to, by their job description, such, perhaps, as Grusch.
I think that's just too Hollywood. Stuff leaks - proper stuff, not drunken bar tales.
There have been a certain number of insider reports for years, but most of the people have been considered axiomatically and culturally crazy.
As the Slate article mentions, if any of this is true, it would be more than a paradigm shift, and more like a complete reordering of reality, for many people.
The problem with so much of this is that UFO's and little green men who became grey aliens is that its a cultural phenomena. People in the middle ages saw things they didn't understand and thought it was angels. After the second world war we saw an explosion of things flying around (aeroplanes, then satellites) and people started to misidentify them. Arnold didn't see flying saucers, he described things skipping like a saucer, yet that story became the flying saucer genesis. And so throughout the fifties and sixties people saw saucer shapes.
TV and film play a part - Close Encounters of the Third Kind caused a huge upsurge in UFO sightings. And aliens became greys, something that followed through into the X-files. The X-files convinced people that a government could cover up a huge conspiracy (aliens and here, are malevalent and experimenting on humans). And now we see this playing out with with yet another grift merchant spinning tales.
Its possible Grusch believes what he has been told and is reporting. Its possible he is being played (i'd argue likely). But what is less likely is that alien races in all their different forms have been visiting the Earth since the 1940's with an ever changing shape and ever changing craft.
I'd love to be wrong. If aliens are here and it is revealed is will change EVERYTHING. But don't hold your breath.
I've posted before a map of reported UFO sightings. They're massively weighted towards the Anglosphere.
We will see. From all the chat I'm expecting NOTHING that hasn't been alleged before, and ZERO actual evidence. Grusch himself has seen ZERO, he is relating takes told to him.
Keep believing folks, if it floats you boat, but don't expect an earth shattering revelation any time soon...
A lot of it may depend on whether they can get names and information from the U.S. Inspector-General of Intelligence.
He seems to have collecting names and evidence for about three years now.
I just don't see anything beyond what we have seen many times before. Unless you subscribe to the X-files state within a state cover-up, its hard to see how this stuff hasn't come out, if there really are crashed UFO's with alien bodies.
Far more likely is the usual grift. There is money to be made writing books, and going on TV's shows talking shit.
I personally would say it's quite easy to see how information could have not come out. An ossified, compartmentalised bureaucracy, then protected by layers of fearsome secrecy legislation.
A large conspiracy, state-within-a-state, or anything like that, is not necessarily part of this sort of compartmentalisation. Something shut away and forgotten about by most, and then with very limited access, to only people who have specific cause to, by their job description, such, perhaps, as Grusch.
I think that's just too Hollywood. Stuff leaks - proper stuff, not drunken bar tales.
There have been a certain number of insider reports for years, but most of the people have been considered axiomatically and culturally crazy.
As the Slate article mentions, if any of this is true, it would be more than a paradigm shift, and more like a complete reordering of reality, for many people.
The problem with so much of this is that UFO's and little green men who became grey aliens is that its a cultural phenomena. People in the middle ages saw things they didn't understand and thought it was angels. After the second world war we saw an explosion of things flying around (aeroplanes, then satellites) and people started to misidentify them. Arnold didn't see flying saucers, he described things skipping like a saucer, yet that story became the flying saucer genesis. And so throughout the fifties and sixties people saw saucer shapes.
TV and film play a part - Close Encounters of the Third Kind caused a huge upsurge in UFO sightings. And aliens became greys, something that followed through into the X-files. The X-files convinced people that a government could cover up a huge conspiracy (aliens and here, are malevalent and experimenting on humans). And now we see this playing out with with yet another grift merchant spinning tales.
Its possible Grusch believes what he has been told and is reporting. Its possible he is being played (i'd argue likely). But what is less likely is that alien races in all their different forms have been visiting the Earth since the 1940's with an ever changing shape and ever changing craft.
I'd love to be wrong. If aliens are here and it is revealed is will change EVERYTHING. But don't hold your breath.
We will see. From all the chat I'm expecting NOTHING that hasn't been alleged before, and ZERO actual evidence. Grusch himself has seen ZERO, he is relating takes told to him.
Keep believing folks, if it floats you boat, but don't expect an earth shattering revelation any time soon...
A lot of it may depend on whether they can get names and information from the U.S. Inspector-General of Intelligence.
He seems to have collecting names and evidence for about three years now.
I just don't see anything beyond what we have seen many times before. Unless you subscribe to the X-files state within a state cover-up, its hard to see how this stuff hasn't come out, if there really are crashed UFO's with alien bodies.
Far more likely is the usual grift. There is money to be made writing books, and going on TV's shows talking shit.
I personally would say it's quite easy to see how information could have not come out. An ossified, compartmentalised bureaucracy, then protected by layers of fearsome secrecy legislation.
A large conspiracy, state-within-a-state, or anything like that, is not necessarily part of this sort of compartmentalisation. Something shut away and forgotten about by most, and then with very limited access, to only people who have specific cause to, by their job description, such, perhaps, as Grusch.
I think that's just too Hollywood. Stuff leaks - proper stuff, not drunken bar tales.
There have been a certain number of insider reports for years, but most of the people have been considered axiomatically and culturally crazy.
As the Slate article mentions, if any of this is true, it would be more than a paradigm shift, and more like a complete reordering of reality, for many people.
The problem with so much of this is that UFO's and little green men who became grey aliens is that its a cultural phenomena. People in the middle ages saw things they didn't understand and thought it was angels. After the second world war we saw an explosion of things flying around (aeroplanes, then satellites) and people started to misidentify them. Arnold didn't see flying saucers, he described things skipping like a saucer, yet that story became the flying saucer genesis. And so throughout the fifties and sixties people saw saucer shapes.
TV and film play a part - Close Encounters of the Third Kind caused a huge upsurge in UFO sightings. And aliens became greys, something that followed through into the X-files. The X-files convinced people that a government could cover up a huge conspiracy (aliens and here, are malevalent and experimenting on humans). And now we see this playing out with with yet another grift merchant spinning tales.
Its possible Grusch believes what he has been told and is reporting. Its possible he is being played (i'd argue likely). But what is less likely is that alien races in all their different forms have been visiting the Earth since the 1940's with an ever changing shape and ever changing craft.
I'd love to be wrong. If aliens are here and it is revealed is will change EVERYTHING. But don't hold your breath.
I've posted before a map of reported UFO sightings. They're massively weighted towards the Anglosphere.
Why are aliens so interested in the Anglosphere? Or is it, as you suggest, a cultural phenomena?
Actually not true. A new map - I’ll try and find it on X - shows that the latest concentration of sightings are in the USA but ALSO east Asia, with a scattering elsewhere. Europe is shamefully ignored
It may be cultural, but then it may also be that for a few decades after WW2 Americans were the only people with the money and leisure to look up and worry about UFOs
Ufologists would argue that it is because the little green men are intrigued by our military tech - or worried by it - so they gravitate to its centres. America for a long time. But now also China and Russia
Or it’s a huge American psy-op to freak the Chinese. This is still my best guess (tho I not at all certain)
I AM certain it is not a normal UFO flap being exploited by a “few grifters” who want to “write a book”. That’s laughably stupid, at this point. This week we will see unprecedented Congressional hearings
We will see. From all the chat I'm expecting NOTHING that hasn't been alleged before, and ZERO actual evidence. Grusch himself has seen ZERO, he is relating takes told to him.
Keep believing folks, if it floats you boat, but don't expect an earth shattering revelation any time soon...
A lot of it may depend on whether they can get names and information from the U.S. Inspector-General of Intelligence.
He seems to have collecting names and evidence for about three years now.
I just don't see anything beyond what we have seen many times before. Unless you subscribe to the X-files state within a state cover-up, its hard to see how this stuff hasn't come out, if there really are crashed UFO's with alien bodies.
Far more likely is the usual grift. There is money to be made writing books, and going on TV's shows talking shit.
I personally would say it's quite easy to see how information could have not come out. An ossified, compartmentalised bureaucracy, then protected by layers of fearsome secrecy legislation.
A large conspiracy, state-within-a-state, or anything like that, is not necessarily part of this sort of compartmentalisation. Something shut away and forgotten about by most, and then with very limited access, to only people who have specific cause to, by their job description, such, perhaps, as Grusch.
I think that's just too Hollywood. Stuff leaks - proper stuff, not drunken bar tales.
It’s ALREADY “to Hollywood”. It’s now crossed a line to a point where you can’t dismiss it “as a few grifters hoping to make money”
An honest analysis of the evidence - not the feeble videos and pics - but the behaviour of people close to the issue: is enough to prove that, many times over
For a scientist you are incredibly closed-minded. It’s a shame
Incidentally I see that lab leak has been slam dunked again. The guy who wrote the crucial and original Proximal Origins paper, virologist Kristian Andersen, was - we now know - privately saying “lab leak is so friggin likely, it looks engineered” even as he was publishing the “official” paper which claimed “there is no evidence whatsoever to believe in any lab origin, we can rule this out”
Lol
I love the way you call anyone who doesn't drink the same kool-aid as you 'close-minded'.
Here's a view I hold: unexplained phenomena such as aliens are more likely to be something terrestrial but currently unknown, such as ghosts or past apparitions, than aliens who travelled billions of miles to get here.
But that's also *massively* unlikely. Much more likely is that people make mistakes, exaggerate or lie, and other people take those mistakes as gospel truth.
As I am often called a pessimist, though I think there are good reasons for pessimism on the subject of climate change and whether mankind will actually do anything to stop it. There is a bright note in that a sea level rise of several metres means I will be living in a beach front property.
Rather depends exactly how much it rises, and won't you be having rather a lot of people living in your garden shed?
It wont rise past my house I doubt and nope don't have a garden shed so they can go live in london
"It wont rise past my house I doubt"
Didn't know you lived on a boat, Pagan
I am 60 metres above sea level so it is unlikely
Complete melting of antarctica would do it. As you say, unlikely.
That would potentially happen within a thousand or so years on current CO2 loadings, though of course it's hard to imagine what human society would look like in a thousand years. Indeed it's hard to imagine what human society will look like in a hundred years. It's possible we'll all just be data by then. One big neural net.
In the shorter (i.e. during 21st century) term the really worrying thing is the knock-on impacts we'll get from warming, not just the natural disasters but the human social upheavals: notably warfare, migration and refugee crises, revolutions etc. It's possible that climate change rather than being the proximate cause for human society collapsing becomes the trigger for other proximate causes. After all we've managed just under 80 years of no nuclear attacks since Nagasaki but not without several near misses.
I am personally somewhat optimistic that the combination of stabilising/declining global population and technological change towards net zero will spare us the worst. 2.5C warming perhaps. Catastrophic in many ways but not as bad as 3C, which in turn isn't as back as 4C and so on.
That's one of the good things about climate change mitigation. It isn't a binary issue. Every bit of mitigation makes things somewhat less bad than they might otherwise have been. We are already undershooting the BAU emissions projections from the 1990s so we're already better that worst case scenario.
We will see. From all the chat I'm expecting NOTHING that hasn't been alleged before, and ZERO actual evidence. Grusch himself has seen ZERO, he is relating takes told to him.
Keep believing folks, if it floats you boat, but don't expect an earth shattering revelation any time soon...
A lot of it may depend on whether they can get names and information from the U.S. Inspector-General of Intelligence.
He seems to have collecting names and evidence for about three years now.
I just don't see anything beyond what we have seen many times before. Unless you subscribe to the X-files state within a state cover-up, its hard to see how this stuff hasn't come out, if there really are crashed UFO's with alien bodies.
Far more likely is the usual grift. There is money to be made writing books, and going on TV's shows talking shit.
I personally would say it's quite easy to see how information could have not come out. An ossified, compartmentalised bureaucracy, then protected by layers of fearsome secrecy legislation.
A large conspiracy, state-within-a-state, or anything like that, is not necessarily part of this sort of compartmentalisation. Something shut away and forgotten about by most, and then with very limited access, to only people who have specific cause to, by their job description, such, perhaps, as Grusch.
I think that's just too Hollywood. Stuff leaks - proper stuff, not drunken bar tales.
There have been a certain number of insider reports for years, but most of the people have been considered axiomatically and culturally crazy.
As the Slate article mentions, if any of this is true, it would be more than a paradigm shift, and more like a complete reordering of reality, for many people.
The problem with so much of this is that UFO's and little green men who became grey aliens is that its a cultural phenomena. People in the middle ages saw things they didn't understand and thought it was angels. After the second world war we saw an explosion of things flying around (aeroplanes, then satellites) and people started to misidentify them. Arnold didn't see flying saucers, he described things skipping like a saucer, yet that story became the flying saucer genesis. And so throughout the fifties and sixties people saw saucer shapes.
TV and film play a part - Close Encounters of the Third Kind caused a huge upsurge in UFO sightings. And aliens became greys, something that followed through into the X-files. The X-files convinced people that a government could cover up a huge conspiracy (aliens and here, are malevalent and experimenting on humans). And now we see this playing out with with yet another grift merchant spinning tales.
Its possible Grusch believes what he has been told and is reporting. Its possible he is being played (i'd argue likely). But what is less likely is that alien races in all their different forms have been visiting the Earth since the 1940's with an ever changing shape and ever changing craft.
I'd love to be wrong. If aliens are here and it is revealed is will change EVERYTHING. But don't hold your breath.
I've posted before a map of reported UFO sightings. They're massively weighted towards the Anglosphere.
I somehow suspect it isn't a £1.3m home in Hampshire. Not if you can afford a RR and helicopter and it appears to have a large plot, lake and covered swimming pool.
We will see. From all the chat I'm expecting NOTHING that hasn't been alleged before, and ZERO actual evidence. Grusch himself has seen ZERO, he is relating takes told to him.
Keep believing folks, if it floats you boat, but don't expect an earth shattering revelation any time soon...
A lot of it may depend on whether they can get names and information from the U.S. Inspector-General of Intelligence.
He seems to have collecting names and evidence for about three years now.
I just don't see anything beyond what we have seen many times before. Unless you subscribe to the X-files state within a state cover-up, its hard to see how this stuff hasn't come out, if there really are crashed UFO's with alien bodies.
Far more likely is the usual grift. There is money to be made writing books, and going on TV's shows talking shit.
I personally would say it's quite easy to see how information could have not come out. An ossified, compartmentalised bureaucracy, then protected by layers of fearsome secrecy legislation.
A large conspiracy, state-within-a-state, or anything like that, is not necessarily part of this sort of compartmentalisation. Something shut away and forgotten about by most, and then with very limited access, to only people who have specific cause to, by their job description, such, perhaps, as Grusch.
I think that's just too Hollywood. Stuff leaks - proper stuff, not drunken bar tales.
Every month or so, @Leon and @WhisperingOracle whip themselves up in an orgy of excitement over the *next* news they're sure will come out. And each time, there's much heat but little light.
Little green men having the tech to travel vast distances to our planet, then being seen - or even crashing many times in just one or two countries - is truly extraordinary, and requires truly extraordinary evidence.
There isn't any. Occam's razor applies.
There is of course the explanation that it is a bunch of drunk teenage aliens out for a laugh. Let's go and find the guy who lives by himself and buzz him. You know the guy everyone thinks is a bit weird. Let's fly across the bow of a USAF plane but in such a way that any video is blurred.
The distances are too vast. If any aliens happened to head our way in some sort of ark ship it would be very very clear and very very obvious.
What about the ant in the sand below the Mohave desert theory.
There are ants three metres below in the sand happily living out their lives with their colonies and whatnot and no human ever found them hence humans don't exist.
Or then there's the turtles.
You're misreading what I've written.
It's likely aliens are out there, it's very unlikely they'll make contact with us. Space is vast and the speed limit (c) is extremely slow for the size.
As I am often called a pessimist, though I think there are good reasons for pessimism on the subject of climate change and whether mankind will actually do anything to stop it. There is a bright note in that a sea level rise of several metres means I will be living in a beach front property.
Rather depends exactly how much it rises, and won't you be having rather a lot of people living in your garden shed?
It wont rise past my house I doubt and nope don't have a garden shed so they can go live in london
"It wont rise past my house I doubt"
Didn't know you lived on a boat, Pagan
I am 60 metres above sea level so it is unlikely
Complete melting of antarctica would do it. As you say, unlikely.
That would potentially happen within a thousand or so years on current CO2 loadings, though of course it's hard to imagine what human society would look like in a thousand years. Indeed it's hard to imagine what human society will look like in a hundred years. It's possible we'll all just be data by then. One big neural net.
In the shorter (i.e. during 21st century) term the really worrying thing is the knock-on impacts we'll get from warming, not just the natural disasters but the human social upheavals: notably warfare, migration and refugee crises, revolutions etc. It's possible that climate change rather than being the proximate cause for human society collapsing becomes the trigger for other proximate causes. After all we've managed just under 80 years of no nuclear attacks since Nagasaki but not without several near misses.
I am personally somewhat optimistic that the combination of stabilising/declining global population and technological change towards net zero will spare us the worst. 2.5C warming perhaps. Catastrophic in many ways but not as bad as 3C, which in turn isn't as back as 4C and so on.
That's one of the good things about climate change mitigation. It isn't a binary issue. Every bit of mitigation makes things somewhat less bad than they might otherwise have been. We are already undershooting the BAU emissions projections from the 1990s so we're already better that worst case scenario.
What do you envisage the scenario for the climate wars will be and when do you think it will transpire.
We will see. From all the chat I'm expecting NOTHING that hasn't been alleged before, and ZERO actual evidence. Grusch himself has seen ZERO, he is relating takes told to him.
Keep believing folks, if it floats you boat, but don't expect an earth shattering revelation any time soon...
A lot of it may depend on whether they can get names and information from the U.S. Inspector-General of Intelligence.
He seems to have collecting names and evidence for about three years now.
I just don't see anything beyond what we have seen many times before. Unless you subscribe to the X-files state within a state cover-up, its hard to see how this stuff hasn't come out, if there really are crashed UFO's with alien bodies.
Far more likely is the usual grift. There is money to be made writing books, and going on TV's shows talking shit.
I personally would say it's quite easy to see how information could have not come out. An ossified, compartmentalised bureaucracy, then protected by layers of fearsome secrecy legislation.
A large conspiracy, state-within-a-state, or anything like that, is not necessarily part of this sort of compartmentalisation. Something shut away and forgotten about by most, and then with very limited access, to only people who have specific cause to, by their job description, such, perhaps, as Grusch.
I think that's just too Hollywood. Stuff leaks - proper stuff, not drunken bar tales.
Every month or so, @Leon and @WhisperingOracle whip themselves up in an orgy of excitement over the *next* news they're sure will come out. And each time, there's much heat but little light.
Little green men having the tech to travel vast distances to our planet, then being seen - or even crashing many times in just one or two countries - is truly extraordinary, and requires truly extraordinary evidence.
There isn't any. Occam's razor applies.
There is of course the explanation that it is a bunch of drunk teenage aliens out for a laugh. Let's go and find the guy who lives by himself and buzz him. You know the guy everyone thinks is a bit weird. Let's fly across the bow of a USAF plane but in such a way that any video is blurred.
The distances between stars are vast. The tech needed to traverse those distances would require a phenomenal vastness of engineering. If any aliens happened to head our way in some sort of intergenerational ark it would be very very clear and very very obvious.
Or they are from a parallel dimension. And they’ve been here all along, and given our limited bandwidth we only occasionally glimpse them, the same way we cannot begin to smell the 10,000 aromas available to a dog
Yes, that sounds insane
But then, rational physicists calmly discuss the idea of infinite parallel universes - or even the idea we are simply players in a simulation - and no one demands that they be locked up for lunacy
We will see. From all the chat I'm expecting NOTHING that hasn't been alleged before, and ZERO actual evidence. Grusch himself has seen ZERO, he is relating takes told to him.
Keep believing folks, if it floats you boat, but don't expect an earth shattering revelation any time soon...
A lot of it may depend on whether they can get names and information from the U.S. Inspector-General of Intelligence.
He seems to have collecting names and evidence for about three years now.
I just don't see anything beyond what we have seen many times before. Unless you subscribe to the X-files state within a state cover-up, its hard to see how this stuff hasn't come out, if there really are crashed UFO's with alien bodies.
Far more likely is the usual grift. There is money to be made writing books, and going on TV's shows talking shit.
I personally would say it's quite easy to see how information could have not come out. An ossified, compartmentalised bureaucracy, then protected by layers of fearsome secrecy legislation.
A large conspiracy, state-within-a-state, or anything like that, is not necessarily part of this sort of compartmentalisation. Something shut away and forgotten about by most, and then with very limited access, to only people who have specific cause to, by their job description, such, perhaps, as Grusch.
I think that's just too Hollywood. Stuff leaks - proper stuff, not drunken bar tales.
Every month or so, @Leon and @WhisperingOracle whip themselves up in an orgy of excitement over the *next* news they're sure will come out. And each time, there's much heat but little light.
Little green men having the tech to travel vast distances to our planet, then being seen - or even crashing many times in just one or two countries - is truly extraordinary, and requires truly extraordinary evidence.
There isn't any. Occam's razor applies.
There is of course the explanation that it is a bunch of drunk teenage aliens out for a laugh. Let's go and find the guy who lives by himself and buzz him. You know the guy everyone thinks is a bit weird. Let's fly across the bow of a USAF plane but in such a way that any video is blurred.
The distances are too vast. If any aliens happened to head our way in some sort of ark ship it would be very very clear and very very obvious.
What about the ant in the sand below the Mohave desert theory.
There are ants three metres below in the sand happily living out their lives with their colonies and whatnot and no human ever found them hence humans don't exist.
Or then there's the turtles.
You're misreading what I've written.
It's likely aliens are out there, it's very unlikely they'll make contact with us. Space is vast and the speed limit (c) is extremely slow for the size.
Ah yes indeed that could easily be the case. Bonkers as it is to envisage the universe it is equally bonkers to think that we are the very only life forms in existence.
I note the discussion on aliens. I saw this the other day and thought you would like it. The aviation journalist Alex Hollings has been youtubing for some time, and I follow him because fast plan be sexy now. He also saw a UFO in his childhood and tangentially covers the whole kerfuffle.
One of the climate feedback loops just went off the chart. Antarctic sea ice extent in southern hemisphere summers is highly variable, but it always recovers in the winter. Thus year it hasn't.
(*six sigma would be once in a billion years - actually five sigma.)
The problem with alarmism is when everything is a crisis nothing is.
It's a fair point, but when one is faced with orbital photos of Australia on fire in 2020 and Mediterranean islands on fire in 2023, one does start wondering if this hug-a-penguin green crap might actually have a bit of a point.
If the UK cut its carbon footprint to zero it would stop precisely nothing,
That's why I always throw my litter in the street, what difference does it make when 99.9% of litter is dropped by other people?
LOL
thats why we burn all that lignite in our coal fired power stations and have 7 of Europes top ten polluters on our land
Weve picked up our litter it would be nice if you Germans could do the same given you produce twice as much carbon as we do.
Deutschland - Spitzenverschmutzer
The German record is terrible. Obviously that is entirely my fault and I will never disagree with you again. Sorry.
Germany's record is terrible.
You lecture the rest of us while chugging out lignite emissions and buying Putins oil and gas. Your green agenda is going backwards because of public resistance to - heat pumps will go tits up here too - and you have closed down all your nuclear .
There are many places one could take a note of the green agenda, but Germany isnt really one of them.
Germany doesn't buy any Russian gas any more, does it? In fact, if you want to be really picky and look at the Enerdata stats, we've bought more Russian gas* than the Germans in 2023.
* Albeit we probably didn't know it was Russian, because we bought if from a UAE broker
You mean we didn't 'know' it was Russian.
Guangzhou is a chemical weapons plant masquerading as a fertilizer plant. We know this. The Chinese know that we know. But we make believe that we don't know and the Chinese make believe that they believe that we don't know, but know that we know. Everybody knows.
I somehow suspect it isn't a £1.3m home in Hampshire. Not if you can afford a RR and helicopter and it appears to have a large plot, lake and covered swimming pool.
We will see. From all the chat I'm expecting NOTHING that hasn't been alleged before, and ZERO actual evidence. Grusch himself has seen ZERO, he is relating takes told to him.
Keep believing folks, if it floats you boat, but don't expect an earth shattering revelation any time soon...
A lot of it may depend on whether they can get names and information from the U.S. Inspector-General of Intelligence.
He seems to have collecting names and evidence for about three years now.
I just don't see anything beyond what we have seen many times before. Unless you subscribe to the X-files state within a state cover-up, its hard to see how this stuff hasn't come out, if there really are crashed UFO's with alien bodies.
Far more likely is the usual grift. There is money to be made writing books, and going on TV's shows talking shit.
I personally would say it's quite easy to see how information could have not come out. An ossified, compartmentalised bureaucracy, then protected by layers of fearsome secrecy legislation.
A large conspiracy, state-within-a-state, or anything like that, is not necessarily part of this sort of compartmentalisation. Something shut away and forgotten about by most, and then with very limited access, to only people who have specific cause to, by their job description, such, perhaps, as Grusch.
I think that's just too Hollywood. Stuff leaks - proper stuff, not drunken bar tales.
There have been a certain number of insider reports for years, but most of the people have been considered axiomatically and culturally crazy.
As the Slate article mentions, if any of this is true, it would be more than a paradigm shift, and more like a complete reordering of reality, for many people.
The problem with so much of this is that UFO's and little green men who became grey aliens is that its a cultural phenomena. People in the middle ages saw things they didn't understand and thought it was angels. After the second world war we saw an explosion of things flying around (aeroplanes, then satellites) and people started to misidentify them. Arnold didn't see flying saucers, he described things skipping like a saucer, yet that story became the flying saucer genesis. And so throughout the fifties and sixties people saw saucer shapes.
TV and film play a part - Close Encounters of the Third Kind caused a huge upsurge in UFO sightings. And aliens became greys, something that followed through into the X-files. The X-files convinced people that a government could cover up a huge conspiracy (aliens and here, are malevalent and experimenting on humans). And now we see this playing out with with yet another grift merchant spinning tales.
Its possible Grusch believes what he has been told and is reporting. Its possible he is being played (i'd argue likely). But what is less likely is that alien races in all their different forms have been visiting the Earth since the 1940's with an ever changing shape and ever changing craft.
I'd love to be wrong. If aliens are here and it is revealed is will change EVERYTHING. But don't hold your breath.
I've posted before a map of reported UFO sightings. They're massively weighted towards the Anglosphere.
EPL: made a couple of early bets (already backed Manchester United wach way for the title) on matches.
Backed Brentford at home versus Spurs at 3, and Bournemouth at home versus West Ham also at 3. Both pairs were within a point of each other at the end of last season, and with home advantage the odds look too long to me. Bets with Smarkets.
I somehow suspect it isn't a £1.3m home in Hampshire. Not if you can afford a RR and helicopter and it appears to have a large plot, lake and covered swimming pool.
We will see. From all the chat I'm expecting NOTHING that hasn't been alleged before, and ZERO actual evidence. Grusch himself has seen ZERO, he is relating takes told to him.
Keep believing folks, if it floats you boat, but don't expect an earth shattering revelation any time soon...
A lot of it may depend on whether they can get names and information from the U.S. Inspector-General of Intelligence.
He seems to have collecting names and evidence for about three years now.
I just don't see anything beyond what we have seen many times before. Unless you subscribe to the X-files state within a state cover-up, its hard to see how this stuff hasn't come out, if there really are crashed UFO's with alien bodies.
Far more likely is the usual grift. There is money to be made writing books, and going on TV's shows talking shit.
I personally would say it's quite easy to see how information could have not come out. An ossified, compartmentalised bureaucracy, then protected by layers of fearsome secrecy legislation.
A large conspiracy, state-within-a-state, or anything like that, is not necessarily part of this sort of compartmentalisation. Something shut away and forgotten about by most, and then with very limited access, to only people who have specific cause to, by their job description, such, perhaps, as Grusch.
I think that's just too Hollywood. Stuff leaks - proper stuff, not drunken bar tales.
There have been a certain number of insider reports for years, but most of the people have been considered axiomatically and culturally crazy.
As the Slate article mentions, if any of this is true, it would be more than a paradigm shift, and more like a complete reordering of reality, for many people.
The problem with so much of this is that UFO's and little green men who became grey aliens is that its a cultural phenomena. People in the middle ages saw things they didn't understand and thought it was angels. After the second world war we saw an explosion of things flying around (aeroplanes, then satellites) and people started to misidentify them. Arnold didn't see flying saucers, he described things skipping like a saucer, yet that story became the flying saucer genesis. And so throughout the fifties and sixties people saw saucer shapes.
TV and film play a part - Close Encounters of the Third Kind caused a huge upsurge in UFO sightings. And aliens became greys, something that followed through into the X-files. The X-files convinced people that a government could cover up a huge conspiracy (aliens and here, are malevalent and experimenting on humans). And now we see this playing out with with yet another grift merchant spinning tales.
Its possible Grusch believes what he has been told and is reporting. Its possible he is being played (i'd argue likely). But what is less likely is that alien races in all their different forms have been visiting the Earth since the 1940's with an ever changing shape and ever changing craft.
I'd love to be wrong. If aliens are here and it is revealed is will change EVERYTHING. But don't hold your breath.
I've posted before a map of reported UFO sightings. They're massively weighted towards the Anglosphere.
Why are aliens so interested in the Anglosphere? Or is it, as you suggest, a cultural phenomena?
Huge reporting bias, frivolous anglophone media prepared to print this stuff.
Good question is where would you visit, or land, if you were an alien civilisation with an ability to pick up and decode human communications?
Depending on your intent, you might choose different places:
1. Wish to remain undetected, but enter the atmosphere / biosphere in order to do "science": send unmanned craft to the open ocean, or areas of uninhabited tropical rainforest with sparse satellite coverage (or jam human satellites). Possibly the Sahara too - somewhere lawless where conventional military would struggle to get to, though you might have to deal with Wagner and bands of Jihadists.
2. Want to encounter humans and animals but avoid heavily defended or militarised locations, on order to do a bit of botany, zoology and anthropology: land on some inhabited tropical Islands (but not Guam, Hawaii, French Polynesia, Diego Garcia or American Samoa), remote parts of the rainforest in PNG or the Amazon (Congo too militarised), or remote parts of the sub-Arctic (Canada or Siberia).
3. Want to make civilisational contact and be "taken to your leader": land in Eastern USA, Western Europe or East Asia. I.e. the places that show up brightest at night from space.
Comments
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eemian
While it was certainly a couple of degrees (Celsius) warmer than our pre-industrial recent history, and temperatures in Europe (and other part of the northern hemisphere) at the peak were still above present day, is that true of global mean surface temperatures, since the southern hemisphere looks to have been relatively cooler back then ?
Care to elaborate?
(Locally warmer periods are of course important to get an idea of some local effects, but e.g. sea level would be different with more widespread warming compared to historic events)
ETA: And there's also dispute about MWP temps compared to today, of course. Depends where you look at, for a start
In other words: I appreciate it may be pointless (to do anything)
And
Do you have children (need to think of their future)
And not asking you whether you had children was a pointless exercise.
Agggh - It is so easy to word things badly.
Perhaps we should really thank him for encapsulating the climate change debate so neatly for us.
However, politicians are naturally optimistic and if they really do think they'll get battered in 6 months, then rolling the dice now might seem a worthwhile gamble, particularly if they think Labour's election machine weak and capable of being out-manouevred. Major went 3 months before he had to in 1992, even though trailing in the polls, partly in order to gain some initiative.
And while history might view an 'early', lost election as an error (not really that early if it's after 4.5 years), it would remember a landslide defeat 6 months later even less well.
Deep-fried aubergine with a tomato sauce and a Shepherd's salad. I also ordered Tarator soup and a sort of ham/cheese/potato hock with fresh bread, and lashings of Bulgarian beer at 90p a pint - even today.
Delicious.
They wanted to make it easier for them to sell diggers in Brazil, by making it harder for everyone else to sell anything to Europe.
I do like Daylesford though
There will be Congressional hearings this week. Even Biden’s spokespeople have stopped 1. Joking about it or 2. Trying to ignore it. Suddenly they are serious and open
From a few days ago:
“NEW - White House on UFOs: "Some of these phenomena we know have already had an impact on our training ranges."”
https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/1681044837825380355?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw
Wtf is going on?
The oceans are such a massive heat sink, and the heat transfers mechanisms between deep ocean, ocean surface and atmosphere still so imperfectly understood, that there's a great deal of difficulty in comparing the global climate system then with the one today.
Apart from anything else, atmospheric CO2 was far lower - and we're comparing the then peak with our current point on an upward slope.
In a rare bipartisan effort, Republicans and Democrats want to shine a light on documented mysterious aerial sightings.”
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2023/07/congressional-hearing-ufos
If they can't, there's a chance the process may take a lot longer.
https://twitter.com/realannapaulina/status/1683682165526081537
https://twitter.com/UAPJames/status/1683635533640024064/video/1
Bit of nuance. Uncertainty is important. Reconstructing past temperatures is hard. Take the use of tree ring data and the 'divergence'. If tree rings are a good proxy for temperature, why are they not working now?
Keep believing folks, if it floats you boat, but don't expect an earth shattering revelation any time soon...
Then the first sentence: "The last three Julys on Earth have been the three warmest ever recorded."
(BBM). Oopsadaisy! Surely some mistake? I was going to ask what kind of average they were using and whether in theory it treats all points on the Earth's surface equally, but really when faced with an article like that, who cares? The editor surely didn't.
He seems to have collecting names and evidence for about three years now, with no official denials of this, and the previous IG working for Grusch.
I am not sure this is a helpful approach. The measured data we have ought to be enough, as should the increasing impacts we see around the world.
In short, it may have been the warmest for 120,000 years, but I would put low confidence on that assertion.
"There's little doubt among scientists that we're now probably experiencing the warmest climate in some 120,000 years, even reaching above a particularly warm period around 7,000 years ago, during a post-ice age era called the Holocene.
"I agree entirely that it's very likely the last few summers have been the warmest in the last ~100,000-115,000 years," David Black, a paleoclimatologist at Stony Brook University, said over email. "It's very probable that we've begun to exceed the warmest part of the Holocene."
"It is safe to say that it's true," added Jennifer Marlon, a research scientist at Yale University's School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, in an interview. "You'll find a scientific consensus among experts even on that point now I'd bet, which says a lot."
Marlon noted that during that hotter time 7,000 years ago, only the northern hemisphere experienced some pretty warm summers, "but now we are warmer year round."
Back in 2013, Rahmstorf already argued that the current climate had already surpassed this warmest period of the Holocene. And in the last five years, the case has only grown stronger."
Far more likely is the usual grift. There is money to be made writing books, and going on TV's shows talking shit.
And I’m not a confirmed believer in “ET” - as I’ve
said a trillion times. My point is that something deeply weird is happening in Washington. And this latest chapter shows the weirdness intensifying
The number of esteemed DC people who are now openly speculating that we have probably encountered “non human intelligence” - or at least something totally inexplicable - is beyond counting
Why are they all doing it?
The suggestion that this change and heating is purely coincidentally occuring immediately after 3 decades in which we doubled the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is risible.
Or perhaps it is all those UFOs buzzing about that is over heating our world?
Just that interpreting it is subject to uncertainties.
How does it benefit the White House Strategic Spokesman to say “there is stuff our pilots are encountering, we don’t know what it is, it affects their performance”
Why go beyond “no comment” or the laughing brush off this got before? He’s not gonna “write a book”
Ultimately, it doesn't really matter if 5 July 7614 BC was a couple of hundredths of a degree warmer. What matters is the effect of climate change now on us here and into the future.
A large conspiracy, state-within-a-state, or anything like that, is not necessarily part of this sort of compartmentalisation. Something shut away and forgotten about by most, and then with very limited access, to only people who have specific cause to, by their job description, such, perhaps, as Grusch.
I totally agree that its irrelevant - we have really good measured evidence of temperature and CO2 concentrations, and can see the impacts around the world. Making claims like the hottest in 120,000 is a pointless distraction.
As the Slate article mentions, if any of this is true, it would be more than a paradigm shift, and more like a complete reordering of reality, for many people.
Review (which is very vague, TLDR is it's good) of the first three in anthology form here: https://thaddeusthesixth.blogspot.com/2023/07/review-chronicles-of-black-company-by.html
https://www.marketingweek.com/twitter-rebrand-x-mistake/
I read the book below on the subject last year, which was interesting if a bit evangelistic on the subject (the author is a dendrochronologist so it's perhaps to be expected).
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Tree-Story-History-World-Written/dp/1421437775/ref=asc_df_1421437775/?tag=googshopuk-21&linkCode=df0&hvadid=430975187240&hvpos=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=4955989376061679791&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=c&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9046334&hvtargid=pla-902582009751&psc=1&th=1&psc=1&tag=&ref=&adgrpid=97419295382&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvadid=430975187240&hvpos=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=4955989376061679791&hvqmt=&hvdev=c&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9046334&hvtargid=pla-902582009751
Everyone else has exactly the same access to
googlethe information that @FeersumEnjineeya has. But, as we are seeing with the reaction to the Just Stop Oilers, and a quick look at the M25 at any time of day, the broad mass of British people don't think it's a credible threat.And when old Feersum starts saying: "you'll stop laughing when you have to swim to Tescos before long" then you can see why.
He (he?) is being terribly sincere and really cares about the planet warming. But by his very actions is turning people off the issue.
Will he have the last laugh, paddling aboard his rigid raider as we are all in water wings flailing around? Who can say. My money is on no.
I'm going to see if I can mischievously register that for the Conservative Party.
Well, they're write wing copy cats, that's close enough.
Little green men having the tech to travel vast distances to our planet, then being seen - or even crashing many times in just one or two countries - is truly extraordinary, and requires truly extraordinary evidence.
There isn't any. Occam's razor applies.
This is still the Holocene. I conclude the writer didn't know what they were talking about, as usual.
In the Middle Eocene there was no ice on the planet at all - not even in Antarctic regions - and it was a hell of a lot warmer than now.
I conclude that the Earth will be absolutely fine. 5 degrees warming will not make the planet uninhabitable for humans or wipe out life.
The main risk, therefore, is to society as it is now (and why should we expect to continue exactly as we are?) and to individual species that cannot move easily due to direct habitat loss.
Didn't know you lived on a boat, Pagan
TV and film play a part - Close Encounters of the Third Kind caused a huge upsurge in UFO sightings. And aliens became greys, something that followed through into the X-files. The X-files convinced people that a government could cover up a huge conspiracy (aliens and here, are malevalent and experimenting on humans). And now we see this playing out with with yet another grift merchant spinning tales.
Its possible Grusch believes what he has been told and is reporting. Its possible he is being played (i'd argue likely). But what is less likely is that alien races in all their different forms have been visiting the Earth since the 1940's with an ever changing shape and ever changing craft.
I'd love to be wrong. If aliens are here and it is revealed is will change EVERYTHING. But don't hold your breath.
For much of the population, green is in the same field as woke. I'm not saying it should be, just that it is for many people. Many see it ALL as a moralising cum theatrical wagging of fingers: OK I'll just say yes so as not to make a fuss, but why TF are my grocery bills and rent payments going up, why TF should I borrow more money so as to buy a "new" car, so as to avoid paying "polluter" bills, so as to save the effing planet, why should I buy plastic bags for my kitchen bin when I used to get them free from the supermarket, and how come I've lost the hope I used to have for future generations? Conditions are ideal for the Tories to say when you get to the polling station vote for what you really think is in your personal interests and don't let any finger wagger tell you otherwise.
Meanwhile Keir Starmer had a good LGBT pride month. Fine, but how many votes did it win for Labour?
An honest analysis of the evidence - not the feeble videos and pics - but the behaviour of people close to the issue: is enough to prove that, many times over
For a scientist you are incredibly closed-minded. It’s a shame
Incidentally I see that lab leak has been slam dunked again. The guy who wrote the crucial and original Proximal Origins paper, virologist Kristian Andersen, was - we now know - privately saying “lab leak is so friggin likely, it looks engineered” even as he was publishing the “official” paper which claimed “there is no evidence whatsoever to believe in any lab origin, we can rule this out”
Lol
This wasn't the one, but here's an example:
https://twitter.com/qikipedia/status/1411671138355253256?lang=en
Why are aliens so interested in the Anglosphere? Or is it, as you suggest, a cultural phenomena?
As mentioned, I also think that may be the key to whether this week's hearings yield up any new information. It is interesting, though, as Leon mentions, that the White House is already subtly shifting its messaging on the subjrct.
If the talk of an early General Election gets out of hand, and then it doesn't happen, that's not good for him either.
Remember Bottler Brown?
Probably not, as some humans are incapable of that at any temperature.
As also seen (in a way) in the brilliant film Morons from Outer Space.
Or do the aliens really want to make America great (again) and hence are singling them out for special treatment?
The U.S. is the country the most soaked culturally in U.F.O. lore, and from any outsider's perspective, is clearly the country with the most advanced technological level.
TV and film ply There is nothing close minded about looking at evidence and finding it wanting. I've been a Fortean since I was in my early teens, literally obsessed with ghosts, UFO's, bigfoot, the Loch Ness monster and so on, I have seen the stuff that's happening now about UAPS happen before. Luis Elizondo, MJ12, Blue Book. Its all there, and its all the same. I think what we are seeing is just a new set of people taking an interest, people who probably don't have the background awareness of all of the above.
Or for the deep enthusiast, a Skysweeper.
There are ants three metres below in the sand happily living out their lives with their colonies and whatnot and no human ever found them hence humans don't exist.
Or then there's the turtles.
Wowbagger might be amongst us.
It may be cultural, but then it may also be that for a few decades after WW2 Americans were the only people with the money and leisure to look up and worry about UFOs
Ufologists would argue that it is because the little green men are intrigued by our military tech - or worried by it - so they gravitate to its centres. America for a long time. But now also China and Russia
Or it’s a huge American psy-op to freak the Chinese. This is still my best guess (tho I not at all certain)
I AM certain it is not a normal UFO flap being exploited by a “few grifters” who want to “write a book”. That’s laughably stupid, at this point. This week we will see unprecedented Congressional hearings
Here's a view I hold: unexplained phenomena such as aliens are more likely to be something terrestrial but currently unknown, such as ghosts or past apparitions, than aliens who travelled billions of miles to get here.
But that's also *massively* unlikely. Much more likely is that people make mistakes, exaggerate or lie, and other people take those mistakes as gospel truth.
In the shorter (i.e. during 21st century) term the really worrying thing is the knock-on impacts we'll get from warming, not just the natural disasters but the human social upheavals: notably warfare, migration and refugee crises, revolutions etc. It's possible that climate change rather than being the proximate cause for human society collapsing becomes the trigger for other proximate causes. After all we've managed just under 80 years of no nuclear attacks since Nagasaki but not without several near misses.
I am personally somewhat optimistic that the combination of stabilising/declining global population and technological change towards net zero will spare us the worst. 2.5C warming perhaps. Catastrophic in many ways but not as bad as 3C, which in turn isn't as back as 4C and so on.
That's one of the good things about climate change mitigation. It isn't a binary issue. Every bit of mitigation makes things somewhat less bad than they might otherwise have been. We are already undershooting the BAU emissions projections from the 1990s so we're already better that worst case scenario.
It's likely aliens are out there, it's very unlikely they'll make contact with us. Space is vast and the speed limit (c) is extremely slow for the size.
Yes, that sounds insane
But then, rational physicists calmly discuss the idea of infinite parallel universes - or even the idea we are simply players in a simulation - and no one demands that they be locked up for lunacy
I note the discussion on aliens. I saw this the other day and thought you would like it. The aviation journalist Alex Hollings has been youtubing for some time, and I follow him because fast plan be sexy now. He also saw a UFO in his childhood and tangentially covers the whole kerfuffle.
Guangzhou is a chemical weapons plant masquerading as a fertilizer plant. We know this. The Chinese know that we know. But we make believe that we don't know and the Chinese make believe that they believe that we don't know, but know that we know. Everybody knows.
You need a decent size back garden to do it but not the grounds of Versailles.
Next
Betting PostEPL: made a couple of early bets (already backed Manchester United wach way for the title) on matches.
Backed Brentford at home versus Spurs at 3, and Bournemouth at home versus West Ham also at 3. Both pairs were within a point of each other at the end of last season, and with home advantage the odds look too long to me. Bets with Smarkets.
Depending on your intent, you might choose different places:
1. Wish to remain undetected, but enter the atmosphere / biosphere in order to do "science": send unmanned craft to the open ocean, or areas of uninhabited tropical rainforest with sparse satellite coverage (or jam human satellites). Possibly the Sahara too - somewhere lawless where conventional military would struggle to get to, though you might have to deal with Wagner and bands of Jihadists.
2. Want to encounter humans and animals but avoid heavily defended or militarised locations, on order to do a bit of botany, zoology and anthropology: land on some inhabited tropical Islands (but not Guam, Hawaii, French Polynesia, Diego Garcia or American Samoa), remote parts of the rainforest in PNG or the Amazon (Congo too militarised), or remote parts of the sub-Arctic (Canada or Siberia).
3. Want to make civilisational contact and be "taken to your leader": land in Eastern USA, Western Europe or East Asia. I.e. the places that show up brightest at night from space.