Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Global warming

13468933

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,267 ✭✭✭Shoog


    Yes the majority of the extra co2 is absorbed into the ocean, this is why atmospheric co2 has risen relatively slowly as the oceans have been a huge buffer and sink. However as temperatures rise the amount of co2 the oceans can hold falls meaning a positive feedback loop kicks in and temps rise some more until the new equilibrium is reached at a significantly higher overall temp and atmospheric co2 concentration.

    The upshot of this is that a large amount of atmospheric warming is locked in whatever we do to reduce emissions. We will continue to warm for centuries even if we cut emissions to zero tomorrow.

    Sobering.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,918 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    Sure and it leads to things (discussed here earlier) about the AMOC shutting down, which by any analysis would be catastrophic to the ocean biosphere and life on the surface. Unfortunately that got shouted down by the deniers with their usual "it's always been a cycle!" nonsense. Now we have 'here's some unproven snake-oil that'll save us all!' crowd doing the same.

    Really, all this stems from human overpopulation. More people == more warming. Everything else is the details. I've followed the issues for most of my adult life and to date, nothing's working. So, if you add to the population, you doom your offspring to live with the consequences. Good luck to them.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,593 ✭✭✭cfuserkildare


    So how large was the human population 100 million years ago, then 50million years ago?

    Then 2 million years ago?

    How many cars did we have then?

    Look at the facts, global warming is an event,

    But it is definitely a natural event.

    The earth's surface temperature is still substantially lower than it was before the first glacial period, and it will keep rising until it stabilises.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,931 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78




  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Minister of population control right here.

    Take away every person, every car, no fossil fuels bio diversity loss will continue to cause desertification and all the symptom’s associated with that. You’ll have nothing left.

    Whats better a small town of say 5 thousand people worth lots of small shops, cafes, business and growing, sourcing food locally

    or

    A big Walmart or Amazon that provides everything you need and sources its stuff from all over the world to be trucked in.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Satellite Photos Africa from Nasa

    Enormous Global warming coming from Africa alone.

    Bare sand is like a magnifying glass in those part’s of the world.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,593 ✭✭✭cfuserkildare


    So no counter theory?

    Just ridicule those that don't agree with you?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,599 ✭✭✭eightieschewbaccy


    I don't think anyone is gonna change your mind and we've got a wealth of scientific evidence that humans are responsible for global warming.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 39,645 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    Exactly. The facts are obvious at this point. No amount of acidic comments or link dumps from dubious American sources changes that.

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    this is knepp estate in the uk.

    basically rewilding project.

    there story is a brilliant one.

    they were your typical commercial farm doing everything the way all the expert’s were advising them to do.

    they simply couldn’t make it pay.

    Turned the property into a nature reserve and are far more profitable.

    I believe something like this would do wonder’s for Ireland to help biodiversity & help put carbon back into the soil, clean our water’s & air. Imagine tourist’s seeing an Ireland like that. This is the future, no doubt about it.

    We send 80% of our beef & dairy for export, so would be reasonable to say that we are destroying 80% of Irish land to feed people that don’t even live here.

    Some might say that’s madness. And farmer’s complaining about going broke!!

    Post edited by [Deleted User] on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,931 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78




  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    And it’s gonna get an awful lot shorter if we dont do something about it.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Its a shame such an important issue has lost all momentum, threads on Boards.ie with hundred’s of comments of less importance!

    https://youtu.be/6-M4Hq0MKFA?si=Evwn6UqEqstC8mru this is a new documentary Called Common Ground.

    Its a documentary showing how regenerative agriculture can & is saving the planet.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,267 ✭✭✭Shoog




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,599 ✭✭✭eightieschewbaccy


    Every video you post increases the disinterest in the thread. 😂



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Continue on as we are so until there’s nothing left seems to be what people want.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,599 ✭✭✭eightieschewbaccy


    Says man who opposes reducing fossil fuel use.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]




  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    We have to care because people before us didn’t & kicked the can down the road.

    We gotta start somewhere.



  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 39,645 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    I've no idea what people get out of constantly posting snide comments like this just because other people care about something.

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 288 ✭✭Upstream


    For anyone that's interested in solutions the National Organic Training Skillnet have just announced the lineup for their BioFarm 2023 conference. It should be up on their website soon

    https://nots.ie/events/biofarm-2023/

    This event has ran for a number of years with speakers from a diverse range of backgrounds, including Irish government bodies such as Teagasc and the EPA, NGOs like An Taisce, soil scientists such as Dr Christine Jones and Professor Helen Sheridan, vegetable growers such as Jim Cronin and Klaus Laitenberger as well as Irish farmers who are working out how to apply regenerative agriculture techniques on a variety of Irish Farms, in a real world context. It has also featured Allan Savory and some farmers who have used his ideas.

    @Shoog mentioned that we're probably guilty of looking for easy answers, they're right, there mightn't be perfect solutions or easy answers, but I think it is possible to reduce fossil fuel dependency, improve biodiversity and climate resilience on working productive Irish Farms.

    I'll just leave a few pictures from a presentation from 2019 by a UK based farmer called Rob Havard, who used some of Allan Savory's holistic management techniques on a farm in the UK. He was able to significantly increase the amount of biodiversity by resting paddocks and allowing time for different plant species to recover and reproduce. And as the different plant species reappeared and field covers increased, insects and birds reappeared too. He also used bale grazing to reintroduce native species of rare orchids and grasses from species rich meadows to land that had lost these. It's not a highly scientific technique, it's basically rolling out round bales of hay from species rich meadows as feed for animals, and in doing so the seeds are scattered and have an opportunity to germinate and grow, but it does produce tangible results.






  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 288 ✭✭Upstream


    If I can attempt to mediate here (or pour more fuel on the fire😂) - I don't think @thinkabouit is saying we don't need to reduce our reliance fuels, they are going to run out some time soon if we carry on the way we are. Or as @cfuserkildare was looking at the graph of historical CO2 levels, that the increased CO2 in the atmosphere is not the main problem we face. I am somewhat in agreement with that idea, but I would say exponential / hockey stick type curves / rapid unsustainable short term changes like this are a real risk.

    Rather the main problem we face is desertification, largely caused by deforestation and poor agricultural practice (overgrazing and unsuitable irrigation), and since desertification causes climate change, desertification leads to more desertification, so that's what we need to fix, as a matter of urgency.

    Many proponents of holistic management are probably a bit hard to pin down on the science front. But there are other regenerative farming techniques that have shown quantifiable increases in soil carbon sequestration and biodiversity improvements. But when an argument breaks out online most people on the opposing side seem to see Allan Savory as a bogey man and completely overlook the potential of regenerative agriculture practices, especially practices that include ruminant animals, to be part of any solution, so I hope we can find some common ground somewhere.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,918 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    Is desertification the main problem of global warming? I don't think that follows at all.

    Desertification is really bad. REALLY REALLY bad. But violent storms, sea level rise, species extinction due to rising temperatures seem like the main problem, along with the massive human migrations its introduced.

    Still, holistic management sounds like a nice hypothesis to try.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Im thinking biodiversity loss is what lead’s to poor land & poor land lead’s to desertification.

    And the symptom’s of that includes everything like flooding, fires, conflict, poverty, war, famine’s, migration etc

    These are huge problems for much of the world, things we can’t imagine in Ireland thank god.

    The true problem according to savoury is how humans make decision’s & our failure to address complexity



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,599 ✭✭✭eightieschewbaccy


    Problem is, @thinkabouit thinks increasing livestock such as cows is a necessity to enable this kind of approach. That ends up more detrimental than anything else.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 288 ✭✭Upstream


    Sorry, I wasn't clear enough, I meant it the other way around.

    I think desertification is the main cause of the disruptions we're seeing to our climate. The vast hot deserts are changing weather patterns, leading to storms and increased extreme weather events in other areas.

    It's obviously a problem in and of itself, for the reason you mention, desertificaton leads to human migration due to lack of food and resources.

    There's also some speculation that broken microclimates are a way to explain some desertification. If the moisture and plants are completely gone the water can't cycle

    For instance there's some research that suggests that every drop of rain contains a bacteria or spore, that caused the droplet to form. I think 80% are a single species, so if the land has lost it's bacteria through desertification it has lost it's ability to bring the rain back.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    But there’s no animal’s being managed on those parts of the world holistically, there’s places in the world where only animal’s can restore ecosystem & biodiversity.

    And equally there’s place’s that have too many animal’s on the land.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,593 ✭✭✭cfuserkildare


    Maybe we should be stopping the destruction of forest and scrubland,

    Yeh know, like the areas being torn up and housing estates built on them?

    Many of which were only permitted due to the COVID Emergency Housing program?

    Many of which had previously been refused planning permission?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,599 ✭✭✭eightieschewbaccy


    You coming at this from a different angle after spamming the thread with claims that humans aren't responsible for climate change?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,593 ✭✭✭cfuserkildare


    I didn't spam this thread,

    I started this thread!!!


    Secondly, the historical record shows that warming and cooling cycles have been ongoing since long before the advent of humans!!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,132 ✭✭✭malinheader


    We'll all be long dead in this country soon enough with the amount of slurry being spread and in all weather conditions entering the water tables.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,267 ✭✭✭Shoog


    I always said it a part of any solution. What I have objected to is the proposition that it is the solution. This has been explicitly said here and it brings the whole idea into disrepute.

    Overselling a solution whilst not acknowledging both the complexity of the problem and it solutions is magic bullet thinking and unhelpful.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,267 ✭✭✭Shoog


    Dessertidication is a symptom not a cause.

    The vast majority of the planet is water, the land use patterns have small effects compared to the thermal inertia of the oceans.

    Biodiversity loss is the primary crisis, and one which has to be dealt with in parallel to fossil fuel caused climate change. If we do not address the fossil fuel driven climate crisis we will not solve the biodiversity crisis since it is one of the primary causes of habitat disruption.

    Take for example the migration of fish species to more northern latitudes following sea warming which is causing the collapse of sea bird colony's across the planet.

    Focusing on one issue whilst blanking yourself to the multiple other issues is counterproductive and what has happened within this thread.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,918 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    Can't disagree though what I've googled and read about the research here isn't that conclusive. Still, bringing species back, especially the 'cryptic' things like bacteria and bugs, is good in my book.

    It's a loop: CO2 gets into the atmosphere. Temps go up. Desertification worsens, storms due to acute dryness and perhaps loss of bacteria worsen. Storms (lightening) cause more wildfire. Fewer trees sequester CO2. CO2 gets into the atmosphere. Repeat.


    Trouble is, CO2 is going up for all kinds of reasons, but the one thing I keep coming back to, is more people eating means more CO2.



  • Registered Users Posts: 93 ✭✭Seamus4life


    One single Pinatubo+ volcano will knock the global temps back more than any agreed global treaty lads. I'm more worried about the trillion dollar industries of NGOs that will try to manipulate the facts to stay alive when this does happen.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,606 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    We know where most of the additional C02 is coming from in our atmosphere. It's from fossil fuels. We can measure this using Carbon 14. https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2018/11/isotopes-point-to-the-culprit-behind-climate-change/

    The primary solution needs to be 'stop burning fossil fuels'

    Of course we cant do this immediately or we'd all starve and end up chopping down every last tree for fuel, so the primary activity needs to be to build the infrastructure that allows us to stop burning Fossil fuels as quickly as we can, and then use the infrastructure to allow us to stop burning oil gas and coal.

    Being quite resourceful as a species, we can do more than one thing at once, so we should simultaneously spent resources on improving adaptability, and this involves increasing biodiversity, rewetting drained land, rewilding uplands(not just tree plantations) and using more sustainable agricultural techniques as much as we can, creating green buffers to protect our towns and cities from the consequences of climate change, natural flood plains, forests create micro climates that cool the area and improve soil health and clean water courses...

    Not gonna be easy to balance competing interests



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,918 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    Maybe. Maybe for a short time. Or maybe not - on a hotter planet, volcanic eruptions might have less effect. This is being investigated and modelled, so I wouldn't jump to any conclusions yet.




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,267 ✭✭✭Shoog


    Volcanos are short one off blips on the carbon concentration graph. Their effects last a few years at most. The main point is that volcanos have been constant so cannot account current climate changes



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Can’t be any doubt about it that livestock are essential to keep land healthy in brittle environments.

    My simple observation earlier where I said that if the science is right, & keeping animal’s off land, then Arizona, Australia, Spain Portugal etc (using them as examples )should all be green & bio diversity thriving. But it’s not.

    The only thing working i can see, is holistically managed livestock to restore biodiversity.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,267 ✭✭✭Shoog


    All of those areas have serious issues with feral stock.

    The Sahara was not created by overgrazing - it was created by regional climate change. Your analysis is shallow.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I disagree

    But the bottom line is this, agriculture is having an absolutely enormous effect on climate change & biodiversity loss

    If agriculture isnt right economically, socially & environmentally then we’re going to continue living in a chaotic world and were going to to bring extinction.

    Holistic management is the only thing i find that can bring about the changes.

    take a drive around the country side today & i promise you’ll see over grazed fields, cattle not bunched & moving, hedgerows with all there flower & berries cut, river’s brown with silt & slurry.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,267 ✭✭✭Shoog


    Confusing the issues of biodiversity loss and climate change is unhelpful. Your concerns about biodiversity loss are well founded, but they are not the primary cause of climate change.

    If you want to discuss the biodiversity crisis then please start your own thread on it. It's an interesting and important discussion to have but a distraction in a thread focused on climate change.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    your wrong.

    Biodiversity loss is a huge part of climate change, it started even before we got fossil fuel’s.

    To think they are different issues is like saying smoking 40 cigarette’s a day isnt going to cause you cancer & a pile of other problem’s!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,267 ✭✭✭Shoog


    Biodiversity loss is not the main cause of climate change - repeat it all you like but no one here is biting.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    It absolutely is the main cause, and its caused by human management.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,267 ✭✭✭Shoog




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,599 ✭✭✭eightieschewbaccy


    And you can't produce an ounce of research to prove this claim. It's just gonna be another Savory institute video.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    There’s plenty evidence out there you’ll just have to go and get educated about it yer selves.



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Me & Upstream have schooled ye. It’s you guy’s that destroyed it.

    Ye have offered nothing to it really.



Advertisement