There is a lot going on that I should be posting about, but I am preparing for a new round of public presentations, of which I give the first tomorrow night in Phoenix. Once that is done, and I can get the video posted, I will be back to normal operations.
By the way, if you like the video, I am available for talks to groups for no speaking fee, if I can get to where you are. My business (totally unrelated to climate) takes me all over the country so I may be near you some time soon. Just drop me an email at the link above.
Ever come to New Zealand? I arrange seminars for a law and economics organisation here, we would be delighted to have you speak.
Break a leg.
It will be good to hear more from you.
THE COPENHAGEN CONFERENCE ON FOOD SECURITY
http://www.earthpolicy.org/index.php?/plan_b_updates/2009/update84
By Lester R. Brown
For the 193 national delegations gathering in Copenhagen for the U.N. Climate Change Conference in December, the reasons for concern about climate change vary widely. For delegations from low-lying island countries, the principal concern is rising sea level. For countries in southern Europe, climate change means less rainfall and more drought. For countries of East Asia and the Caribbean, more powerful storms and storm surges are a growing worry. This climate change conference is about all these things, and many more, but in a very fundamental sense, it is a conference about food security.
We need not go beyond ice melting to see that the world is in trouble on the food front. The melting of the Greenland and West Antarctic ice sheets is raising sea level. If the Greenland ice sheet were to melt entirely, sea level would rise by 23 feet. Recent projections show that it could rise by up to 6 feet during this century.
The world rice harvest is particularly vulnerable to rising sea level. A World Bank map of Bangladesh shows that even a 3-foot rise in sea level would cover half of the riceland in this country of 160 million people. It would also inundate one third or more of the Mekong delta, which produces half of the rice in Viet Nam, the world’s number two rice exporter. And it would submerge parts of the 20 or so other rice-growing river deltas in Asia.
The worldwide melting of mountain glaciers is of even greater concern. The World Glacier Monitoring Service in Switzerland has recently reported the eighteenth consecutive year of shrinking mountain glaciers. Glaciers are melting in the Andes, the Rocky Mountains, the Alps, and throughout the mountain ranges of Asia.
It is the disappearing glaciers in the Himalayas and on the Tibetan Plateau that are of most concern, because their ice melt sustains the flow of the major rivers of India and China––the Indus, Ganges, Yangtze, and Yellow rivers—during the dry season. This ice melt thus also sustains the irrigation systems that depend on these rivers.
Yao Tandong, one of China’s leading glaciologists, who predicts that two thirds of China’s glaciers could be gone by 2050, says “the full-scale glacier shrinkage in the plateau region will eventually lead to an ecological catastrophe.”
kevin,
Good thing those concerns are just hogwash.
Kevin…all that ‘terrible’ warming during the period up until about 1999 when the climate actually was warming (it hasn’t warmed for the past decade or so…) and the fact that the vast majority of glacial melting occurred in the early part of the 20th Century, and ‘sea level’ has only managed a few millimeters increase…well within the range of measurement error.
Sorry, but all the Chicken Little stuff about dozens of meters of sea level increase increasingly appear to be based on nothing more than fearful fantasies.
Try taking a look at the well recorded glacial data detailing exactly what melted when and come back afterward with something a bit more substantiated if you want me to believe those catastrophic predictions.
Even though there’s no good evidence to support predictions of a rise of, say, “6 feet during this [C]entury”, doesn’t it seem likely people just might be able to adapt to such a change over 100 years? People have certainly adapted to worse changes in the past. Are you afraid of ‘damages’, or is it just change of ANY kind you fear?
I recently saw a article about the status of endangered sea turtles in Central America…pointing out that their beaches were awash now. Strangely it was credited to ‘sea level’ increase from AGW…when we know that just hasn’t happened. Other factors were mentioned, in passing, such as the conversion of marsh and wetland inland from the beaches to development, which we know from experience can cause severe beach erosion. And that’s almost certainly what’s going on there! But should be address those things we know for a fact are major factors, and that are (with difficulty) addressable? No, not at all. We should spend all our time and effort trying to address things that aren’t happening, aren’t significant factors, and probably couldn’t be effectively addressed if they were. The result is we lose the chance to actually DO anything to save the sea turtles. So I have to conclude the concern expressed for the turtles isn’t real, but merely an emotional facade for some other agenda.
Hello,
I am not sure if this is the right forum to post in, if it is wrong, moderators, feel free to delete/move my thread. I don’t want to give anyone problems.
I am a newbie to Internet Marketing and I wanted some tips from senior members here on how to bring users to my blog: http://squidoo.com/nikunjgupta
Please let me know if you have any tips for me.
You can mail me at jaketurner82@gmail.com
Thanks, all input would be highly appreciated.
You can also post your view on this thread itself so other members can learn from this thread too.
Regards,
Jake
Hello everyone how are you doing kubota hydraulic problem really good site.