I suspect the older Dems see that climate may become a dead horse to ride to power as the cooling climate becomes more obvious the next few years.
One of the reasons I'm a terrorist threat/blasphemous heretic on climate is I've been following the science since the major cooling trend in the 1970s. I followed the onrushing Ice Age as I lived with a Weather Cube ( remember those? Remember Radio Shack? ) as I learned to soar ( Al Gore never did ) and read real weather maps & learned real weather science.
The transition from whitewash to latex paint on weather stations took place while I watched and the country got 2-3 degrees warmer, station by station, over the summer, as they repainted all the wood boxes the thermometer the airport meteorologist walked out to and recorded the hourly reading. On an alcohol thermometer. ( sometimes, it was me, when I was a Scout )
So, for me, a lot of the Climate Con has been like being a veteran of a conflict being told it never happened, that I didn't exist, and never was there. I'm starting to get Shell Shocked about the lies.
“We need to act on climate change NOW w/ a *fossil fuel $-free* Select Committee *with a mandate* to draft a Green New Deal,” Ocasio-Cortez tweeted earlier Thursday. “It’s our best chance to beat the clock.”
I can understand her wanting a Select Committee that has no one to represent fossil fuels. Basic facts can really get in the way for Progressives. Much easier if you can just shut those who will use facts out of the room. It's what they've learned in college. Funny thing about "beating the clock" on this. We've been told about the deadline, that has been missed repeatedly for decades now. If they were right, then it's far too late to act. For some strange reason though, being wrong never seems to convince them that they aren't right. Very strange.
We set into a winter mode a week ago. Yesterday I saw 6 degrees on the dash while driving about half an hour before sunrise. Last summer we had areas with snow (not where it was plowed into a pile either) on the ground a week into June. I'm pretty sure we still have Arctic sea ice too. It is a shame about NYC being swallowed by the rising seas though. That was really a shame.
Being wrong is sometimes as bad. I thought I had until this weekend to put in the fiberglass wands that define my driveway loop before the ground froze solid. Ooops.
And my studded snow tires are still in the shed.
I'm snowbound in November, and the actual scientists that watch the Sun are predicting cold in record levels until 2030. Sunspot minimum may, they fear equal the Dalton minimum, or even the Maunder minimum.
I speculate the Chinese ( and Indian ) air pollution levels now equal a Major volcanic eruption, but continuously, not an isolated event. I'm really curious how the megatons of particulates amounts compare to Mount Tambora from 103 years ago....a year without a summer.
For literally decades now, I've been telling the credulous that bought into Global Warming, that "If you really believe, then you can't allow a billion Chinese to have SUVs. And the only way to stop them is to nuke China back to pre-industrial levels, or 1940, in their case. Are you willing to kill two billion people for this cause? Use Nuclear winter to stop Global Warming?"
And for decades the ONLY reaction to those questions has been rage. Never counter questions, never reasoning, never an attempt to find a solution.
That's blind religious zealotry. Period. Conditioned reflex to blasphemy.
He does not believe a mini Ice Age is enough to save us from manmade climate change.
‘There is 40% more of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide in the air now than during the 17th century, and global temperature records are being smashed,’ he said.
‘A new Maunder Minimum would slow climate change, but it is not enough to stop it.’
That last sentence is correct, if misleading. Yes, a single sunspot cycle micro Ice age won't stop climate change. Nothing will. It's going to get cold no matter what we do.
A killer plague that 100% eliminates mankind won't stop climate change. No legislation written by man will stop climate change.
Maybe a few million orbital mirrors run by Elon Musk's robot double could temporarily change the climate, but after his battery bricks and the mirrors vaporize San Francisco trying to stop the glaciers, climate change will continue without us.
A deliberately misleading pile of statistical lies.
What was 30-40 years ago? The warming following the 1970's cold spell. Not one word about how the park compares to 80 years ago during a warm period.
This is HOW YOU LIE WITH NUMBERS. Pick a starting point that shows the trend line you want. You don't even need to fake numbers from nothing or make "adjustments" like NASA does. Just look at the peaks and valleys, and pick your start & end points. Easy, simple cheap, and a Lie.
As far as the Wildlife goes, just look up the history of errors in the efforts to manage the Elk population. Yellowstone is the best example of how Not to run a wildlife control operation I know of.
Unless you count California's criminal trespasser system.
I spent last night at the hunting cabin on the back 40. I haven't really been bit by the hunting bug, but my brother and some of his friends have it bad. They've been hunting our back 40 since the late 70's. Opening day is the same time every year. This year had a first though. The lake had frozen over for opening day. First time in 40 years! It's not uncommon for it to not freeze until the middle of December. I'm sure not trying to claim catastrophic cooling, but catastrophic warming? I'm just not so convinced of that one.
There's an old saying... When you are trying to identify a bird, but the bird in question just doesn't quite match what's in the book, believe the bird.
1) I the local news this morning... Caberfae Ski resort was open this past weekend. Earliest opening they've had in 23 years.
2) This one ties together a number of seemingly unrelated things I've learned recently. It's great when that happens. We have a lake that is shared with a neighboring property. It's the same lake I wrote about a few days ago being frozen over for opening day of deer season. Well, for the past few years, the water has been rising. Considerably! It's easy to see from the trees that are dead/dying in the shallow water that used to be dry. We have a fire pit of large rocks that we can now go over with a canoe. Our lake has always had a stream that comes from a lake just to our south, which is on our neighbor's property. That stream has become a flooded area with all the trees dying. It's virtually becoming one lake. This summer I was paddling my kayak around the shorelines, and our neighbor was there for the 4th of July week camping. I don't see him often and we sat and talked for a while. As part of that conversation, he told me that according to a map that his dad had, the lakes at one time were a single lake. Supposedly, his dad had talked to people who remember it being a single lake. Interesting stuff.
A couple of years ago we were talking to an arborist about getting our property, as well as 3 of our neighbors property logged. He spent a long day with us property owners, hiking around our properties telling us about the various trees in the different areas. It was very educational for me at least. One thing I learned is that when a forest becomes populated with hardwoods, the first species to take over tends to be Poplars. Later, other hardwoods will become established. Well, as it turns out, the area between the lakes that is flooding is mostly Poplars, with just a few other hardwoods beginning to get established. There's simply nothing in that area that goes back many decades. That certainly makes sense if in the past 100 or so years the lakes were a single lake. Interesting stuff.
So I don't have a solid explanation for why the lake is rising the way it has been in recent years. My guess would be a change in climate though. Simply a change in rain fall vs. evaporation rates. While it's never been a single lake in my lifetime, it seems that it was a single lake in the life time of people who overlapped my lifetime. Not all that long ago when talking about climate, but clearly climate can change quickly at times. What is interesting here is that if the lakes are rising because of climate, it is returning to a climate that ended, probably less than 100 years ago. This is supported by the map, people who knew of it being a single lake, and the state of being a young hardwood forest area. Very interesting stuff as far as I'm concerned.
So what do we believe? Is the climate warming in an unprecedented manner as we are told? Or is it returning to a state that we have seen before? As I learn more about a pretty special piece of property that has been in our family since 1969, I see more and more evidence of a climate cycle that has played out before. Of course this is contrary to what we are being told by "experts" in the field. Quite the conundrum! Of course, when you see what the "experts" have done to the official record of climate, detailed in the video I posted on November 15, is it possible to believe that they have lied to the point that we can be having a reversal in a cycle while they are telling us that it's a one way trend?
I hate to say it, but I'm getting to the point where I'm starting to believe my lying eyes over the experts and their temperature graphs. Things around me have been telling me we are at least a few years into a cooling trend. Of course, in flying, there is a saying. Believe your instruments, your senses will lie to you. What does a pilot do when he's faced with the fact that his instruments are being constantly adjusted from their actual readings. When your altimeter shows a constant rate of climb, but the houses on the ground keep getting bigger, you eventually have to reassess what you know to be true. I happen to be in what I believe to be a fairly unusual situation where I have some physical climate evidence right in front of me, and have recently learned some clues that tell me how to read that evidence. It's almost like the land is telling me of a warm period from about 90 years ago that changed the land. If only we had other anecdotal evidence from others from that time period that were in tune with the land and the weather. Perhaps the farmers from the 1930s dust bowl era? Sorry for the long post, but it's been several years in the making.
I'm sure the Change proponents will say your lake is growing because of melting ice caps (regardless of how far inland you may or may not be).
I look at our solar system. Even "those" same scientists will tell you that planets have eccentric orbits around the sun. Over time, planets orbit closer...then further...then closer...then further.
But God forbid you try and incorporate that into logical denial of Climate Change Doctrine!!
Day/night (rotation of the earth) Winter/summer. (tilt of the earth relative to the sun) Tides ebb and flow. (orbit of the moon around the earth)
Why, for anyone who has the ability to think independently, would you NOT extrapolate that the daily/monthly/seasonal/annual cycles would continue to grow in time (frequency), while at the same time decreasing in severity (amplitude)? Day/night is a pretty big, short-term cycle. Same for high/low tides. Seasons...take longer, and aren't AS much of a change. Why WOULDN'T we have cycles that take decades, or centuries...and are extremely minor (but noticeable) changes in temperature? One or two degrees up...one or two degrees down...
Ripples on the surface of water.
Waves of sound through the air.
Global seasons, as opposed to northern/southern hemisphere seasons. Not the tilt of the earth, so much as the total orbit ellipse.
When you live on a big round ball, moving in a big round (ish) circle around a big, round sun...things come and go in cycles.
"When you outlaw the clearing of dead brush and trees because you want to protect the habitat..."
Which specific laws you're referencing? I think such laws in California such as CA penal code 384a prohibiting the removal of plant material from public lands generally have specific fire suppression exemption written into them precisely to protect the habitat from wildfire.
...which is where the crime would be concerning Moonbeam and his veto of the threat maps for the utilities.
If the area isn't documented as a "threat"...you can't clear it.
Glad they kept it natural. Habitat's looking good for those owls and wildlife and humans now, eh? They KNOW the state is in constant seasonal fire danger. They KNOW responsible clearing can save lives, dwellings, utilities, and infrastructure. It's COMMON SENSE.
Which, I suppose, is why Kalifornia doesn't do it. Common sense takes a back seat to some endangered owls, or whatever species deserves saving at the moment.
That's not the greenies' intent...but it does seem to become the end result.
Theory floating around currently that "isn't it funny that these fires are in mostly red communities"...no argument either way from me because I don't have much research (any) into it, nor do I have any verified facts, but it is interesting that someone would postulate the theory in the first place.
I don't know today's rules in the Federal and State treatment of fire risk factors.
I do know that since the Prophet Gore had ghost written his manifesto, that "they" blame Gobal Warming and deny it's a forest management issue.
Since "they" lie, I assume it's forest management.
Ratbuell, yep, there are cyclic long term climate changes related to orbital mechanics.
Also cyclic short term climate change from sunspot cycles. We appear to be leaving a warm spell that peaked around 1998, and entering a cold spell some actual scientists predict may go until 2030. That's Just sunspot/solar cycles.
There's the El Nino/El Nina cycles, a yearly??? Pacific ocean current that comes and goes, but is not yet completely, predictably understood. Mostly affects America. ( but is world wide in effect )
And a very scary Gulf Stream oscillation that affects Europe big time. Lots to learn about that, that we don't know.
Most of these factors have negative feedback. They self correct.
A few, like snowfall reflecting heat back into space, have positive feedback, and don't.
And we now know there are synergistic effects, like reduced Sunspots affect the Van Allen belts that affect cosmic rays, that affect high altitude clouds that affect how much sunlight reaches the surface.
The only thing I'm dead solid certain about is the goals of the Climate Cultists. They want to take your money & freedom, and establish an international dictatorship to rule all mankind.
I know that because when the World Was Sliding Into The Ice Age, the "solutions" were exactly the same as 20 years later when it was The World Is Going To Burn, and now 30 years later, when The World Is Going To Have Weather!
Argues that the Forest Service the last 2 years, under Trump, actually is doing a good job.
But the problems will take much longer, a decade? Decades? To fix, as well as they can be.
Probably a fair assessment. 2 years of competent management can't fix many years of incompetence, or just ill informed policies.
Are locals willing to pay to bury power lines, or accept that the power company will turn off the power, often, when the winds blow?
Damn, that's an easy one for me to answer. I already pay to bury power lines, in slow motion, and resent when the power goes out when the wind blows. For me, that's 5-10 times a year, and what I pay is up to a State committee. If I don't like the price, I'm free to do without.
And I don't have to worry about brush fires. Just blizzards.
Maybe my attitude comes from getting my fall Bill for Propane?
A hypothetical. In two years, we get a new administration, for example, hyphen-Cortez becomes the new President, appoints her choice for Tree Czar, ( I don't expect her to learn any of the agencies of government in just 2 years ) who will blame Global Warming for the cold weather, and demand a no road, no humans policy for the countryside. ( as happened during the Clinton years, but worse ) and reverses any progress made during the Literally Hitler administration.
I think it's safe to say it's possible that four years of good work may never be able to catch up with four to eight years of bad.
I will point out that the power companies may be far behind the curve in infrastructure projects to protect against magnetic storms and war, but they do a darn good job responding to storm damage, with crews from the local area going thousands of miles to the yearly disasters. It might take days to get power back, and people die because of blackouts, ( the poor and elderly most affected ) but it does come back.
And the job of restoring power in a major snow storm is incredibly difficult.
Governor Moonbeam agreed with Trump before he disagreed.
An unfair editorial. What was the California legislature's response to Brown's proposal? Did it become law? Or was it rejected?
No matter what Hyphen-Cortez failed to learn with an expensive college degree, the President, and a Governor, can't rule by decree. They aren't Obama. The legislature/Congress has to vote, and secure funding.
You can't blame Brown for stuff that happened before he got the job, either.
Sure, my opinion is he's a relic of hippie days unrealistic expectations, and an incompetent parasite, but fair is fair.