hardtack

Is the Pope a Catholic?

True DC, very true... but I suppose in the case of climate change, you probably don't want to wait to find out... because by then it will be too late.

I don't believe I said that Essendon should be transparent... I said the truth will out despite their denials... much like it will regardless of those denying climate change.

Certainly not PD... but I would have no trouble in believing you're a Patsy.

Safe level of CO2 in atmosphere is 350 ppm - anything over is considered unsafe Just exceeded 400ppm and remained above 400ppm for over one month for the first time in recorded history The last time levels were this high was pre human existence At the Mauna Loa Observatory, carbon dioxide levels have increased by about 24 percent since the beginning of their recording in 1958. Quotes (http://climate.nasa.gov/400ppmquotes/) - but what would they know: Passing the 400 mark reminds me that we are on an inexorable march to 450 ppm and much higher levels. These were the targets for 'stabilization' suggested not too long ago. The world is quickening the rate of accumulation of CO2, and has shown no signs of slowing this down. It should be a psychological tripwire for everyone. – Dr. Michael Gunson Global Change & Energy Program Manager; Project Scientist, Orbiting Carbon Observatory-2 satellite mission - NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory CO2 concentrations haven't been this high in millions of years. Even more alarming is the rate of increase in the last five decades and the fact that CO2 stays in the atmosphere for hundreds or thousands of years. This milestone is a wake up call that our actions in response to climate change need to match the persistent rise in CO2. Climate change is a threat to life on Earth and we can no longer afford to be spectators. – Dr. Erika Podest Carbon and water cycle research scientist We are a society that has inadvertently chosen the double-black diamond run without having learned to ski first. It will be a bumpy ride. – Dr. Gavin Schmidt Climatologist and climate modeler at NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies Scary scorecard: catastrophic climate change 400, humanity zero. Listen to the scientists, vote wisely, beat carbon addiction and put humanity into the game. – Dr. William Patzert Research Oceanographer In some ways, 400 ppm is just a number, another milestone that we are blasting past at a rate that is now exceeding 2 ppm per year. Over time, this number takes on greater weight. It brings home the fact that fossil fuel combustion, land use practices, and human activities have increased the CO2 concentration in Earth’s atmosphere by more the 20 percent since I was born. Wow! – Dr. David Crisp Principal Investigator, Orbiting Carbon Observatory-2 satellite mission; works on the Greenhouse gases Observing SATellite (GOSAT) Project, a joint effort with the Japanese Aerospace Exploration Agency We've put the planet on a high-carb diet for over a century. Time to get lean and go green. – Dr. Josh Willis Project Scientist, JASON-3 ocean satellite mission; Ocean warming and sea level rise expert Reaching 400pm is a stark reminder that the world is still not on a track to limit CO2 emissions and therefore climate impacts. We're still on the 'business-as-usual' path, and adding more and more CO2, which will impact the generations ahead of us. Passing this mark should motivate us to advocate for focused efforts to reduce emissions across the globe. – Dr. Annmarie Eldering Deputy Project Scientist, Orbiting Carbon Observatory-2 satellite mission – NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Current [atmospheric] CO2 values are more than 100 ppm higher than at any time in the last one million years (and maybe higher than any time in the last 25 million years). This new record represents an increase of 85 ppm in the 55 years since David Keeling began making measurements at Mauna Loa. Even more disturbing than the magnitude of this change is the fact that the rate of CO2 accumulation in the atmosphere has been steadily increasing over the last few decades, meaning that future increases will happen faster. When averaged over 55 years, the increase has been about 1.55 ppm CO2 per year. However, the most recent data suggest that the annual increase is more than 2.75 ppm CO2 per year. These increases in atmospheric CO2 are causing real, significant changes in the Earth system now, not in some distant future climate, and will continue to be felt for centuries to come. We can study these impacts to better understand the way the Earth will respond to future changes, but unless serious actions are taken immediately, we risk the next threshold being a point of no return in mankind's unintended global-scale geoengineering experiment. – Dr. Charles Miller Researcher specializing in the remote sensing of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases; Principal investigator, Carbon in Arctic Reservoirs Vulnerability Experiment (CARVE) mission As a college professor who lectures on climate change, I will have to find a way to look into those 70 sets of eyes that have learned all semester long to trust me and somehow explain to those students, my students – who still believe in their young minds that success mostly depends on good grades and hard work, who believe in fairness, evenhandedness and opportunity – how much we as people have altered our environment, and that they will end up facing the consequences of our inability to act. – Laura Faye Tenenbaum Oceanography Professor, Glendale Community College; Communications Specialist for NASA's Global Climate Change Website Reaching the 400 ppm mark should be a reminder for us that carbon dioxide levels have been shooting up at an alarming rate in the recent past due to human activity. Levels that high have only been reached during the Pliocene era, when temperatures and sea level were higher. However, Earth's climate had never had to deal with such a drastic change as the current increase, which is, therefore, likely to have unexpected implications for our environment. – Dr. Carmen Boening Scientist, Climate Physics Group – NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory ================================================= BBC educational resource: http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/science/aqa/earth/earthsatmosphererev5.shtml “The Earth’s atmosphere today contains around 21 percent oxygen and about 0.04 percent carbon dioxide.” “Today, the burning of fossil fuels (coal and oil) is adding carbon dioxide to the atmosphere faster than it can be removed. This means that the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is increasing, contributing to global warming. It also means that the oceans are becoming more acidic as they dissolve increasing amounts of carbon dioxide. This has an impact on the marine environment, for example making the shells of sea creatures thinner than normal.” ================================================= http://phys.org/news/2008-11-theory-carbon-dioxide-danger-zone.html In 2008 levels were at 385ppm… this means an increase of 15ppm per million in just 7 years (so far their prediction of levels increasing at 2ppm per year is precisely on track). The very last sentence quoted below is probably the most important. If climate disasters are to be averted, atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) must be reduced below the levels that already exist today, according to a study published in Open Atmospheric Science Journal by a group of 10 scientists from the United States, the United Kingdom and France. The authors, who include two Yale scientists, assert that to maintain a planet similar to that on which civilization developed, an optimum CO2 level would be less than 350 ppm — a dramatic change from most previous studies, which suggested a danger level for CO2 is likely to be 450 ppm or higher. Atmospheric CO2 is currently 385 parts per million (ppm) and is increasing by about 2 ppm each year from the burning of fossil fuels (coal, oil, and gas) and from the burning of forests. “This work and other recent publications suggest that we have reached CO2 levels that compromise the stability of the polar ice sheets,” said author Mark Pagani, Yale professor of geology and geophysics. “How fast ice sheets and sea level will respond are still poorly understood, but given the potential size of the disaster, I think it’s best not to learn this lesson firsthand.” ============================================== https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LiYZxOlCN10

You consider it fraud (something has not been proven)... I consider it an investment in my childrens' future... maybe you don't have kids? You seem to be concerned with the here and now and not in securing the best for future generations... well, I suppose that is a conservative approach.

Not at all... I believe that Essendon are a club of denialists and that they will be found out and have to pay the price... their time is up.

How... by providing an equally irrational argument?

We all agree that weather is not static... it is just the degree and speed with which it has changed/is changing that is the point of contention. His agenda (much like yours I suppose) is that anyone who believes in climate change is an hysterical left wing nutter, while unlike the left, the conservatives fight for what is right. And then, as if to prove his reasoned calm and conservative approach, proceeds to go on a posting frenzy of seemingly random items from the 1920's and beyond, regardless of whether they hold any water or not. He claims that he shared this particular article because it was informative, yet he chose to selectively cite a very small part of it, to the effect that rising sea levels are not a bad thing as these islands will possibly be safe, while making no mention of the part that states the oceans will continue to rise (and THAT is the real issue). No agenda? Yeah, sure... I am convinced that most denialists (and they are not restricted to the left, by the way) are more concerned about their hip-pockets and saving a few dollars, than they are about saving lives. Pro Dee always loves to take the moral high ground, and would have us believe that he is always right (and I'm sure that in his mind, he is)... so what's the point in arguing with him? I have no issue with him referring to me as a fool for not agreeing with him, because when it comes down to it, that old adage rings true... we do tend to see our own worst faults in others.

Mine and my son's arrived yesterday.

You don't think that if Melksham is sidelined by the drugs ruling, that Wagner might be elevated as his replacement on the backline?

That doesn't fit in with Pro Dee's agenda. Also, it seems that the sea levels will continue to rise and surely that doesn't get ignored simply because these islands MAY no longer be in danger of being submerged. Surely the problem goes a little deeper (pardon the pun) than that?

Alarmists? The only alarmists I see around here are those that are alarmed they might be a few dollars out of pocket.

You "doubt there is nothing to worry about"??

There's a new movie franchise in there somewhere... "Forward to the Past".

Essendon and the AFL are hoping that they will be getting a bulk discount.

Does anyone know what kind of a break in training the club takes over the xmas/new year period? I want to bring my son down to Melbourne during the school holidays, but it has to be at a time when he can get along to a training session. Thanks in advance.

Any interstaters got theirs yet? I'm in Sydney and nothing yet... neither mine nor my sons.

He will run rings around the opposition.

I wouldn't be so sure about that: http://www.climatecentral.org/news/warming-increases-typhoon-intensity-19049 http://www.smithsonianmag.com/ist/?next=/science-nature/warmer-waters-are-making-pacific-typhoons-stronger-180955443/ "Tropical cyclones in the northwestern Pacific have strengthened about 10 percent since the 1970s because of warming ocean temperatures, researchers report this week in Science Advances. According to an extensive analysis of historical cyclone data, nearly 65 percent of typhoons now reach category 3 or higher on the Saffir-Simpson scale, compared with around 45 percent just decades ago."

Munga's holiday snap?

Nothing to do with numbers of hurricanes... most scientists say that the numbers have not changed... the issue is that the intensity is increasing and will continue to increase (and I would have thought this is probably borne out by the fact that we have recently seen a number of extremely powerful storms, including the strongest recorded (I believe). "We should not be worried about the frequency of hurricanes; we should be worried about the frequency of intense hurricanes," said Kerry Emanuel, professor of atmospheric science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. http://www.livescience.com/28489-sandy-after-six-months.html

No, Brett Garsed... played with Farnham at one stage.

Ok, I do remember him as Goose, but didn't know the BG reference... strange that there was coincidentally a guitarist with the same initials. So Goose would have been playing in the days when Chain were backing Wendy Saddington in the late 60's (still remember them doing a live spot on Ross D Wylie's Up-Tight).

"Cheney said his comments of receiving game-sensitive information from Michael Talia were made "in jest as part of friendly banter" with a mate." Shades of the tanking case.