Must read for any farmer questioning climate change

Commodity Marketing

Tools

Must read for any farmer questioning climate change

Nov 26, 2017 | 08:02 1 https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/26/w...&nlid=50975083

To those of you who claim the climate is not warming, or climate change is all good, or even if you are not sure if climate change is happening, this is a must read.

The really scary part is most of the rivers in western Canada are also glacial fed and if those glaciers melt, there goes our irrigation supply as well as water for many of the major cities. What is happening is Peru is what we will face down the road. Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2017 | 08:10 2 A good read. Won't find many supporters here though - too many that call water "soil poison" LOL. Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2017 | 08:12 3 If the rivers are just glacier fed that means that the glaciers have been melting for millions of years so global warming started long before man showed up. Fuckin libtard bullshit. Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2017 | 08:14 4 Forgot to mention that rivers are fed by melting snowpack from annual winter snow. Reply With Quote
jcv
Nov 26, 2017 | 08:30 5 That logic is so full of shit!!!!
What about rivers such as the Red that flow into Hudsun Bay? Can argue about the whole watershed but I know of no glaciers in ND or MINNESOTA Reply With Quote
jcv
Nov 26, 2017 | 08:34 6 Also, what is proposed as a reduction in C02 and Green House gasses, will cool the planet how? Or reduce warming by how much?

Peru has always had glaciers?

The climate is always changing, and will no matter what we do Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2017 | 08:51 7
Quote Originally Posted by sofa.king View Post
If the rivers are just glacier fed that means that the glaciers have been melting for millions of years so global warming started long before man showed up. Fuckin libtard bullshit.
no use arguing with the data deniers on here , wasting your breath .
everyone knows the climate has been changing since time began and never will stop .
and if they really wanted to lower emissions , bio fuel would do that , it's got fuck all to do with lowering emissions
instead they believe leaches like gore and Suzuki and can't seem to figure out its all about them making money Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2017 | 09:07 8 One interesting quote from the article:"A changing climate has long haunted Peru. One past civilization, the Moche people, built cities in the same deserts, only to collapse more than a millennium ago after the Pacific Ocean warmed, killing fish and causing flash floods, many archeologists contend." No fossil fuel use a millennia ago, still had changing climates wiping out people!

Grassfarmer, always stirring the pot trying to get a reaction lol. First, I have no doubt that the almost 7 billion humans on earth affect the planet. Please explain to me how you feel the carbon tax in Canada is going to change the world's climate? How will it stop glaciers melting? Have glaciers not been melting since the ice age? Also what are you going to do for a living when the environmental movement outlaws the consumption of meat? I read an interesting article on the CBC website discussing how it is easiest to lower your carbon footprint. Two points stuck out in my mind, the first was to have 1 less child and the second was to eat less meat!

One other thought, supporters of more government think government is the answer. Look at our Federal government, they can't even develope a new pay system that works. It could end up costing a billion dollars! Yet many on the left think governments should nationalize industry and take over. What a joke! Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2017 | 09:25 9 Nobody is listening to human caused climate change deniers. As I have pointed out before only one Conservative MP voted against supporting the Paris Climate accord in a June vote. You can't even convince the Conservative party of Canada to support your anti science views. Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2017 | 09:33 10 At some point in the past the glaciers were formed by an asteroid or volcanoes or combo causing clouds to cool the earth.
Since the clouds have been gone these glaciers have been melting taking our earth back to where it was prior those major events. As the glaciers naturally get smaller more sunlight is hitting black ground and less ice simply means warmer. It is no surprise then that the planet may be warming and that there may be floods etc. To stop this natural event we would need to replicate these disasters at a lower rate??? Crazy or what ???? Hahaha Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2017 | 09:36 11 Donald trump may have another alternative answer in maybe to get rid of the pathetic humans that need to keep warm and grow food to live by using energy we should perhaps nuke vast population areas to slow down this pattern??? Donald the humanitarian saviour!!! Hahahah
Last edited by the big wheel; Nov 26, 2017 at 09:44.
Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2017 | 10:10 12
Quote Originally Posted by chuckChuck View Post
Nobody is listening to human caused climate change deniers. As I have pointed out before only one Conservative MP voted against supporting the Paris Climate accord in a June vote. You can't even convince the Conservative party of Canada to support your anti science views.
well , you listen and argue everyday . soon no one will be listening to the data and science deniers . maybe after this unusually cold winter Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2017 | 10:10 13 More Sunday morning education:

for those of you thinking glaciers have nothing to do with river flows:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-04-1...nstant/8449508

source of rivers in western Canada:
http://aep.alberta.ca/water/water-co...a-Dec2010A.pdf
Read section 2.1 Rivers in above link. Note first sentence states: "Most of the major rivers in Western Canada originate from glaciers and high elevation snowpacks in the Rocky Mountains..."
Last edited by dmlfarmer; Nov 26, 2017 at 10:14.
Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2017 | 10:59 14 dml, this article proves beyond a doubt that if you cherry pick the place, and cherry pick the time frame, that you can find evidence to support any agenda. In this case, the time frame coincides with the most recent natural warming cycle of 1980 to 2000, and the place, a postage stamp sized area which has no history of agriculture.

Quote from the article: that were locked under the glaciers for thousands of years While I expect that this statement is simply the result of someone with no concept of geologic history, it implies that sometime in the past few thousand year long interglacial period (~11,000 years), that these glaciers did not exist at this altitude, which would imply that it was warmer then than now, then got cold enough for them to creep back down.

So I guess the best solution is to cool these glaciers so that they stop melting. Then they will have no agriculture, no drinking water, no hydro electric, and can all go back to subsistence farming in the mountains. That will be the end result either way. So instead of taking advantage of this brief respite from cold which nature has provided us, which allows opportunities to use water otherwise uselessly locked up in ice, we should do everything we can to keep it there and deny them at least a short term opportunity. Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2017 | 14:00 15 AF5 Are you insinuating that glacier melt is only happening in Peru and only in the last few years?

Fact is retreat of glaciers has happened since the last ice age and will continue until the next ice age (if and when that occurs). And it is not limited to Peru but is a world wide phenomena. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retrea...ers_since_1850
But as someone concerned about global cooling and the onset of the next ice age, glacier retreat should not be a worry to you unless the glaciers all melt before the onset of the next ice age. (this means next ice age must begin within the next generation for the recovery of Peru glaciers and all the people that demands on this water source) However, it is tough to claim global cooling when the rate of glacier melt is rapidly increasing.
Nor am I advocating complete stopping the melt of glaciers. To say such a thing is ludicrous given glaciers provide water and life to farms, people, communities and life around the world. The only point I tried to make by posting the Peru article was glacier melt is another indication of a warming world; especially given the rate of melt is rapidly increasing. Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2017 | 14:29 16 Nope, I just don't see any negatives in the entire article. Glaciers are still shrinking. They are not wasting to precious resources, gravity fed freshwater and heat. Neither one will last forever so good to not let them go to waste. Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2017 | 14:29 17 I guess we better start filling water bottles for drinking or she will be a thirsty summer. Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2017 | 14:56 18 There are two possible scenarios regarding how the the end result when mining an unsustainable finite resource Such as glacier fed water. Best case, it stays warm enough long enough to melt it all agets used for agriculture Before the area returns to be the desert it once was. The only other option is it doesn't Stay warm long enough to melt it, The meltwater stops or slows in the area returns to the desert it once was. Same and result but one-way results in a lot more production in the meantime. And every gallon of Glacier fed water they use, Is 1 gallon of fossil water that didn't get used for irrigation elsewhere in the world. Fossil water which would still be available to us In cooler world where glaciers are no longer melting fast enough to supply our irrigation needs, Or in a warmer world where Glaciers Fed supplies dwindle.
Last edited by AlbertaFarmer5; Nov 26, 2017 at 15:06.
Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2017 | 17:21 19 If you wanted to manipulate data:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weather_modification

THE MOST studied climate in the world, but no definitive answers;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Droughts_in_California

California is suggested to be in an unprecedented wet cycle

http://ocp.ldeo.columbia.edu/res/div/ocp/drought/medieval.shtml Reply With Quote
Nov 27, 2017 | 07:24 20 News just in!!!

The sky is falling again!!!!!

Oh no!!!

[//http://dailycaller.com/2017/11/25/after-30-years-alarmists-are-still-predicting-a-global-warming-apocalypse/[/URL]

The climb down has started because the Anthropogenic Goldilocks Warministas are now using CLIMATE CHANGE to promote their doomsday scenario. Instead of their BS AGW.

Nobody says the climate is not changing. It has ALWAYS changed right from the Big Bang.

Is there anybody not aware that people farmed on Greenland, just a few hundred years ago?

And that the Arctic icecap was far enough south to entirely surround Iceland? Which is why it was named ICELAND.

And that was well BEFORE anybody was drilling for oil or gas.

Glacier building takes decades to happen and can disappear over decades. No news here folks.
In fact, if the climate did not change, Glacier National Park (latest poster child used to scare people) would still be under 3000 feet of ice.

When the glaciers are disappearing in the Americas, it is likely because they are not getting enough storms coming off the Pacific Ocean to replenish the snow in the mountains.
Both the Pacific and the Atlantic are well known to have decadal cycles in them.
And we do not control any of that.

The other thing that affects them is the dust storms that come all the way across the ocean from China.
This dust settling on the snow helps to melt it down quickly.
There are lots of pics of monster Asian dust storms on the net. Just google them.

And finally there is the changing Sun.
We have just went thru a period where the Sun is at its hottest in about the last 8000 years, due to increased sunspots.
Gee, I wonder if that has anything to do with the climate on Earth? Reply With Quote
Nov 27, 2017 | 07:37 21 Rwt common sense like this only entices more cut and paste by the sheeple.
Last edited by binthere; Nov 27, 2017 at 07:52.
Reply With Quote
SASKFARMER3's Avatar Nov 27, 2017 | 07:39 22 For Centuries people like this existed in cultures around the world. The world is ending the sky is falling follow my bullshit and you will live a healthy life. Blah Blah Blah.

Oh a meteor was suppose to hit last week. nope it didn't.

When Al Gore was born 130 glaciers and today 130 glaciers.

Its all bullshit the climate continues to change.

But try to tell a Climate barbie type that wow your brain feels sore after that discussion.

Guess what the sun will rise the sun will set spring will arrive around may 1, the wet season will be june and july will be hot, August could have cool nights or be down right awesome the change begins in Sept and October is who knows then finally Nov comes and it usually snows with Cool transition to winter days then winter is here days get shorter nights get longer and guess what we repeat again with similar results next year again.

WTF are we missing.

Snow in Mountains guess what rivers are running hard most of the year snow shitty for skiing or sledding in Mountains less river water flow.

Dah what are we missing. Reply With Quote
Nov 27, 2017 | 08:02 23 I see Suzuki is trying save boreal forest I guess he forgit about the brazilian rain forest since the do gooders watched it disappear .... Reply With Quote
Nov 27, 2017 | 10:48 24 The story of Lake Chad in Africa is a good example of the difference between water vapour and CO2.

You can have all the CO2 in the air you want and it changes nothing.
It is statistically insignificant.

You take water vapour out the equation and Lake Chad disappears.

https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/LakeChad/?src=features-hp&eocn=home&eoci=feature

Water vapour in all its different forms is the life saver on this planet.

Although I have heard they get too much of it in east central Sask sometimes. heh Reply With Quote
Nov 27, 2017 | 11:10 25
Quote Originally Posted by shtferbrains View Post
If you wanted to manipulate data:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weather_modification

THE MOST studied climate in the world, but no definitive answers;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Droughts_in_California

California is suggested to be in an unprecedented wet cycle

http://ocp.ldeo.columbia.edu/res/div/ocp/drought/medieval.shtml
Now, don't go confusing matters, we all know that before 1950, the climate everywhere was exactly as it supposed to be, and had been stable in that utopian state since the beginning of time. It only started changing since then, and all changes are by definition bad. Reply With Quote
SASKFARMER3's Avatar Nov 27, 2017 | 11:32 26 Yea we do! Reply With Quote
Nov 27, 2017 | 13:01 27
Quote Originally Posted by AlbertaFarmer5 View Post
Now, don't go confusing matters, we all know that before 1950, the climate everywhere was exactly as it supposed to be, and had been stable in that utopian state since the beginning of time. It only started changing since then, and all changes are by definition bad.
yea mind boggling how the flock buys into this horseshit , gore and Suzuki and the rest of the mind benders must be amazed how easily it's done
the reason they didn't go save the rain forest is because the farmers would of shot them Reply With Quote
Nov 27, 2017 | 13:14 28
Quote Originally Posted by binthere View Post
Rwt common sense like this only entices more cut and paste by the sheeple.

They cut and paste the propaganda because they can't think for themselves. 🙀 Reply With Quote
Nov 27, 2017 | 13:21 29
Quote Originally Posted by AlbertaFarmer5 View Post
Now, don't go confusing matters, we all know that before 1950, the climate everywhere was exactly as it supposed to be, and had been stable in that utopian state since the beginning of time. It only started changing since then, and all changes are by definition bad.

You can't be serious. If you are serious, please get lost, you are beyond repair. Did you every hear of the dirty thirties? Reply With Quote
Nov 27, 2017 | 13:49 30
Quote Originally Posted by SASKFARMER3 View Post
Yea we do!
And I know it's true, I've seen the hockey stick graph. Reply With Quote