Vice-Regent

We should all get familiar with the term "Compassionate de-growth" and embrace a future where our lives are more fulfilling because we have less.

People always get salty about this information. You are a funny man but not very charming. I did not mention global warming but people are assuming that I am pushing an agenda because James Hansen is my profile pic. We are way past the point of being able to pretend that global warming is not already trashing our snowfall totals. The stakes are too high. I understand. Denial is easy to fall into. The weather weenies would die without significant annual snowfalls.

With global temps like this you will be waiting a long time. As well the caveat of the Antarctica see-saw effect.

It looks like Florence will recover at the last possible second with an apparent huge eye clearing out in 3-6 hours. Pressure at landfall will be important. https://www.tropicaltidbits.com/sat/satlooper.php?region=06L&product=vis

They only explode north of 30N when they go out to sea. You know how it works.

Saved for posterity. So true lol.

Anyone wishcasting this hurricane to their backyard is out of their damn mind. Hopelessly batsh** crazy. That's all I got. One of the rare instances where I would rather observe from a distance.

It's the hyper trades blowing through that region. It seems more mysterious than it is. Rather hostile environment but Florence is robust. For reference. https://earth.nullschool.net/#current/wind/surface/level/overlay=temp/orthographic=-48.50,19.21,1231/loc=-45.990,24.647

That 12z Euro run though. Hurricane strike from the northeast. (Florence) https://twitter.com/RaleighWx/status/1036690577566445569

Let's have a political movement for precipitation inequality.

How far away is Jersey City, NJ from the 35C wet bulb limit? That's gotta be no more than 2-3C away. Beyond said limit humans die of heat exhaustion fully unclothed while in the shade.

It's apparent just how rare these late August heatwaves were in the 90s and 2000s. Alot of old unbroken records. Could be another reason for the low amount of hurricane strikes on the East Coast. 40s and 50s were very active along the East Coast.

Who is reporting 100 degrees F? Odd to say the least.

Okay so this is now turning into a historic late season heat event. I'm sorry that I don't have anything more than anecdotal evidence for my claims. Maybe the warm Atlantic is helping some of these stations reach record highs.

You will love the 2040's climatology I think. Just hang in there you won't be disappointed my man.

IF you know where to look you can actually find the solar minimum signal. So far it's been massively overshadowed by AGW.

I did enjoy Snowlover91's posts but it was just for entertainment value. At this point it's clear that climate deniers are putting lives at risk.

"massive death" sounds like the law of entropy. Take from one system to add to another.

You need to understand how many factors led us to hothouse Earth. Trying to compartmentalize climate change has not worked ever. You moderate this forum but you don't delete the ridiculous denier talking points. So frustrating.

What if there were a simple solution to fighting climate change right under our feet? In her new book, The Soil Will Save Us, journalist and writer Kristin Ohlson says there is. “The soil has been playing a mighty role in our climate ever since we've been a planet,” Ohlson says. It's full of carbon fuel that helps plants and microorganisms thrive, but today's industrial farming methods rip up the soil and release huge amounts of that carbon into the air. Ohlson argues that returning to no-till farming practices, which leave the soil undisturbed and carbon trapped underground, will help reverse climate change and solve other pressing environmental issues at the same time. "Everything we want for our planet above the soil line depends on the activity of those microorganisms below," she says. “Plants take carbon dioxide out of the air,” Ohlson explains. “They convert that into a carbon fuel for themselves, but they share 40 percent of that carbon fuel with the soil microorganisms. The soil microorganisms take that carbon fuel, and they eat it and they grow with it and they make a glue with it to create habitat down in the soil. All those activities fix carbon in the soil.” But when humans came along, Ohlson says, we started “messing up nature” — with agriculture, burning forests, plowing up the soil and changing the behavior of animals on the land. Worse, we started releasing all the carbon in the soil. One of the best solutions, Ohlson says, is also one of the simplest: no-till farming. With this method, farmers plant crops with minimal disturbance of the soil, keeping the essential system of microrganisms intact. That helps keep all of that carbon in the soil instead of releasing into the air. David Johnson, a scientist at New Mexico State University, has been doing “amazing work,” Ohlson says, using no-till agriculture in conjuction with dense cover crops — plants, such as legumes and grasses that grow in places and at times when the ground would otherwise be bare. Cover crops have roots in the ground that capture carbon dioxide and send carbon down into the soil, feeding the underground community of soil microorganisms. This, in turn, builds up carbon in the soil, making the soil more porous. “So it's very healthy for the plants, it's very healthy for the land, but it's also removing a lot of carbon from the air,” Ohlson says. In fact, Johnson estimates that returning just 11 percent of the world's cropland to no-till farming could potentially offset all of our current carbon dioxide emissions. Gabe Brown, a farmer and rancher based outside of Bismark, North Dakota, has been practicing no-till farming for 20 years. He has also greatly increased the diversity of the plants he uses on his farm. “Nature abhors a monoculture — it likes diversity,” Brown says. “It's through that diversity that we can sequester carbon [and] put that carbon into the soil. That carbon, in turn, through the soil biology, is what produces healthy crops, healthy animals, and eventually healthy people.” “So we're bringing the whole system together,” he says, “thinking of our farm and ranch as an ecosystem, versus the current production model, which is monocultures and low diversity.” Farming the old-fashioned way brings other benefits, too, Brown points out. Because he no longer uses synthetic fertilizers, pesticides and fungicides, his expenses are a fraction of the conventional production model. What’s more, his yields, based on the amount of grain produced per acre, are above average in his surrounding community. “So we're getting more production at a much lower cost,” he says. “And in turn, we're regenerating the soil, which is the important thing." If farmers start focusing now on regenerative agriculture, they can significantly reduce the need for the fertilizers, pesticides, fungicides and herbicides within three to five years. That means dramatically less damage to the soil and to the many waterways into which they inevitably flow. Asked if he really believes healing the soil this way in sufficient areas of land could absorb enough CO2 to make a difference, Brown is emphatic: “There's absolutely no doubt in my mind about that,” he says. “Absolutely no doubt.” This story is based on an interview that aired on PRI's Science Friday with Ira Flatow. https://www.pri.org/stories/2014-08-25/old-school-farming-methods-could-save-planet Interview attached scifri-healthy-soil.mp3

The debate and subsequent arguments need to be processable by the commoner. There is no point in using such academic language to describe a simple problem with simple solutions. I will be posting more often on this topic in order to prove that the old world is superior to our current arrangement. The idea that we have been progressing forward for 250 years is laughable at best. Life expectancy has increased only because assisted living is more prevalent and the medications are potent enough to prolong the life of someone in a diseased status. The amount of years in good health has largely stayed the same or declined. Quality of life begins decreasing around 55 years for most people and exponentially further each year as one approaches 70 and subsequently ends catastrophically or stabilizes into further longevity depending on the individual. As well pediatric deaths have skewed down the average life expectancy for the pre-modern man in the statistical analysis. I merely would like to present more evidence that capitalism has made life less hospitable for the individual. Of course we now know why this relationship has occurred. Largely due to changes in occupation,lifestyle, and diets of the common western man. Absorb the big picture. Do not get caught up in semantics like most specialists. You are not a systems thinker - don't pretend to be. However your analysis is invaluable. It is a pleasure to discuss a very important topic with a gifted specialist in order to iron out the argument and fill the gaps of missing evidence. If your goal is to make life optimized for the individual then capitalism is the wrong system. If your goal is to extract as much energy as possible then capitalism is the correct system. It's really impossible to achieve both simultaneously. End stage capitalism requires less manual labor inputs but wealth inequality remains indefinitely. The hypothetical system favoring individual prosperity over enegy production does not exist at this time. Communism is a response to capitalism and not a separate branch of economics thus it is plagued by limitations.

Our #1 mistake was letting capitalism and democracy survive. We had many opportunities to remove it. People say communism is less appealing but one must remember that the Machiavellian manuvering of US-based western governments caused a premature collapse of the USSR and Nazi Germany. It's pretty sad when you realize that the two cesspit countries/societies mentioned beforehand would of been more sustainable than the United States. Our priorities and hearts have not been in the right place since the early 20th century (some would say never in the right place - aka pre-history). As soon as greed entered everything else was erased from memory. Politics is relevant but all of the political actions that could have stopped global warming are in the rear-view mirror. Don't like it? Too bad I suppose. Do you realize that Cuba has the most efficient energy consumption per capita in the world? In my private memoirs. I list FDR as the most dangerous man of the 20th century for reasons you may not expect. The same man who put American citizens in concentration camps to perform manual labor. Alas it's in the past now. Everything comes full circle. Once FDR entered the world stage. Madness became normalized and we gave unprecedented control to Laissez-faire capitalism. Unrivaled consumption and waste pouring from every orifice. The American system is only good at two things. 1:) Polluting the Earth and 2:) Building bombs (Killing for monetary gain). The argument for capitalism is that it spurs innovations and responses to problems of significance faster than any economic system to date. What's the purpose of unsustainable innovations causing more unsustainable innovations? This is delusion if not a cleverly disguised form of greed or as the old world would call it - sin. Put simply - Capitalism is a way to deplete the Earth faster. Nothing more. It's not fun, it doesn't make people happier. It's just more efficient at death.

The opposite for me. I moved from denier to proponent. Lol. Although I was 14 when I was a denier so I think that's to be expected.