Fall Banter/LibertyBell

[BxEngine]

Gonna be an interesting flight to jamaica next week 

[Santa Claus]

i think it should rain

[LibertyBell]

1 minute ago, Santa Claus said:

i think it should rain

I thought Santa needs snow not rain?

 

[Santa Claus]

19 minutes ago, LibertyBell said:

I thought Santa needs snow not rain?

 

yeah buddy keep telling santa what he needs that’s gonna get you the toy train this year

[rclab]

3 hours ago, Santa Claus said:

i think it should rain

 

3 hours ago, LibertyBell said:

I thought Santa needs snow not rain?

 

 

2 hours ago, Santa Claus said:

yeah buddy keep telling santa what he needs that’s gonna get you the toy train this year

Caution Liberty …… The coal that appears in your stocking may arrive already lit. As always ….

 

 

[forkyfork]

it's black walnut season

[uofmiami]

27 minutes ago, forkyfork said:

it's black walnut season

Squirrels have been around my yard with those for a couple of weeks now.  Always a sign of fall’s arrival. 

[FPizz]

1 hour ago, uofmiami said:

Squirrels have been around my yard with those for a couple of weeks now.  Always a sign of fall’s arrival. 

Mine produced a ton this year.  Probably the most in the 9 years ive been here.

[LibertyBell]

1 hour ago, uofmiami said:

Squirrels have been around my yard with those for a couple of weeks now.  Always a sign of fall’s arrival. 

and the summer birds have departed early

[Sundog]

1 hour ago, LibertyBell said:

and the summer birds have departed early

This is the first time all the red berries on my flowering dogwood have been completely picked clean this early, they were all gone by last weekend. 

[Stormlover74]

Chipmunks all over today

[forkyfork]

2 hours ago, uofmiami said:

Squirrels have been around my yard with those for a couple of weeks now.  Always a sign of fall’s arrival. 

big haul today

[LibertyBell]

18 minutes ago, Sundog said:

This is the first time all the red berries on my flowering dogwood have been completely picked clean this early, they were all gone by last weekend. 

we've actually had a real fall this year!

[donsutherland1]

1 hour ago, Sundog said:

It certainly doesn't help that on the other side many of the so called proponents of climate change science are constantly saying the world will end next week or that they draft legislation turning what is purely a scientific matter into some type of racial justice issue. 

It makes the very real and solid science behind climate change look foolish and ridiculous. 

Sensationalist headlines do create problems, as they draw attention from the actual science. There's a big difference from, let's say, asserting that the Arctic could be ice free by 2030 when a single ensemble member shows the possibility of an ice free (< 1 million km2) summer by 2030 and most of the members show 2040-2050 for the first such summer. "Ice free" Arctic implies all seasons. 2030 focuses on a single ensemble member. The overwhelming model consensus is 2040 or later for the first ice-free summer. 

When drafting legislation, those seeking remedies often try to attach their desired causes to other legislation to improve prospects for those causes. There are some legitimate climate justice issues e.g., location of refineries in predominantly minority neighborhoods where large cancer clusters or significant particulate pollution exists. However, using the legislation to advocate for sweeping social reforms e.g., wage reforms, that go far beyond such issues, has no connection to the science. 

1 hour ago, LibertyBell said:

But this cautiousness also cripples the urgency for action.

 

In part, this is true. However, science operates on the rejection of null hypotheses. Very high confidence (usually 95% or above) is needed to reject a hypothesis. That's why it took so long for the IPCC to recognize that anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions had been the dominant cause of warming since the mid-20th century. Moreover, the laws of physics responsible were understood since the mid-19th century. The idea that a doubling of CO2 would lead to a large increase in temperature was understood by the turn of the 20th century. Yet, because internal variability is large, the science had to wait until the climate change signal was unmistakably apparent. 

Further, while caution can delay the onset of aggressive action, bad faith actors and weak leaders do a lot more to thwart problem-solving. Today, the reality that the world is warming and that anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions are driving the warming is unequivocal. Yet, key actors in society have doubled down on a desperate bid to preserve the status quo. In doing so, today's political leaders have ignored the bolder precedent set by their predecessors who tackled both the acid rain and ozone depletion issues. Then again, perhaps because Cold War era leaders had to tackle or manage existential issues far more complex and larger than those that confront today's leaders, it's probably little surprise that they were willing and able to tackle acid rain and ozone depletion without finding excuses for delay, much less denying the problems altogether. 

In the end, the scientists have done their job and exceptionally well. Their findings have stood the test of time. Political and business leaders have not done theirs.

Humanity has substantial agency to act today and humanity has enjoyed the luxury of a truly substantial amount of time to address the problem of climate change in a very gradual fashion. Unfortunately, humanity has squandered a significant and growing portion of that time. Any protests down the road that little could have been done to avert 1.5°C warming over pre-industrial levels (which may already have been reached) lack merit. In the future, impacts such as those from a rising sea level that begins to claim neighborhoods or acidification of oceans that reduces harvests of fish, will not be the unavoidable tragedies that humanity will spin. They will be the tragedies that one or more generation of impotent and short-sighted leaders chose not to prevent.

 

 

 

[LibertyBell]

13 minutes ago, donsutherland1 said:

Sensationalist headlines do create problems, as they draw attention from the actual science. There's a big difference from, let's say, asserting that the Arctic could be ice free by 2030 when a single ensemble member shows the possibility of an ice free (< 1 million km2) summer by 2030 and most of the members show 2040-2050 for the first such summer. "Ice free" Arctic implies all seasons. 2030 focuses on a single ensemble member. The overwhelming model consensus is 2040 or later for the first ice-free summer. 

When drafting legislation, those seeking remedies often try to attach their desired causes to other legislation to improve prospects for those causes. There are some legitimate climate justice issues e.g., location of refineries in predominantly minority neighborhoods where large cancer clusters or significant particulate pollution exists. However, using the legislation to advocate for sweeping social reforms e.g., wage reforms, that go far beyond such issues, has no connection to the science. 

In part, this is true. However, science operates on the rejection of null hypotheses. Very high confidence (usually 95% or above) is needed to reject a hypothesis. That's why it took so long for the IPCC to recognize that anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions had been the dominant cause of warming since the mid-20th century. Moreover, the laws of physics responsible were understood since the mid-19th century. The idea that a doubling of CO2 would lead to a large increase in temperature was understood by the turn of the 20th century. Yet, because internal variability is large, the science had to wait until the climate change signal was unmistakably apparent. 

Further, while caution can delay the onset of aggressive action, bad faith actors and weak leaders do a lot more to thwart problem-solving. Today, the reality that the world is warming and that anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions are driving the warming is unequivocal. Yet, key actors in society have doubled down on a desperate bid to preserve the status quo. In doing so, today's political leaders have ignored the bolder precedent set by their predecessors who tackled both the acid rain and ozone depletion issues. Then again, perhaps because Cold War era leaders had to tackle or manage existential issues far more complex and larger than those that confront today's leaders, it's probably little surprise that they were willing and able to tackle acid rain and ozone depletion without finding excuses for delay, much less denying the problems altogether. 

In the end, the scientists have done their job and exceptionally well. Their findings have stood the test of time. Political and business leaders have not done theirs.

Humanity has substantial agency to act today and humanity has enjoyed the luxury of a truly substantial amount of time to address the problem of climate change in a very gradual fashion. Unfortunately, humanity has squandered a significant and growing portion of that time. Any protests down the road that little could have been done to avert 1.5°C warming over pre-industrial levels (which may already have been reached) lack merit. In the future, impacts such as those from a rising sea level that begins to claim neighborhoods or acidification of oceans that reduces harvests of fish, will not be the unavoidable tragedies that humanity will spin. They will be the tragedies that one or more generation of impotent and short-sighted leaders chose not to prevent.

 

Yes, the health problems associated with petrochemicals also needs to be addressed and more than just air pollution from their smoke stacks which is bad enough we also have to deal with plastic pollution which is finding its way into our bodies.

As a matter of fact fossil fuel companies are increasingly going into plastic production to make up for what they see as a slow market reduction in fossil fuels.

Plant based biodegradable plastics offer a future beyond fossil fuel plastics.

 

[Sundog]

That entire OT conversation is the result of our weather being unbelievably boring.  

[LibertyBell]

Just now, Sundog said:

That entire OT conversation is the result of our weather being unbelievably boring.  

Cant even buy a decent storm.

I'm not even a big fan of storms, they're too localized, but seeing something like what we did back in early July would be nice.

 

[Sundog]

Just now, LibertyBell said:

Cant even buy a decent storm.

I'm not even a big fan of storms, they're too localized, but seeing something like what we did back in early July would be nice.

 

I'm bitter about the massive bust that was Thursday haha

[LibertyBell]

Just now, Sundog said:

I'm bitter about the massive bust that was Thursday haha

Imagine if that was snow, WW3 would have started lol

[LibertyBell]

By the way I do think some of the stuff with processed food is an addiction, my parents were big on eating healthy so I never got why some people just can't eat normal food.  But I've been told by people who have been eating highly processed food since they were little that they can't even digest vegetables.  It didn't make sense to me but then I read this.

 

Mr. Moss was able to obtain documents that support this entire story. Michael Moss stated, “What I found, over four years of research and reporting, was a conscious effort — taking place in labs and marketing meetings and grocery-store aisles — to get people hooked on foods that are convenient and inexpensive.” Mr. Moss interviewed over 300 people who had been involved, or were still involved, with the food industry. In this article, he relays examples of how certain foods were formulated to make products irresistible to consumers. Foods that he mentioned in the magazine article were Dr. Pepper soft drink, Prego spaghetti sauce, Lunchables with dessert, the line extension for Lay’s potato chips, and several other major processed foods.

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/04/26/990821079/cheap-legal-and-everywhere-how-food-companies-get-us-hooked-on-junk