... CO2 at 0.04% is a 2,500th part of the atmosphere. That means to warm the climate by just 1"C carbon dioxide molecules must capture 2,500"C of heat energy. That is impossible. It also breaks the fundamental laws of thermodynamics. Methane at 0.00017% is a 600,000th of the atmosphere so it's even more impossible. However, the climate is changing. This is because of deliberate geoengineering programmes, in particular ozone thinning away from the poles. Though largely unreported ozone thinning effect is directly observable, this summer you can see a unnaturally bright sun just as we did last year. Under these conditions the pain felt when looking at the sun is not only from the increase in visible light but the much larger increase in infrared. (Look up at the sky and you will see a range of geoengineering operations in progress, these include chemtrail induced cloud or hazing, ripple patterns caused by HAARP installations, bizarre and unnatural cloud formations). Climate change is a programme to force change in accordance with the implementation of Agenda 21 /2030. Current events demonstrate this transition is well underway and will involve massive population cull through injected nanotech (re transhumanist programme). Agenda 21 also sees the permanent loss of all property rights with the introduction of universal basic income (ref NESARA/GESARA) and has/is being promoted by The World Economic Forum. 'You will own nothing and you will be happy' WEF In a depopulated world the surviving brainwashed and controlled population will be confined to mega cities. Carbon limits will be used to restrict consumption and liberty. Meanwhile the re-greened wilderness will be the exclusive playground of the ultra rich elite posing as conservationists. The CO2 hoax amounts to the theft of the world and the enslavement of humanity by a parasitic few. Welcome to the future! _________ I have included a debunking of 'accumulated heat' as it is so often used to explain how trace elements, so called 'greenhouse gasses', can warm the planet. Accumulated heat whilst sounding a reasonable explanation of how heat can build up is rather nothing more than gobbledygook. In fact it shows those using such arguments do not even understand what heat is. When we measure temperature we are measuring the heat energy a thing is losing. In short heat is a measurement of flow, the transfer of heat energy and this will always be in the direction towards the colder. For this reason a thing can never 'accumulate heat' in the way those advocating CO2 climate change describe. The temperature of a body is the measure of heat output, it can never be greater than the measure of heat input. Output = input. When a thing is warmed it is heated to an equivalent of the heat input. If this input is not maintained it will cool. Those that propose that heat can build up to be hotter than the total measure of heat input at a given time either do not understand what heat is or are being deliberately misleading. To illustrate, an object being heated by a flame can never become hotter than that flame, it's temperature cannot rise inexorably to the temperature of the sun for instance. Heat cannot be accumulated. When we think about it common sense tells us this must be the case. NASA and even Nobel Prize winning physicists have expounded 'accumulated heat' as the explanation how CO2 is able to warm the atmosphere. They claim that over hundreds of years CO2 has captured heat energy and this heat has 'accumulated' to produce a serious warming effect. As I have just explained, this is totally impossible and fundamentally violates all the laws of thermodynamics. That respected scientists should support such uneducated, unthinking nonsense is disturbing and only reflects that in terms of being able to think clearly about a subject they have no facility or inclination. These are the Dark Ages of science. Belief has outweighed logic or any critical thought. It tells us that we should not unquestioningly accept anything we are told, that experts can be fools. (NB: be aware of attempts to discard thermodynamics by talking about biology. Eg. 'It only takes a drop of arsenic to kill a person.' This would be somewhat desperate, muddled thinking. Clearly biological processes based on the reaction of a cell are not the same as the laws of physics/thermodynamics). (AS PROOF THIS DECEPTION IS REAL, DISSENTING INFORMATION SUCH AS THIS IS BEING BLOCKED. THIS COMMENT WILL BE BLOCKED, BURIED, OR DELETED WITHIN HOURS. PLEASE COPY).
Never, never drink your experiment... This is a good rule to follow at all times. .. .. Also, the Arctic region must be modelled as a subsystem. When you do this and determine the albedo change of the entire subsystem, you find that the reducing snow on land is contributing equally to the reduction of albedo in the subsystem. In other words, half of the albedo change in the subsystem is caused by sea ice area reduction and the other half is caused by land area snow cover reduction. .. There is a faction of Climate Scientists who are focusing more on the Arctic subsystem and they disagree with the IPCC prediction of 2050 for the Blue Ocean event. (I am an engineer and a student of this group.) In fact, it is this group/faction who coined the term "Blue Ocean event." We predict that this event will occur before 2030. (See full definition of Blue Ocean event.) .. .. I don't intend to scare the general public, but serious students should understand that the IPCC is not the only game in town. Personally, I am very critical of the IPCC for a number of reasons: 1) The UN appointed an economist to head the IPCC. 2) The IPCC has presided over a doubling of GHG emissions. .. .. Other points - I have searched the data sets and have found nothing to support the "Cow Farts" hypothesis. Multiple data sets show clearly that Coal Mining is the biggest emitter of anthropogenic CH4 into the atmosphere. And, China's unregulated Coal Mining is the biggest culprit of all, by far. .. .. Sorry, I'll save the rest for my book. ..
I have a question Dr.... The present situation of widespread lockdown helps in reduction of aerosols and greenhouse gases. Reduction in aerosol may lead to short term temperature rise. What could happen as a result of this? I am no expert, just asking out of curiosity.
@@frankboff1260 I think he coined the term " What happens in the Arctic doesn't stay in the Arctic ." Or it could have been Fran Ulmer 6 years ago:) You might be right. They used to call it Arctic blue ocean "strategy ". Before the term BOE
@bimmjim Oct 2020: A large paper about all the methane (CH4) sources & sinks was published a few weeks ago if your interested (your "Cow Farts" hypothesis). Highly detailed with dozens of experts as the authors.
I would expect that a video of this importance would have millions of views. However, humanity is sleeping and in denial that we are quickly going extinct. When the Arctic ice disappears, humans will soon follow. Do not fear higher temperatures and storms, fear the abrupt loss of human habitat (food, water, housing). Why the entire world is not right now building massive reflector mirrors all around the Arctic is beyond me. Humans are myopic, self deceiving, callous, and stupid.
There are other pages that talk about this, that's why. I would recommend Just Have a Think, I love the fact author is both funny and great at simplifying the science. But there are many others, so it's not nice of you to say that. Millions are following Greta Thunberg, and George Monbiot, Extinction Rebellion and other movements. Besides, plant based diet is much better solution than mirrors in the Arctic.
Arctic sea ice extent went up this year, so calm yourself. It's currently higher than it was ten years ago and higher than the average level of the last decade.
Actually, we just had a big increase in arctic sea ice extent this year. So the predictions he showed in the graph at 4:55 have already been proved wrong.
(for example) It takes the same energy to move 1 litre of water from -1Cº to 1Cº, as from 1Cº to 80Cº. You can do the experiment at home: Put a quantity of frozen water on the fire, and it takes the same time to thaw as it then goes to 80Cº. It is good to see live, like a movie, the extinction of some species, for example, humans.
Distractor. Does that work when I put ice under warm water? Are those time periods still equal? Apparently you believe that even though equatorial waters don't go above 30C despite the sun being almost directly overhead, with no ice for thousands of km, that the Arctic can somehow reach 80C despite the sun being almost on the horizon. If the sun doesn't provide enough energy to warm equatorial waters then it doesn't provide anywhere enough energy to raise polar waters to those levels.
The more the ice melts the faster it picks up speed or the faster it goes, the faster it goes. I think we will all be shocked at how fast it will pick up speed. Humans have a hard time understanding exponential growth.
The arctic is the northern hemispheres air conditioning, after the ice is gone self reinforcing positive feedback loops will ensue and global temperature will rise to that of the Permian extinction also known as the great dying 😉👍 In other words human extinction....
yep, full on biodiversity collapse and environmental collapse along with it, humans wont survive if theres nothing to eat probably have 15 years maximum
..oh yeah ..u r soo right..runaway global greenhouse effect is acceleratong by far faster then these experts are predicting.. ..the number one factor is these positive methane feedback loops are popping up all over and are only getting worse .. desertification..ocean acidification.. ..not to mention modernization..and half the planet is still doing and exploding population growth..it's too late to prev er nt.. ..these methane explosions aren't even taken into the calculus..
@@bflex when I try to explain what’s happening, to simplify it, I tell them to think of a pile of ice on an asphalt parking lot. The spring temps come and it slowly starts to melt. You measure the loss at the perimeter and make a few days readings and calculate the complete loss. But it’s wrong because as the pile gets smaller it melts faster and faster. I guess it’s too simple for most folks to contemplate.😁✌️
If world population knew how important ice/snow albedo is in our system we hadn´t arrived to this point. Surprisingly this year´s ice current curve on NASA´s website is much better than past one. But according to different sources ice is no longer the way it was, so I wonder how representative measuring the ice extent is seeing how thin and fragmented it is. In my opinion it is shameful that having so much technology as we have there is not a daily report of images of cryosphere. Yes, we have satellite data, but why not even real time streamed videos?
I had an aquantaince 20 years ago who was a student at Harvard University. His father was a scientist working aboard a ship in the Arctic. He showed me an article in the Boston Herald--this would have been, I think, in the spring year 2000--which stated that this scientist, the father of my acquaintaince, had found during this expedition that there was NO ice within the Arctic circle. This person had zero reason to lie to me on the subject and the newspaper article was rather casual, probably because we weren't aware of the consequences yet. So, what's the damn deal with that?
The deal with that is, people like this guy are LYING to you. It IS worse than we're being told by most. We're already PAST 1.5 C warming from actual pre-industrial, which is 1750, not 1850 as they're now saying. And "they" are ALL saying it. Why? Because you can't tell the truth. It'd freak everyone out. The absolute truth is, there's VERY little ice left in the Arctic. There's almost NO multi-year ice left, and that's the ice that matters. That's why there was NO ice up there on that expedition even in 2000. Follow Paul Beckwith. He'll explain everything you need to know. He actually coined the term, "Blue Ocean Event." First Blue Ocean Event no longer than 5 years. Outside of miracles....
@@georgenelson8917 Thanks. I don't think that climate scientists are willing to apply that model to our complex feed-back loop driven climate system. I seems all real-time tests of their models come back quicker and stronger
@@andywomack3414 With the models, there was a tendency to select the more conservative values and results. No one wants to believe the problem is difficult to address hence we always had a bias to accept the less worrisome results. Scientists are people too and the worst case scenarios are truly frightening.
@@ricktd6891 We knew that greenhouse gasses would be a problem as far back as 1956 ("The Unchained Goddess"). It is the abject denial of people like you with only conspiracy theories such as it's all just to scare us that has brought us to this. What the IPCC report simply says is that though much of the damage is already irreversible, it will be far worse if we don't take action now. People like you just keep painting us into a corner where it will be far worse. Pascal's Bargain shows that the logical act even if you did not believe in anthropogenic climate change is to still adhere to the recommended actions. Also doing nothing will only prove that you are wrong and foolish, while participating in adverting the climate disaster will always keep whether or not you were right not completely known though quite frankly as the report says human influence is now unequivocal so you've already been proven wrong and foolish by the very nature of what we are already suffering from, you just keep denying it.
I would be very interested in any research that has been done on the loss of the aresol making effect lost during the beginning of the pandemic. Air travel and a lot of industrial activity came to a stand still. How much temperature increase was seen during that period. I mean when planes stopped flying after 9/11, that was only a few days. If the particulate matter take 6 to 10 days to fall out of the atmosphere.
The "planes stopped flying after 9/11" has nothing at all to do with the aerosol maSking effect and that event caused no measurable change in daily temperature over the U.S. for the 3 days (the scientists said it was so tiny they couldn't possibly measure it because daily temperatures go up & down so much all the time anyway). ----------- Nothing has been published by scientists about actual measured effect during 2020 (your question) but there's a published paper about climate computer modeling they did of the projected effect (if they are correct) over the next decade but I've forgotten the result and there's no audience here and you're gone so I'm not wasting time searching my notes. It was something like a extra warming of 0.01 degrees per year building to 0.06 degrees extra by 2026 and then going slowly back to zero extra but I'm just guessing that amount from a scratchy memory.
been scared since university after taking a closer look at feedback loops and the controversy over the climate models. Things like clouds, water vapor, decomposition and volcanic emissions. All increases in warming cause all these things to increase and the feedback continues. But these things are not largely used in climate models because they are considered an uncertainty. If you take a close look in the media its very obvious how they manipulate the facts to seem rosy, would't expect that silly behavior from scientists, but it looks like scientists just aren't really allowed to tell the whole truth if its too horrible. Not if they don't want a media hate campaign or to not have a job, the scary part is that scientists that just do the math without tampering with the numbers end up being called an extremist, even Stephen Hawking shortly before he was killed.....I mean died of perfectly normal causes. Speculation, but he was beloved, he said whatever he liked, opposed those in power, took Jeremy Hunt to court and then he dies. They wont release a full postmortem or give a specific cause of death.
Lady Fibblesworth, lol! I love the name, never change it. Just go to the channel Suspicious Observers for climate change education. It's all peer reviewed and isn't the mainstream, just the science. Probably not the from the angle you're used to but I feel Ben is honest and not a fear monger like everyone else that keeps insisting that snow was supposed to be a thing of the past this year. If you're looking for a more world view after that then go to Magnetic Reversal News and say hi. Neither channel is for the easily offended so if you're the sensitive type instead of the logical one well...
@@saucywench9122 certainly never easily offended. Causing offence is now illegal.... More or less. So it's a rare treat indeed, that is if anyone can ever find my heckles. I guess calling conspiracy theories crazy is upsetting to me, like being suspicious is a mental disorder :)
@@dtz1000 think I am the last person on earth who would just buy into anything. This is an opinion derived from a lifetime of close study, scrutiny and observation. I have a son to protect, the last thing I would ever do is lazily go along with whatever the media says. Besides my opinion is generally viewed as extremism by the media, not promoted at all! My views are not at all popular, I have nothing to gain from this line of thinking. Other than self preservation, and hopefully my family too. But if you want to be a dumb cow laughing at the funny box whilst being lead to slaughter then by all means, enjoy! But don't stop others from resisting due to your own insecurity. You chose the death ramp, don't try to encourage others to go with you in ignorance
So we need to start now , forget rents , mortgages , negative impact jobs and full steam ahead for mitigating and preparing for vast climate refugee numbers and a sustainable vision of a future .
@@ricktd6891 Good grief , i am surprised you go outside with all those stories of the sky falling on peoples heads . Please do not presume what `i` am falling for . Wtf is agenda 21 and why should i care ? no don`t answer i don't care what any climate change denialist thinks any more , its just more noise .
Well, we could just send those illegal immigrants you talk about back to where they came from. But that would require politicians with a backbone, which there are currently very few.
The most widely regarded estimate is within two years - ice free during the summer melt season and at current trajectory, complete BOE within a decade.
Blue sea "within 50 years"??? As pessimistic as you are, sir, you are way overly optimistic considering the the geometric rate of ice recession and feedback loops involved. I say, "How about, within a single year or, at most 2?" After that, love will be all that remains.
Thanks for speaking the truth, Bruce. I’m beyond frustrated with these people who sugar-coat everything. How about telling people the truth? This is why, sadly, I can only listen to Dr. McPherson and few others on this issue.
@@tuckerbugeater CO2 is a greenhouse gas, meaning when the sun projects short waved radiation onto the earth and the earth reflects it as long waved radiation, CO2 traps the long waved radiation in the Earth's atmosphere, increasing the temperature, which in turn makes the ice melt faster. The less greenhouse gases there is in the environment, the less ice melts.
@@Oi.... who said anything about trust? I just want to verify the facts presented, my guy. The fact that i addressed an inconsistency in this video essay respectfully is to both enhance my knowledge and theirs of what they are presenting.
Visit Paul Beckwith and Guy McPherson, all the evidence is presented through scientific literature from completed peer reviewed studies and explained by them. Ever drive your car, closed your eyes and let go of the steering wheel???
@@chrisczyzewski7927 Beckwith and McPherson .... *HAHAHAHAHAHAHA.* The so-called "scientists" who present their "findings" on youtube instead of writing papers.
@@godfreypigott How do you know that?? Once the earth's global temperature hits only 2 more degrees Celsius, NOTHING WILL SURVIVE. I suggest you start watching Dr. Guy McPherson, and soon.
@@godfreypigott Guy McPherson only prints facts given by the top peer-reviewed scientists the world over. Where do YOU get your facts? CNN or Sesame Street??
Blue ocean event before 2026 and possibility this year or next it maybe for a few weeks to start but will increase very quickly unfortunately although i hope i am wrong
I think the NASA prediction for an ice-free Artic summer is well sooner than 50 years. That was the old prediction. Then they moved it up to 2050, and more recent predictions are between 2030-2040. I think the range is generally 2030-2050.
So he's saying that the latent heat of ice transfers heat from summer to winter. If there were no ice then the water beneath would transfer heat from summer to winter instead. Right ? Rather obvious.
Guy McPherson predicted this doom and gloom nightmare with surprising accuracy years ago. You be lucky to be alive in 2025. I think Guy McPherson saw this would happen and freaked and be came obsessed with ICE cream.
@@godfreypigott Go look at your client scientist. They all owned by oil interest. They lie. Your Gods are lying dogs. Ruff Ruff. I not a seemstress but I sew. I not an auto mechanic but I fix my car. I guess you need an expert for everything. The world is warming, guess we need thermometer experts. Guy McPherson is way way more accurate then you oil bought goof balls. Guy says we gonna have extreme storms. Omg look at Oregon. Biblical flood. Just like Guy says. Hmm. Do have anything to contribute? Can you talk? Or just TROLL?
@@trentblack1218 Oh really? So Richard Alley is into oil is he? And James Hanson, Kevin Trenberth, Michael Mann, Gavin Schmidt? I suppose you have some evidence for that nonsense claim? If not, you are no different to the deniers. And ..... "biblical"? *HAHAHAHAHA*
@@godfreypigott Biblical is what the news paper said. Several actually. Do you not read? Repeat after me troll. News BIBLICAL. NEWS BIBLICAL. But the fact you did read the articles, cause you would have known about the flooding. I GOT AN IDEA. Before writing, research. Try it does a body good. As for your climate scientist, I help you out. Follow the money. Search , I know you hate it. But search oil, University, oil, University. You see the link. Your climate scientist will be there. Because you don't research, I am going know. Bye Troll.
@@trentblack1218 Why would I read American newspapers? Do you read foreign newspapers? And I've done my research - there is *nothing* to suggest that the thousands of *real* climate scientists are tied to the oil industry. Of course, there is bound to be one, and you are making your claim by false extension. How many papers has McPherson published? And what ever happened to his Peak-Oil extinction scenario?
I've heard it hot water freeze faster than cold water. And I can see why? Because hot water will steam and drawthe heat away from the hot water in. Bring it down to a cooler temperature. Faster. haven't tried it?
"could be ice free within 50 years"? What a clown. The Blue Ocean Event will be next year. 2022. Lots of newly published peer reviewed papers. Try to keep up.
The intent of the video is to raise issue - the predictions as to when in some respect are irrelevant. Lots of of predictions with a large variation between papers. The latest IPCC report, publish less than a month ago, states at least one ice free Arctic event by 2050
Wow, you are a nutcase. We had a big increase in arctic sea ice extent this year. So the trend he showed in the graph at 4:55 has already been proved wrong.
Talking about habitat loss and then only showing a picture of a lone polar bear is one of the most misleading understatements in climate change discussions at this stage of the game, don't you think?
BOE scientifically predicted next year, definitely before 2050. Good video but the conservative language and predictions is leading humanity over the cliff. This video reviews a lot things, however, these things are happening NOW not coming, or could happen, or in the future, come on man, call it what it is. PAUL BECKWITH explains everything with no BS
We just had a big increase in arctic sea ice extent this year that few in the media have even mentioned. The level of BS from climate scientists also increased at about the same time.
@@dtz1000 Sorry, but sea ice extent is NOT the same as volume, multi-year sea ice remaining in the Artic which continues to decrease at record rates. Yes the artic refreezes when temperatures drop to creat seasonal ice coverage, but then melts again when the spring arrives. Even if the whole artic froze over this winter, it would only be 1st year ice in the area that didn't have it. These areas continue to grow. Do your homework. The numbers don't lie!
@@joekemp83 *Not long to go now, when you no longer experience anything, except eternal darkness, so you won't need to be concerned about the commas any more now will you ???* *Time to understand the difference, between Homo Erectus, and "LIFE The Real Self", which in NOW WAY represents, nor even remotely looks anything like any species, including the human species !*
If deforestation and resource consumption continue at current rates they will culminate in a “catastrophic collapse in human population” and likely “an irreversible collapse of our civilization” in the next 20 to 40 years. - Scientific Reports
@@joekemp83 Because you pointed it out to me, it wasn't sourced to a study. ✌️ You're dealing with a lot of untruthfulness huh? Maybe do your own research. ✌️
The graph he used at 4:55 for arctic sea ice volume has already been shown to be way off. We just had a big increase in minimum sea ice extent in 2021 so the trend shown there is way too pessimistic. Also we had an ice free arctic about 6000 years ago but it came back and we survived.
Ice free within 50 years. LMAO!! WOW is that EXTREMELY optimistic!! I am betting that information comes from the SAME people who now use 1850 for "Pre-Industrial" instead of 1750 as was the ORIGINAL start date for pre-industiral, and pretend that we're not already PAST 1.5C warmer, and WELL on our way to 2C. How about try within FIVE years we'll have the first Blue Ocean Event. And even THAT is extremely optimistic.
1850 was barely warmer than 1750. NOAA says to add 0.3 to their anomalies to get anomalies relative to the 1750 baseline. The NOAA average for the past 5 years is +0.9, so that puts us at +1.2.
@@godfreypigott If you add .3 to the 1.1 or 1.2 that they say we're currently at, you get 1.4 or 1.5. We're already at least AT 1.5. ( I FULLY believe we're already past 1.5, and into the 1.8 territory......it would go a LONG way to explain current global weather catastrophes that they say wouldn't happen until we reached 2 C.) And even if we ARE "only" at 1.4, there is LITERALLY nothing that can be done at this point to stop us from getting to 1.5, so why even bother saying it? No one cares about the average for the last 5 years, as far as it relates to the global average temperature we're currently at. WTF does that have anything to do with the average since 1750? And BTW.....we've been "AT" 1.1 C for how long now? 10 years or so? And it hasn't gotten warmer? C-Mon man.... And of course 1850 was barely warmer than 1750. It was only 100 years of warming, there wasn't very many of us here yet, as compared to now, and we weren't burning oil yet, it was just coal, which, we now know, can and does actually have somewhat of a cooling affect because of the reflective particulates. And finally, things take time at the beginning, and then they accelerate. All that considered, it should be alarming just in itself that we warmed THAT rapidly in 100 years. And then finally, you're not even acknowledging the FACT that they moved the goalposts from 1750, to 1850, while acknowledging that they did by even referencing 1750, and KNOWING that there is a lack of accounting for .3 degrees warming in the information that we get. That's not a problem for you?
@@minnesconsinprepping7856 You mean add 0.3 to 0.9, You work just like the deniers - they represent climate by the extreme lows, and you attempt to represent climate by the extreme highs. The trend is what matters. In the NOAA data there have been only 9 months that reached +1.1 (only 4 since April 2016) and only 1 that has reached +1.2 (none since April 2016), so anyone who says the average is AT those levels is deluding themselves.
@@godfreypigott again, no one gives a shit about the last 9 months. What is it with you and the last 9 months? As per EVERYONE, we are currently at 1.1 C above pre-industrial, which is currently being measured from 1850 instead of 1750. If you add .3 onto 1.1 you get 1.4. It's as simple as that. I'm not TRYING to do ANYTHING.
@@minnesconsinprepping7856 Where did I say *anything* about the last nine months? Do you have comprehension issues? And .... if your figure is 1.1C *above pre-industrial,* why would you add another 0.3? The +0.3 is to be applied to anomalies measured against the 20th century average *TO GIVE ANOMALIES RELATIVE TO PRE-INDUSTRIAL.* Pre-industrial is absolutely NOT being measured from 1850, though it would make a difference of only about 0.1C anyway.
6:02: once the ice is gone in the arctic,the Gulf Stream will slow down , bringing us back to the ice age in the northern hemisphere,, the Jet Stream and Gulf Stream have major effect on the arctic climate,,
Having not gone to the arctic does not invalidate my argument. The latest IPCC report predicts at least one ice free arctic by 2050 and thats based on many scientists who have been there
@@PhysicsHigh The IPCC is a political organization, not a scientific one. Scientists predicted a new ice age in the 1970s and then, I think, Al Gore, based on his take on science, predicted in 2009 a high probability that the summer ice would be gone in 2013. There have been many other predictions that did not materialize. Extrapolation is the bane of science. And so is correlation being equated to causation. Both are well-recognized fallacies. I think you are aware that the tree line in the Arctic has been much higher than it is now. Had you been there, you would have noticed that. That means at times the Arctic has been warmer. There also is a claim that the Arctic was ice-free in the summer about 8,000 years ago. I have not studied this claim sufficiently to accept it. But I don't think the IPCC mentioned this in any of its reports. You realize, of course, that the U.N. has many hidden motives and its global warming claims are vehicles for fostering the goals.
@@colinshaw3776 I gave you a fact. He has no qualifications in climate science. If you want to challenge that then detail his qualifications for me ... year, institution and details of the degree. I already know about his degrees in ecology and evolutionary biology which have nothing to do with climate science, so it had better be something else, with citations.
If the arctic melts we're approaching an ice age? During ice ages the Arctic ocean is frozen solid and ice sheets extend as far south as New York. Also, it's ocean water that's freezing and melting so arctic sea ice melt doesn't change salinity. It's going to cause a dramatic uptick in global heating.
@James Darling @Saucy Wench i am terrified and excited and kind of looking forward to something radically different only because it is inevitable and unknown, ... altho i am also sure it will be awful and sad. if the arctic melts should be the arctic is lost, for sure, no question, ... sai onora. i doubt very much that an ice age will occur and about that salt thing, .. curious that the Oceans carry vastly different "types" of water defined thru salinity what will occur is the balance and ratios of graded slinity so kinda YES the salinity will change in ration or type i think i know why people might worship and fear the Sun, i believe that You will too the arctic is dark for alot of the year so, ... ican only imagine superheated darkness in the future
@Renee L Go to the channel Suspicious Observers and Magnetic Reversal News. Ben does the in depth education on the real climate change science and Diamond keeps on top of the solar minimum check ins as well as future volcanic activity. Also, neither channel is for the faint of heart and they don't promote the sky is falling, lol. Oh, and ignore the talk of the micro nova, it'll make your head spin. If you're easily offended by the truth Diamond might not be you're cup of tea but he won't knowingly lie to you and neither will Ben which is a precious gift these days. Adapt 2030 probably takes his cues from Ben and Diamond, I unsubbed a few weeks back. He kept freaking me out. When it comes to GSM I'll trust Diamond over Adapt 2030 even though he does have valid points.
@@jamesdarling2468 see solar forcing videos on the Suspicious Observers channel. Every video contains links to peer reviewed papers and most if not all can be downloaded. It will help you out. I still consider myself a twelfth grader on the channel as so much of the science is above my head, pun intended, but the climate science I can easily grasp for the most part. By the way, cool last name.
@@-LightningRod- lots of people have already figured out why the sun is equal parts worshipped and feared now, it's been talked about for years. It's just that the wider population didn't know until YT. Personally, I'm not looking forward to what I affectionately call the solar sneeze. The ejecta is plotted to hit the Pacific which means that while we just get the tidal wave the continents to the immediate East get the flash and some wave. Either way from what I understand we'll have plenty of warning if you know what you're looking at. Some pictures of sprites show almost two feet now but most are still showing only long legs so it depends on the geographical location I guess. I'm not at all following what you mean by superheated darkness though.
I had a complete solution we can save the ice and can reduce the temperature not even need ice for that but I want my internet first with all virus deleted next demand I will tell later when plan successful.
Radu, if you want to blame it on humans,I hope you include HAARP and wars,, right now the concern is volcanos around the world going off,that should mess with your calculations, and if the volcano of Island La Palma decides to slip into the ocean, nobody will care about climate change and those that are left will be investing in wool and nobody is talking about the Gulf Stream all along the south and North Americas to Canada, what effect could a tsunami have on it?
@@bobleclair5665 that really gives me hope. I mean just imagine: if mankind originally induced global warming by C02 emission which leads in the first place to some amount of temperature rise and then in consequence desabilizes some critical balance inside the earths crust somewhere (I mean 1-2 degrees increase could already make it, couldn't it?), then a big eruption inside a volcano could take place, am I right? Big explosion! Doomsday! Well, that's perfect! The perfect excuse for mankind it was NOT us: it was mother earth - it always has been...!
@@bobleclair5665 trees love C02 but are sensitive to their environment. As the air warms up (by greenhouse gases) it sucks up the moisture from the ground. Thats too much change for the sensitive trees. Today, if you plant trees you see many die off... my parents own a farm... I am from europe. I know what I am talking about
According to experts (Al Gore) all the ice in Grenland has melted allready. That happend in 2007. The ones who still belives there is ice there is a climate skeptic! The sciense is settled, and the earth is flat, in god we trust and thats that🤣🤣🤣
@@ricktd6891 if I knew who will be removed from this planet I’d know the future. But looking back at the past I can only imagine who will be punished💯 can you guess who has done the most destruction & pillaging across the entire globe with no regrets? WELL IT SURE IN THE FUCC HELL WAS NOT MY PEOPLE!! 💯 GENOCIDE COLONIZATION INCEST THEFT LIES MURDER ETC.
@@penguinuprighter6231 there will be more to fight about, who's to have that land, land disappears and new land appear, i don't really think nature cares, there will be something else and of course disaster for the affected
hahahaha ! most scientists know that the ice is not melting all the time! it just melts when there is too much sun then it all comes back in winter! if we have a cold winter we get more ice ! its that simple !!!!!!
You failed to mention the White Ocean event that always, without fail, follows each September, so that by April three to four millions square miles of ice cover the arctic region.
When the temperature was 2 degrees warmer in the Holocene maximum, no harm happened to humanity. There was plenty of evidence that the arctic ice field remained
@robert hicks Proxies show that the Earth's Global Mean Surface Temperature (GMST) now is 0.7 degrees higher than the Holocene Optimum you naughty naughty naughty naughty naughty little liar you.
This could explain why. It seems like the Holocene Optimum was primarily a summer event, with winter temperatures generally actually colder than today, although up North they were about the same. Since winters were still cold, Arctic ice would refreeze. Current global warming is actually having its strongest effects in winter.
@@brawndo8726 No denying global warming. Just that idiots like you think it's something we can control with carbon taxes. BTW when the ice is gone we will be on the way to a new ice age. Do some research and stop eating the BS.
@@Don-kr5tp Idiots like us would rather that you stop driving your massive Detroit Diesel but it seems that carbon tax is the only preventative measure that YOU idiot Trumpist Deniers are willing to give us.........
Great explanation that deserves a lot more views
Thanks
American prepper wouldn't agree, ( ;
It’s goodbye from here on out.
...
CO2 at 0.04% is a 2,500th part of the atmosphere. That means to warm the climate by just 1"C carbon dioxide molecules must capture 2,500"C of heat energy. That is impossible. It also breaks the fundamental laws of thermodynamics.
Methane at 0.00017% is a 600,000th of the atmosphere so it's even more impossible.
However, the climate is changing. This is because of deliberate geoengineering programmes, in particular ozone thinning away from the poles. Though largely unreported ozone thinning effect is directly observable, this summer you can see a unnaturally bright sun just as we did last year. Under these conditions the pain felt when looking at the sun is not only from the increase in visible light but the much larger increase in infrared. (Look up at the sky and you will see a range of geoengineering operations in progress, these include chemtrail induced cloud or hazing, ripple patterns caused by HAARP installations, bizarre and unnatural cloud formations).
Climate change is a programme to force change in accordance with the implementation of Agenda 21 /2030. Current events demonstrate this transition is well underway and will involve massive population cull through injected nanotech (re transhumanist programme). Agenda 21 also sees the permanent loss of all property rights with the introduction of universal basic income (ref NESARA/GESARA) and has/is being promoted by The World Economic Forum.
'You will own nothing and you will be happy' WEF
In a depopulated world the surviving brainwashed and controlled population will be confined to mega cities. Carbon limits will be used to restrict consumption and liberty. Meanwhile the re-greened wilderness will be the exclusive playground of the ultra rich elite posing as conservationists.
The CO2 hoax amounts to the theft of the world and the enslavement of humanity by a parasitic few.
Welcome to the future!
_________
I have included a debunking of 'accumulated heat' as it is so often used to explain how trace elements, so called 'greenhouse gasses', can warm the planet.
Accumulated heat whilst sounding a reasonable explanation of how heat can build up is rather nothing more than gobbledygook. In fact it shows those using such arguments do not even understand what heat is.
When we measure temperature we are measuring the heat energy a thing is losing. In short heat is a measurement of flow, the transfer of heat energy and this will always be in the direction towards the colder. For this reason a thing can never 'accumulate heat' in the way those advocating CO2 climate change describe. The temperature of a body is the measure of heat output, it can never be greater than the measure of heat input. Output = input. When a thing is warmed it is heated to an equivalent of the heat input. If this input is not maintained it will cool. Those that propose that heat can build up to be hotter than the total measure of heat input at a given time either do not understand what heat is or are being deliberately misleading. To illustrate, an object being heated by a flame can never become hotter than that flame, it's temperature cannot rise inexorably to the temperature of the sun for instance. Heat cannot be accumulated. When we think about it common sense tells us this must be the case.
NASA and even Nobel Prize winning physicists have expounded 'accumulated heat' as the explanation how CO2 is able to warm the atmosphere. They claim that over hundreds of years CO2 has captured heat energy and this heat has 'accumulated' to produce a serious warming effect. As I have just explained, this is totally impossible and fundamentally violates all the laws of thermodynamics. That respected scientists should support such uneducated, unthinking nonsense is disturbing and only reflects that in terms of being able to think clearly about a subject they have no facility or inclination. These are the Dark Ages of science. Belief has outweighed logic or any critical thought. It tells us that we should not unquestioningly accept anything we are told, that experts can be fools.
(NB: be aware of attempts to discard thermodynamics by talking about biology.
Eg. 'It only takes a drop of arsenic to kill a person.'
This would be somewhat desperate, muddled thinking. Clearly biological processes based on the reaction of a cell are not the same as the laws of physics/thermodynamics).
(AS PROOF THIS DECEPTION IS REAL, DISSENTING INFORMATION SUCH AS THIS IS BEING BLOCKED. THIS COMMENT WILL BE BLOCKED, BURIED, OR DELETED WITHIN HOURS. PLEASE COPY).
Cause it's all only people who have open minds and like truth
Spend time with family and friends and have some fun while your at it.....it's gona happen fast so don't waste anymore time.
Never, never drink your experiment... This is a good rule to follow at all times. ..
.. Also, the Arctic region must be modelled as a subsystem. When you do this and determine the albedo change of the entire subsystem, you find that the reducing snow on land is contributing equally to the reduction of albedo in the subsystem. In other words, half of the albedo change in the subsystem is caused by sea ice area reduction and the other half is caused by land area snow cover reduction.
.. There is a faction of Climate Scientists who are focusing more on the Arctic subsystem and they disagree with the IPCC prediction of 2050 for the Blue Ocean event. (I am an engineer and a student of this group.) In fact, it is this group/faction who coined the term "Blue Ocean event." We predict that this event will occur before 2030. (See full definition of Blue Ocean event.) ..
.. I don't intend to scare the general public, but serious students should understand that the IPCC is not the only game in town. Personally, I am very critical of the IPCC for a number of reasons: 1) The UN appointed an economist to head the IPCC. 2) The IPCC has presided over a doubling of GHG emissions. ..
.. Other points - I have searched the data sets and have found nothing to support the "Cow Farts" hypothesis. Multiple data sets show clearly that Coal Mining is the biggest emitter of anthropogenic CH4 into the atmosphere. And, China's unregulated Coal Mining is the biggest culprit of all, by far. ..
.. Sorry, I'll save the rest for my book. ..
I have a question Dr.... The present situation of widespread lockdown helps in reduction of aerosols and greenhouse gases. Reduction in aerosol may lead to short term temperature rise. What could happen as a result of this?
I am no expert, just asking out of curiosity.
I thought Paul Beckwith coined the term Blue Ocean Event?
@@frankboff1260 I think he coined the term " What happens in the Arctic doesn't stay in the Arctic ." Or it could have been Fran Ulmer 6 years ago:) You might be right. They used to call it Arctic blue ocean "strategy ". Before the term BOE
indeed i predict that Social change will also move at Glacial Speed when the stars align
can i join yer faction/
@bimmjim Oct 2020: A large paper about all the methane (CH4) sources & sinks was published a few weeks ago if your interested (your "Cow Farts" hypothesis). Highly detailed with dozens of experts as the authors.
I would expect that a video of this importance would have millions of views. However, humanity is sleeping and in denial that we are quickly going extinct. When the Arctic ice disappears, humans will soon follow. Do not fear higher temperatures and storms, fear the abrupt loss of human habitat (food, water, housing). Why the entire world is not right now building massive reflector mirrors all around the Arctic is beyond me. Humans are myopic, self deceiving, callous, and stupid.
There are other pages that talk about this, that's why. I would recommend Just Have a Think, I love the fact author is both funny and great at simplifying the science. But there are many others, so it's not nice of you to say that. Millions are following Greta Thunberg, and George Monbiot, Extinction Rebellion and other movements. Besides, plant based diet is much better solution than mirrors in the Arctic.
Meers ReflEction Project
50 years?
It's happening now.
Great Video!
Precisely. Not a 'great video' but certainly 'worthy', as it addresses the basic dynamics of Arctic ice flux in layman's terms.
@@ricktd6891 So how do you explain the increase in extreme weather events happening right NOW???????
Arctic sea ice extent went up this year, so calm yourself. It's currently higher than it was ten years ago and higher than the average level of the last decade.
@@dtz1000 But it's not as thick. Oceanographer Jim Massa talks about this all the time. You are cherry picking your data.
@@everythingmatters6308 Massa is wrong. The decrease in volume has *slowed* by as much as the decrease in area.
Sooner and faster than expected, as usual.
Oh yes, it has already happend. Did you miss that😄😉
Actually, we just had a big increase in arctic sea ice extent this year. So the predictions he showed in the graph at 4:55 have already been proved wrong.
@@dtz1000 sea ice increase is not the same as sea ice thickness. A simple fact that is often omitted is we are losing more thickness.
@@dtz1000 yes but is razor thin..dufuss
Gotta love positive feedback loops.
(for example) It takes the same energy to move 1 litre of water from -1Cº to 1Cº, as from 1Cº to 80Cº.
You can do the experiment at home: Put a quantity of frozen water on the fire, and it takes the same time to thaw as it then goes to 80Cº. It is good to see live, like a movie, the extinction of some species, for example, humans.
Distractor. Does that work when I put ice under warm water? Are those time periods still equal? Apparently you believe that even though equatorial waters don't go above 30C despite the sun being almost directly overhead, with no ice for thousands of km, that the Arctic can somehow reach 80C despite the sun being almost on the horizon. If the sun doesn't provide enough energy to warm equatorial waters then it doesn't provide anywhere enough energy to raise polar waters to those levels.
The more the ice melts the faster it picks up speed or the faster it goes, the faster it goes. I think we will all be shocked at how fast it will pick up speed. Humans have a hard time understanding exponential growth.
Many of them even just have a hard time understanding the meaning of the word "exponential". Such as you just for example.
Please provide historical data to back up your claim.
I rip more ass than a Chinese phone book
Hey Jimbo ... whenever you're ready ...
The arctic is the northern hemispheres air conditioning, after the ice is gone self reinforcing positive feedback loops will ensue and global temperature will rise to that of the Permian extinction also known as the great dying 😉👍 In other words human extinction....
yep, full on biodiversity collapse and environmental collapse along with it, humans wont survive if theres nothing to eat probably have 15 years maximum
sounds great! There will be less of people like you.
@@tuckerbugeater u mean you
2050? 😂😂😂 I say by 2025. There’s almost no old ice left now. As the Arctic goes, so goes the rest of the rancid planet.
Good riddance, hate the human race anyways.
..oh yeah ..u r soo right..runaway global greenhouse effect is acceleratong by far faster then these experts are predicting..
..the number one factor is these positive methane feedback loops are popping up all over and are only getting worse .. desertification..ocean acidification..
..not to mention modernization..and half the planet is still doing and exploding population growth..it's too late to prev er nt..
..these methane explosions aren't even taken into the calculus..
@@bflex when I try to explain what’s happening, to simplify it, I tell them to think of a pile of ice on an asphalt parking lot. The spring temps come and it slowly starts to melt. You measure the loss at the perimeter and make a few days readings and calculate the complete loss. But it’s wrong because as the pile gets smaller it melts faster and faster. I guess it’s too simple for most folks to contemplate.😁✌️
How does iz affects the Antarctic? That is the major problem...
Rise of sea Water Means entrance of sea Water in regular Water reservoars with all following effects on cities
Please highlight the MEER:ReflEction framework!
If world population knew how important ice/snow albedo is in our system we hadn´t arrived to this point. Surprisingly this year´s ice current curve on NASA´s website is much better than past one. But according to different sources ice is no longer the way it was, so I wonder how representative measuring the ice extent is seeing how thin and fragmented it is. In my opinion it is shameful that having so much technology as we have there is not a daily report of images of cryosphere. Yes, we have satellite data, but why not even real time streamed videos?
I had an aquantaince 20 years ago who was a student at Harvard University. His father was a scientist working aboard a ship in the Arctic. He showed me an article in the Boston Herald--this would have been, I think, in the spring year 2000--which stated that this scientist, the father of my acquaintaince, had found during this expedition that there was NO ice within the Arctic circle. This person had zero reason to lie to me on the subject and the newspaper article was rather casual, probably because we weren't aware of the consequences yet. So, what's the damn deal with that?
The deal with that is, people like this guy are LYING to you. It IS worse than we're being told by most. We're already PAST 1.5 C warming from actual pre-industrial, which is 1750, not 1850 as they're now saying. And "they" are ALL saying it. Why? Because you can't tell the truth. It'd freak everyone out.
The absolute truth is, there's VERY little ice left in the Arctic. There's almost NO multi-year ice left, and that's the ice that matters. That's why there was NO ice up there on that expedition even in 2000.
Follow Paul Beckwith. He'll explain everything you need to know.
He actually coined the term, "Blue Ocean Event."
First Blue Ocean Event no longer than 5 years. Outside of miracles....
Name of the father?
@@JesusChrist-kg3lq
Ele precisaria citar as fontes !
I saw a research paper few years back stating if we paved roads white we could off set the ice melt by 25% due to the less absorbed heat.
Would make driving quite uncomfortable
Paint roofs white instead.
What a load of nonsense.
"Slowly at first, then all at once." -someone
It was about going broke , I think from THE Great Gadsby
@@georgenelson8917 Thanks. I don't think that climate scientists are willing to apply that model to our complex feed-back loop driven climate system. I seems all real-time tests of their models come back quicker and stronger
@@andywomack3414 With the models, there was a tendency to select the more conservative values and results. No one wants to believe the problem is difficult to address hence we always had a bias to accept the less worrisome results. Scientists are people too and the worst case scenarios are truly frightening.
@@johnwang9914 I am 72 and think that even I will have to prepare for the worst.
@@ricktd6891 We knew that greenhouse gasses would be a problem as far back as 1956 ("The Unchained Goddess"). It is the abject denial of people like you with only conspiracy theories such as it's all just to scare us that has brought us to this. What the IPCC report simply says is that though much of the damage is already irreversible, it will be far worse if we don't take action now. People like you just keep painting us into a corner where it will be far worse. Pascal's Bargain shows that the logical act even if you did not believe in anthropogenic climate change is to still adhere to the recommended actions. Also doing nothing will only prove that you are wrong and foolish, while participating in adverting the climate disaster will always keep whether or not you were right not completely known though quite frankly as the report says human influence is now unequivocal so you've already been proven wrong and foolish by the very nature of what we are already suffering from, you just keep denying it.
I would be very interested in any research that has been done on the loss of the aresol making effect lost during the beginning of the pandemic. Air travel and a lot of industrial activity came to a stand still. How much temperature increase was seen during that period. I mean when planes stopped flying after 9/11, that was only a few days. If the particulate matter take 6 to 10 days to fall out of the atmosphere.
The "planes stopped flying after 9/11" has nothing at all to do with the aerosol maSking effect and that event caused no measurable change in daily temperature over the U.S. for the 3 days (the scientists said it was so tiny they couldn't possibly measure it because daily temperatures go up & down so much all the time anyway).
-----------
Nothing has been published by scientists about actual measured effect during 2020 (your question) but there's a published paper about climate computer modeling they did of the projected effect (if they are correct) over the next decade but I've forgotten the result and there's no audience here and you're gone so I'm not wasting time searching my notes. It was something like a extra warming of 0.01 degrees per year building to 0.06 degrees extra by 2026 and then going slowly back to zero extra but I'm just guessing that amount from a scratchy memory.
been scared since university after taking a closer look at feedback loops and the controversy over the climate models. Things like clouds, water vapor, decomposition and volcanic emissions. All increases in warming cause all these things to increase and the feedback continues. But these things are not largely used in climate models because they are considered an uncertainty. If you take a close look in the media its very obvious how they manipulate the facts to seem rosy, would't expect that silly behavior from scientists, but it looks like scientists just aren't really allowed to tell the whole truth if its too horrible. Not if they don't want a media hate campaign or to not have a job, the scary part is that scientists that just do the math without tampering with the numbers end up being called an extremist, even Stephen Hawking shortly before he was killed.....I mean died of perfectly normal causes. Speculation, but he was beloved, he said whatever he liked, opposed those in power, took Jeremy Hunt to court and then he dies. They wont release a full postmortem or give a specific cause of death.
Lady Fibblesworth, lol! I love the name, never change it. Just go to the channel Suspicious Observers for climate change education. It's all peer reviewed and isn't the mainstream, just the science. Probably not the from the angle you're used to but I feel Ben is honest and not a fear monger like everyone else that keeps insisting that snow was supposed to be a thing of the past this year. If you're looking for a more world view after that then go to Magnetic Reversal News and say hi. Neither channel is for the easily offended so if you're the sensitive type instead of the logical one well...
@@saucywench9122 certainly never easily offended. Causing offence is now illegal.... More or less. So it's a rare treat indeed, that is if anyone can ever find my heckles. I guess calling conspiracy theories crazy is upsetting to me, like being suspicious is a mental disorder :)
We had an ice free arctic 6000 years ago and it wasn't the end of the world. So calm yourself. Don't keep buying into the fake media hysteria.
@@dtz1000 think I am the last person on earth who would just buy into anything. This is an opinion derived from a lifetime of close study, scrutiny and observation. I have a son to protect, the last thing I would ever do is lazily go along with whatever the media says. Besides my opinion is generally viewed as extremism by the media, not promoted at all! My views are not at all popular, I have nothing to gain from this line of thinking. Other than self preservation, and hopefully my family too. But if you want to be a dumb cow laughing at the funny box whilst being lead to slaughter then by all means, enjoy! But don't stop others from resisting due to your own insecurity. You chose the death ramp, don't try to encourage others to go with you in ignorance
So we need to start now , forget rents , mortgages , negative impact jobs and full steam ahead for mitigating and preparing for vast climate refugee numbers and a sustainable vision of a future .
@@ricktd6891 Good grief , i am surprised you go outside with all those stories of the sky falling on peoples heads . Please do not presume what `i` am falling for . Wtf is agenda 21 and why should i care ? no don`t answer i don't care what any climate change denialist thinks any more , its just more noise .
Well, we could just send those illegal immigrants you talk about back to where they came from. But that would require politicians with a backbone, which there are currently very few.
Blue Arctic Ocean within 5 years.
Maybe this summer 2021 🌎🔥
@@navas1138 Yeah, I was playing it safe.
The most widely regarded estimate is within two years - ice free during the summer melt season and at current trajectory,
complete BOE within a decade.
One good thing about the end of the world? Florida will be destroyed.
BS. We just had a big increase in arctic sea ice extent this year. So his graph at 4:55 was showing a BS trend.
Blue sea "within 50 years"??? As pessimistic as you are, sir, you are way overly optimistic considering the the geometric rate of ice recession and feedback loops involved. I say, "How about, within a single year or, at most 2?" After that, love will be all that remains.
Thanks for speaking the truth, Bruce. I’m beyond frustrated with these people who sugar-coat everything. How about telling people the truth? This is why, sadly, I can only listen to Dr. McPherson and few others on this issue.
Jan 4 2022 - *GREATEST* Arctic sea ice extent in 18 years.
@@christina6881 Why cut C02 if it's inevitable?
@@tuckerbugeater CO2 is a greenhouse gas, meaning when the sun projects short waved radiation onto the earth and the earth reflects it as long waved radiation, CO2 traps the long waved radiation in the Earth's atmosphere, increasing the temperature, which in turn makes the ice melt faster. The less greenhouse gases there is in the environment, the less ice melts.
@@tuckerbugeater What a ridiculous comment.
First BOE in 2022 or 2023. No sea ice at all 10 years later.
2050 is a bad joke...I like your estimate...certainly before 2030
Looking at you, that 2025 moon wobble gonna add to the Blue Ocean Event.
Still sticking with your claim?
@deearhead170 Still not even close. How many times do you people need to be bitten before you learn?
HOW can you reduce the chance of occurrence? 418 PPM CO2 and growing+ all other feed back loops started in short you cant!
BOE by 2026?
... Or sooner than expected.
...faster than expected too. 2025 vegas odds.
Cool, so industrialism is the problem. I’m glad I had a say in how fast we did entropy.
@@ricktd6891 Control us in what way? also my future is already ruined by existing the first place.
@@ricktd6891 says who? Some idiotic loon?
@@ricktd6891 You're the moron sir, cause that is false information, YOU are the one being mis-informed
@@morphor boohoo. It's all about you.
When I was a kid it was “save the whales” now it’s “save the entire planet”.
Kids nowadays have bigger goals. I'm guessing 100 years from now kids will be like "Save the Universe !".
I’m very interested in the evidence but do not see the links in the description.
@@Oi.... there’s also a thing called citing your sources for your ideas. You know, like what everyone learns in school when making an essay.
@@Oi.... who said anything about trust? I just want to verify the facts presented, my guy. The fact that i addressed an inconsistency in this video essay respectfully is to both enhance my knowledge and theirs of what they are presenting.
Visit Paul Beckwith and Guy McPherson, all the evidence is presented through scientific literature from completed peer reviewed studies and explained by them. Ever drive your car, closed your eyes and let go of the steering wheel???
@@chrisczyzewski7927 Beckwith and McPherson .... *HAHAHAHAHAHAHA.* The so-called "scientists" who present their "findings" on youtube instead of writing papers.
@@chrisczyzewski7927 Beckwith and McPherson?? At least mention people who contribute to scientific study.
When all polar ice melts we're all toast... literally.
Haha unintentional
There will still be humans long after the ice melts.
@@godfreypigott
How do you know that?? Once the earth's global temperature hits only 2 more degrees Celsius, NOTHING WILL SURVIVE. I suggest you start watching Dr. Guy McPherson, and soon.
@@tiffsaver Guy McPherson .... *HAHAHAHAHA*
I prefer *SCIENCE.*
@@godfreypigott
Guy McPherson only prints facts given by the top peer-reviewed scientists the world over. Where do YOU get your facts? CNN or Sesame Street??
Blue ocean event before 2026 and possibility this year or next it maybe for a few weeks to start but will increase very quickly unfortunately although i hope i am wrong
Latest IPCC report say likely to have at least one an ice free arctic by 2050
Two strikes, three to go.
I think the NASA prediction for an ice-free Artic summer is well sooner than 50 years. That was the old prediction. Then they moved it up to 2050, and more recent predictions are between 2030-2040. I think the range is generally 2030-2050.
The key word being *AN* ice free Arctic. It will not be ice-free every September thereafter.
Fifty years? We could see a blue ocean event by 2025.
And when the ice goes above the threshold a week or so later, it could be many years before the next one.
So he's saying that the latent heat of ice transfers heat from summer to winter. If there were no ice then the water beneath would transfer heat from summer to winter instead. Right ? Rather obvious.
yes it is, but not necessarily to the general public
Is it all gone yet? I'll keep dropping in every couple of years to see.
Guy McPherson predicted this doom and gloom nightmare with surprising accuracy years ago. You be lucky to be alive in 2025. I think Guy McPherson saw this would happen and freaked and be came obsessed with ICE cream.
Guy McPherson is not a climate scientist. He is just an attention seeker whose predictions have little to do with reality.
@@godfreypigott Go look at your client scientist. They all owned by oil interest. They lie. Your Gods are lying dogs. Ruff Ruff.
I not a seemstress but I sew. I not an auto mechanic but I fix my car.
I guess you need an expert for everything. The world is warming, guess we need thermometer experts.
Guy McPherson is way way more accurate then you oil bought goof balls. Guy says we gonna have extreme storms. Omg look at Oregon. Biblical flood. Just like Guy says.
Hmm. Do have anything to contribute? Can you talk? Or just TROLL?
@@trentblack1218 Oh really? So Richard Alley is into oil is he? And James Hanson, Kevin Trenberth, Michael Mann, Gavin Schmidt? I suppose you have some evidence for that nonsense claim? If not, you are no different to the deniers.
And ..... "biblical"? *HAHAHAHAHA*
@@godfreypigott Biblical is what the news paper said. Several actually. Do you not read? Repeat after me troll. News BIBLICAL. NEWS BIBLICAL. But the fact you did read the articles, cause you would have known about the flooding.
I GOT AN IDEA. Before writing, research. Try it does a body good.
As for your climate scientist, I help you out. Follow the money. Search , I know you hate it. But search oil, University, oil, University. You see the link. Your climate scientist will be there. Because you don't research, I am going know. Bye Troll.
@@trentblack1218 Why would I read American newspapers? Do you read foreign newspapers? And I've done my research - there is *nothing* to suggest that the thousands of *real* climate scientists are tied to the oil industry. Of course, there is bound to be one, and you are making your claim by false extension. How many papers has McPherson published? And what ever happened to his Peak-Oil extinction scenario?
I've heard it hot water freeze faster than cold water. And I can see why? Because hot water will steam and drawthe heat away from the hot water in. Bring it down to a cooler temperature.
Faster. haven't tried it?
Self reinforcing feedback loops
Wow - you can unthinkingly regurgitate the McPherson vernacular.
Do they mean like the thousands of times before?
50 years? More like 10.
More like 2.
@@ElkwoodKeys I was being generous, but you are probably closer to the date than me.
@@ElkwoodKeys How is that prediction looking for you?
@@ElkwoodKeys Two years later ... not even close.
@@JimJWalker Not even looking close.
Who is the man giving this presentation?
Good video. Good finish.
Thanks 👍
People have been saying the ice is gonna melt in 5-10ish years since the 70s...yet here we are, no blue ocean
Nup - not until after 2000.
When all the ice is gone we are all f e c k e d as my Irish wife would say
Yeah, it's a scam. We had an ice free arctic about 6000 years ago. Spoiler alert. We survived.
50 years! You mean 3 years!
IPCC latest prediction is at least one by 2050. It’s complex. Likely to happen but as to when is more in flux
This coming September will be the third since your comment. How confident are you feeling?
"could be ice free within 50 years"? What a clown. The Blue Ocean Event will be next year. 2022. Lots of newly published peer reviewed papers. Try to keep up.
The intent of the video is to raise issue - the predictions as to when in some respect are irrelevant. Lots of of predictions with a large variation between papers. The latest IPCC report, publish less than a month ago, states at least one ice free Arctic event by 2050
@@PhysicsHigh We'll all be dead well before 2050. The time for truth is here.
Wow, you are a nutcase. We had a big increase in arctic sea ice extent this year. So the trend he showed in the graph at 4:55 has already been proved wrong.
@@PhysicsHigh If that's what you believe then why show that BS graph at 4:55 showing an ice free arctic by 2025? Tsk tsk.
@RADman
How did 2022 turn out?
Merci beaucoup for this video.
Block Blue Ocean Event
Make ice, pump from sea.
Lower sea level
Risky dump heat to space.
i will get the magic wand
New record low area today. Thoughts?
Record high temps all over northern hemisphere today. Any thoughts?
One day. Next the sky is falling and the earth is flat.
great visual explanation! thanks
But during the arctic night the ice-free water should emit more heat than ice would.
Possibly. And?
Talking about habitat loss and then only showing a picture of a lone polar bear is one of the most misleading understatements in climate change discussions at this stage of the game, don't you think?
BOE scientifically predicted next year, definitely before 2050. Good video but the conservative language and predictions is leading humanity over the cliff. This video reviews a lot things, however, these things are happening NOW not coming, or could happen, or in the future, come on man, call it what it is. PAUL BECKWITH explains everything with no BS
We just had a big increase in arctic sea ice extent this year that few in the media have even mentioned. The level of BS from climate scientists also increased at about the same time.
@@dtz1000 Sorry, but sea ice extent is NOT the same as volume, multi-year sea ice remaining in the Artic which continues to decrease at record rates. Yes the artic refreezes when temperatures drop to creat seasonal ice coverage, but then melts again when the spring arrives. Even if the whole artic froze over this winter, it would only be 1st year ice in the area that didn't have it. These areas continue to grow. Do your homework. The numbers don't lie!
extinction by 2040
Next year is now past. Are we still here? How did Beckwit do?
@@godfreypigott
The proverbial snowball is picking up mass and speed ..
So what happens, when increased *Evaporation* , due to rising Ocean Temperatures, are included in *'Global Warming'* is taken into account ???
What, happens when, you learn, how to put commas in, the, right place?
@@joekemp83 *Not long to go now, when you no longer experience anything, except eternal darkness, so you won't need to be concerned about the commas any more now will you ???*
*Time to understand the difference, between Homo Erectus, and "LIFE The Real Self", which in NOW WAY represents, nor even remotely looks anything like any species, including the human species !*
@@johnb8854 Could we have the English version please.
Great! We have 50 years ! Best news ever. Thanks!
I imagine Methane & Lightning will exhaust the oxygen out there. What are we breathing?!
Please explain how methane measured in parts per billion could "exhaust" 21% of the earth's atmosphere.
If deforestation and resource consumption continue at current rates they will culminate in a “catastrophic collapse in human population” and likely “an irreversible collapse of our civilization” in the next 20 to 40 years. - Scientific Reports
See you in 2027.
And exactly how is that going to happen, Chumps?
@@joekemp83 Overshoot mixed with habitat collapse.
@@leviahimsa Why did you edit your comment? It said "HUMAN EXTINCTION BY 2026". This is the sort of untruthfulness we are dealing with.
@@joekemp83 Because you pointed it out to me, it wasn't sourced to a study. ✌️ You're dealing with a lot of untruthfulness huh? Maybe do your own research. ✌️
Wow. Bloody excellent
thanks
You might like my channel too :)
The graph he used at 4:55 for arctic sea ice volume has already been shown to be way off. We just had a big increase in minimum sea ice extent in 2021 so the trend shown there is way too pessimistic.
Also we had an ice free arctic about 6000 years ago but it came back and we survived.
@The Doomer dont forget permafrost in place like Siberia and Canada are melting also releasing all the methane and carbon, good times ahead
All we have left is gallows humor.
Nice demonstration….
Thank you!
Ice free within 50 years. LMAO!! WOW is that EXTREMELY optimistic!! I am betting that information comes from the SAME people who now use 1850 for "Pre-Industrial" instead of 1750 as was the ORIGINAL start date for pre-industiral, and pretend that we're not already PAST 1.5C warmer, and WELL on our way to 2C.
How about try within FIVE years we'll have the first Blue Ocean Event.
And even THAT is extremely optimistic.
1850 was barely warmer than 1750. NOAA says to add 0.3 to their anomalies to get anomalies relative to the 1750 baseline. The NOAA average for the past 5 years is +0.9, so that puts us at +1.2.
@@godfreypigott If you add .3 to the 1.1 or 1.2 that they say we're currently at, you get 1.4 or 1.5.
We're already at least AT 1.5. ( I FULLY believe we're already past 1.5, and into the 1.8 territory......it would go a LONG way to explain current global weather catastrophes that they say wouldn't happen until we reached 2 C.) And even if we ARE "only" at 1.4, there is LITERALLY nothing that can be done at this point to stop us from getting to 1.5, so why even bother saying it?
No one cares about the average for the last 5 years, as far as it relates to the global average temperature we're currently at. WTF does that have anything to do with the average since 1750?
And BTW.....we've been "AT" 1.1 C for how long now? 10 years or so? And it hasn't gotten warmer? C-Mon man....
And of course 1850 was barely warmer than 1750. It was only 100 years of warming, there wasn't very many of us here yet, as compared to now, and we weren't burning oil yet, it was just coal, which, we now know, can and does actually have somewhat of a cooling affect because of the reflective particulates. And finally, things take time at the beginning, and then they accelerate.
All that considered, it should be alarming just in itself that we warmed THAT rapidly in 100 years.
And then finally, you're not even acknowledging the FACT that they moved the goalposts from 1750, to 1850, while acknowledging that they did by even referencing 1750, and KNOWING that there is a lack of accounting for .3 degrees warming in the information that we get.
That's not a problem for you?
@@minnesconsinprepping7856 You mean add 0.3 to 0.9, You work just like the deniers - they represent climate by the extreme lows, and you attempt to represent climate by the extreme highs. The trend is what matters. In the NOAA data there have been only 9 months that reached +1.1 (only 4 since April 2016) and only 1 that has reached +1.2 (none since April 2016), so anyone who says the average is AT those levels is deluding themselves.
@@godfreypigott again, no one gives a shit about the last 9 months. What is it with you and the last 9 months?
As per EVERYONE, we are currently at 1.1 C above pre-industrial, which is currently being measured from 1850 instead of 1750.
If you add .3 onto 1.1 you get 1.4. It's as simple as that.
I'm not TRYING to do ANYTHING.
@@minnesconsinprepping7856
Where did I say *anything* about the last nine months? Do you have comprehension issues?
And .... if your figure is 1.1C *above pre-industrial,* why would you add another 0.3? The +0.3 is to be applied to anomalies measured against the 20th century average *TO GIVE ANOMALIES RELATIVE TO PRE-INDUSTRIAL.*
Pre-industrial is absolutely NOT being measured from 1850, though it would make a difference of only about 0.1C anyway.
It was good while it lasted.
d future is here
and i already missed the climate change!
Yes Artic may become ice free as soon as next year or BOE! ✌️
It's gonna be interesting.....
Hi
Latent heat, this is what ive been saying. I’m already melting. I should have taken science in hs
6:00 📢
7:45
Slow Death...
6:02: once the ice is gone in the arctic,the Gulf Stream will slow down , bringing us back to the ice age in the northern hemisphere,, the Jet Stream and Gulf Stream have major effect on the arctic climate,,
Ever wonder why our planet spins with a north and south pole? Think that spin will remain stable once we lose one?
WTF are you talking about?
*WHAT???* How dos one lose a pole?
The ice isnt going to all melt. It will simply shift locations. Some glaciers are growing.
@Randall Watts. no, there are no growing glaciers anywhere.
50 years. LOL
It will be soon. Very soon.
When exactly?
Whenever you're ready ...
@@godfreypigott Next week.
@@EmeraldView Right then ... a nonsense answer. Even you don't take your claim seriously.
@@godfreypigott Are you looking for a date?
Much earlier than 50 years isn't good enough for you?
Hi, Paul. When was the last time you were in the Arctic? Or are you just kind of extrapolating from what others have told you?
Having not gone to the arctic does not invalidate my argument. The latest IPCC report predicts at least one ice free arctic by 2050 and thats based on many scientists who have been there
@@PhysicsHigh The IPCC is a political organization, not a scientific one. Scientists predicted a new ice age in the 1970s and then, I think, Al Gore, based on his take on science, predicted in 2009 a high probability that the summer ice would be gone in 2013. There have been many other predictions that did not materialize. Extrapolation is the bane of science. And so is correlation being equated to causation. Both are well-recognized fallacies. I think you are aware that the tree line in the Arctic has been much higher than it is now. Had you been there, you would have noticed that. That means at times the Arctic has been warmer. There also is a claim that the Arctic was ice-free in the summer about 8,000 years ago. I have not studied this claim sufficiently to accept it. But I don't think the IPCC mentioned this in any of its reports. You realize, of course, that the U.N. has many hidden motives and its global warming claims are vehicles for fostering the goals.
@@jaybrodell1959 The statement is a political one - his is based on SCIENCE.
This guy needs to listen to Dr. Mcpherson, conflict of interest here!
You want him to listen to someone who is uneducated in climate science?
@@godfreypigott get some facts, instead of self pleasing opinions!
@@colinshaw3776 I gave you a fact. He has no qualifications in climate science. If you want to challenge that then detail his qualifications for me ... year, institution and details of the degree. I already know about his degrees in ecology and evolutionary biology which have nothing to do with climate science, so it had better be something else, with citations.
@@colinshaw3776 I guess you couldn't find any climate qualifications for him.
McPherson - the guy who predicted we'd all be dead by 2018. How did that turn out?
50 years??? say 2022
Jan 4 2022 ... *Greatest extent* for that date since 2004. Say not.
How is 2022 looking? Any chance you could say something sensible this time?
Hey Nora - any chance you could show some *integrity* and admit you were wrong?
Hey Noooooora ........ Noooooooora ..... what year is this?
Turn the heat lamp on? Surely you are not trying to imply that giant bomb fire in the sky has something to do with the warming of the planet?
What a load of rubbish..more ice than ever.
Thankfully you prefaced your claim with a warning.
Unlikely in many lifetimes.
Weren't we going to have no arctic ice in 2007, then 2013, 2016, 2019. Now ? Predictions eh
Not if you listen to the IPCC instead of the self-appointed experts like Gore, McPherson, Beckwith and Wadhams.
Personally, I'm terrified. If the Arctic melts we're approaching an ice age with all the decreased salinity. Yay for our planets catastrophe cycle.
If the arctic melts we're approaching an ice age? During ice ages the Arctic ocean is frozen solid and ice sheets extend as far south as New York. Also, it's ocean water that's freezing and melting so arctic sea ice melt doesn't change salinity. It's going to cause a dramatic uptick in global heating.
@James Darling @Saucy Wench
i am terrified and excited and kind of looking forward to something radically different only because it is inevitable and unknown, ... altho i am also sure it will be awful and sad.
if the arctic melts should be the arctic is lost, for sure, no question, ... sai onora.
i doubt very much that an ice age will occur
and about that salt thing, .. curious that the Oceans carry vastly different "types" of water defined thru salinity
what will occur is the balance and ratios of graded slinity so kinda YES the salinity will change in ration or type
i think i know why people might worship and fear the Sun, i believe that You will too
the arctic is dark for alot of the year so, ... ican only imagine superheated darkness in the future
@Renee L Go to the channel Suspicious Observers and Magnetic Reversal News. Ben does the in depth education on the real climate change science and Diamond keeps on top of the solar minimum check ins as well as future volcanic activity. Also, neither channel is for the faint of heart and they don't promote the sky is falling, lol. Oh, and ignore the talk of the micro nova, it'll make your head spin. If you're easily offended by the truth Diamond might not be you're cup of tea but he won't knowingly lie to you and neither will Ben which is a precious gift these days. Adapt 2030 probably takes his cues from Ben and Diamond, I unsubbed a few weeks back. He kept freaking me out. When it comes to GSM I'll trust Diamond over Adapt 2030 even though he does have valid points.
@@jamesdarling2468 see solar forcing videos on the Suspicious Observers channel. Every video contains links to peer reviewed papers and most if not all can be downloaded. It will help you out. I still consider myself a twelfth grader on the channel as so much of the science is above my head, pun intended, but the climate science I can easily grasp for the most part. By the way, cool last name.
@@-LightningRod- lots of people have already figured out why the sun is equal parts worshipped and feared now, it's been talked about for years. It's just that the wider population didn't know until YT. Personally, I'm not looking forward to what I affectionately call the solar sneeze. The ejecta is plotted to hit the Pacific which means that while we just get the tidal wave the continents to the immediate East get the flash and some wave. Either way from what I understand we'll have plenty of warning if you know what you're looking at. Some pictures of sprites show almost two feet now but most are still showing only long legs so it depends on the geographical location I guess. I'm not at all following what you mean by superheated darkness though.
I had a complete solution we can save the ice and can reduce the temperature not even need ice for that but I want my internet first with all virus deleted next demand I will tell later when plan successful.
Just a new. Normal.
Can’t wait I am going to see a ice free arctic in my life. Cool !!!
and then there’s the Milankovitch Cycles
those are much much slower and have nothing to do with the human induced climate warming through greenhouse gases
Radu, if you want to blame it on humans,I hope you include HAARP and wars,, right now the concern is volcanos around the world going off,that should mess with your calculations, and if the volcano of Island La Palma decides to slip into the ocean, nobody will care about climate change and those that are left will be investing in wool and nobody is talking about the Gulf Stream all along the south and North Americas to Canada, what effect could a tsunami have on it?
@@bobleclair5665 that really gives me hope. I mean just imagine: if mankind originally induced global warming by C02 emission which leads in the first place to some amount of temperature rise and then in consequence desabilizes some critical balance inside the earths crust somewhere (I mean 1-2 degrees increase could already make it, couldn't it?), then a big eruption inside a volcano could take place, am I right? Big explosion! Doomsday! Well, that's perfect! The perfect excuse for mankind it was NOT us: it was mother earth - it always has been...!
Trees love co2 ,plant more trees,
@@bobleclair5665 trees love C02 but are sensitive to their environment. As the air warms up (by greenhouse gases) it sucks up the moisture from the ground. Thats too much change for the sensitive trees. Today, if you plant trees you see many die off... my parents own a farm... I am from europe. I know what I am talking about
According to experts (Al Gore) all the ice in Grenland has melted allready. That happend in 2007. The ones who still belives there is ice there is a climate skeptic! The sciense is settled, and the earth is flat, in god we trust and thats that🤣🤣🤣
You can expect it to return once GOD plugs the REFRIGERATOR back in💯 but there is a lot of people that need to be removed from EARTH 💯
@@ricktd6891 I don’t have a mind💯 I use my BRAIN💥
@@ricktd6891 there is nothing to be enlightened about 💯
@@ricktd6891 if I knew who will be removed from this planet I’d know the future. But looking back at the past I can only imagine who will be punished💯 can you guess who has done the most destruction & pillaging across the entire globe with no regrets? WELL IT SURE IN THE FUCC HELL WAS NOT MY PEOPLE!! 💯 GENOCIDE COLONIZATION INCEST THEFT LIES MURDER ETC.
@@ricktd6891 HERES THE ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION “the ones that need to be removed are THE ONES DOING ALL THE REMOVALS in the world”💯%fact
there will be new land to exploit the whole of antartica and the whole of greenland
You think this is a good thing?
@@penguinuprighter6231 there will be more to fight about, who's to have that land, land disappears and new land appear, i don't really think nature cares, there will be something else and of course disaster for the affected
I don't think there'll be to many of us left to fight over land 😅
@@busterdan22 I saw some youtube-videos about greenland and antarctica about these issues (hmm: atlas something from 2018?)
Fear! Horror! No Recourse! Change your Lives! Laughing.....
04:58 50 years ? I will worry about it than .
hahahaha ! most scientists know that the ice is not melting all the time! it just melts when there is too much sun then it all comes back in winter! if we have a cold winter we get more ice ! its that simple !!!!!!
You failed to mention the White Ocean event that always, without fail, follows each September, so that by April three to four millions square miles of ice cover the arctic region.
When the temperature was 2 degrees warmer in the Holocene maximum, no harm happened to humanity. There was plenty of evidence that the arctic ice field remained
Well we’re not heading into a Holocene maximum we’re heading to something that’s worse
Earth's Global Mean Surface Temperature (GMST) wasn't 2 degrees warmer in the Holocene maximum than now you naughty little liar you.
@robert hicks Proxies do not show that the temperature was 2° warmer than current temps you naughty little liar you.
@robert hicks Proxies show that the Earth's Global Mean Surface Temperature (GMST) now is 0.7 degrees higher than the Holocene Optimum you naughty naughty naughty naughty naughty little liar you.
This could explain why. It seems like the Holocene Optimum was primarily a summer event, with winter temperatures generally actually colder than today, although up North they were about the same. Since winters were still cold, Arctic ice would refreeze. Current global warming is actually having its strongest effects in winter.
alarmist BS
How stupid do you need to be in order to deny global warming in 2021?
@@brawndo8726 No denying global warming. Just that idiots like you think it's something we can control with carbon taxes. BTW when the ice is gone we will be on the way to a new ice age. Do some research and stop eating the BS.
@@Don-kr5tp When the ice is gone, a tornado is going to rip the roof off your house.
@@Don-kr5tp why are we in the midst of the 6th mass extinction?
@@Don-kr5tp Idiots like us would rather that you stop driving your massive Detroit Diesel but it seems that carbon tax is the only preventative measure that YOU idiot Trumpist Deniers are willing to give us.........