Melting ice and glaciers in the Alps: Mer de Glace, Matterhorn in 2016 and 2017

[GuyGadeboisTheBack]

During the PAG, glacial floods were calamities covering villages and fields with thick ice against which nothing could be done except prayers and processions ....

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL, ah the comedic potential of this guy ... What a waste to spend it here. Have you ever thought of starting a troop?

[ABC2019]

the retreat of the glaciers began in the middle of the 2th century, long before COXNUMX began to rise seriously, marking the end of the Little Ice Age.

During the PAG, glacial floods were calamities covering villages and fields with thick ice against which nothing could be done except prayers and processions ....

This data is not incompatible with the RCA.

or did I say it was incompatible? of course that can be added, I'm just saying that the retreat of the glaciers started before the RCA, and that at the time, it must have been rather a relief not to take them directly on the face. It relativizes the "disaster" side of the thing.

[GuyGadeboisTheBack]

"You realize, during the great glaciation, we lived above ground" ... ABC and cretinism brought to the rank of art.

[sen-no-sen]

or did I say it was incompatible? of course that can be added, I'm just saying that the retreat of the glaciers started before the RCA, and that at the time, it must have been rather a relief not to take them directly on the face. It relativizes the "disaster" side of the thing.

Climate skeptics often make the argument that the warming started before the development of industrial activity, which is correct (end of the PAG) as you mentioned, but they elude the compatibility of its data with each other. For them it would be a very curious "chance" of things, and use this type of argument to denigrate the thesis of the RCA, implying a globalist conspiracy under the aegis of the IPCC.

The analysis should however highlight a subject that is little treated: the role of the Little Ice Age as a motor of techno-economic expansion in Europe and the USA, and the synchronization between the end of this and the beginning of the industrial era.
This is a thesis which may seem rather strange at first glance but which could enlighten us on the historical interactions between modulation of nature and cultural development of all kinds (including technology).

[ABC2019]

or did I say it was incompatible? of course that can be added, I'm just saying that the retreat of the glaciers started before the RCA, and that at the time, it must have been rather a relief not to take them directly on the face. It relativizes the "disaster" side of the thing.

Climate skeptics often make the argument that the warming started before the development of industrial activity, which is correct (end of the PAG) as you mentioned, but they elude the compatibility of its data with each other. For them it would be a very curious "chance" of things, and use this type of argument to denigrate the thesis of the RCA, implying a globalist conspiracy under the aegis of the IPCC.

personally I never denied that there was an RCA, you won't find a line from me claiming it doesn't exist. What I deny is its character as an existential catastrophe, and that it can be avoided without doing even greater damage by removing the fossils.

I was just saying that the retreat of the glaciers had started long before, and that at the time it was rather a big relief that they were moving away from the alpine valleys.

[GuyGadeboisTheBack]

at the time it was rather a big relief that they were moving away from the alpine valleys.

Of horse.

[sen-no-sen]

personally I never denied that there was an RCA, you won't find a line from me claiming it doesn't exist.

Then maybe you should rethink the way you present it, because at first glance it doesn't seem to be obvious.

What I deny is its character as an existential catastrophe, and that it can be avoided without doing even greater damage by removing the fossils.

It is not for you to judge, nor for me. This is the role of scientific study.
To my knowledge I have not seen serious projections aimed at eradicating fossil fuels from the world energy map?

[ABC2019]

personally I never denied that there was an RCA, you won't find a line from me claiming it doesn't exist.

Then maybe you should rethink the way you present it, because at first glance it doesn't seem to be obvious.

What I deny is its character as an existential catastrophe, and that it can be avoided without doing even greater damage by removing the fossils.

It is not for you to judge, nor for me. This is the role of scientific study.
To my knowledge I have not seen serious projections aimed at eradicating fossil fuels from the world energy map?

in this case you should perhaps review your way of reading both forums and newspaper articles, because you don't seem to understand what is written there ... I told you, I didn't write a single line denying that there is an RCA, so if you have understood the contrary, it is not my fault - and when to bring down the consumption of fossils to zero, you will have to explain to us how to limit the total quantity extracted without making the extraction drop to zero (or making them stretch exponentially towards zero which comes back pretty quickly to roughly the same)?

https://www.lemonde.fr/planete/article/ ... _3244.html

[sen-no-sen]

To limit heating to 1,5 ° C, it should leave 60% of the oil and gas in the ground, and 90% of the coal

https://www.lemonde.fr/planete/article/2021/09/08/pour-limiter-le-rechauffement-a-1-5-c-il-faudrait-laisser-60-du-petrole-et-du-gaz-dans-le-sol-et-90-du-charbon_6093946_3244.html

We should, we must, we will have ... etc, to reduce insecurity we should arrest most delinquents, we often hear this kind of remark in speeches, yet there is not much that exchange.

The world is currently taking the opposite direction. Fossil energies (coal, oil and gas), the combustion of which is responsible for most of global warming, still account for 81% of primary energy demand and their production continues to increase. Countries are forecasting an average annual increase of 2% over the next decade, according to the UN Production Gap Report, released in late 2020.

There are therefore two worlds, that of emissions should be limited, and that of we need more energy.
In short, two logics clash, that of physical risks (induced by climate change) versus that of transition risks (induced by a policy of reducing fossil consumption).

What you explain to us in more than 9900 messages (!) Is that putting an end to the use of fossil fuels would be more harmful than the RCA itself.
To this we can answer the following:
1) There is not enough data to support or disprove such a claim.
2) None of the projections serious do not take into account such a drop in fossil consumption in the future.

We should probably be in a hybrid model, which my faith seems to fit perfectly with the "infinite correction" ideology. On the one hand, this will make it possible to financialize the fight against RCA, to deploy colossal technical means to counter the effects (geoengineering etc ...) and to continue to take a little money with fossil fuels, energy at how much necessary for the implementation of renewable energies. It is the mega business of the century.

[Christophe]

The climate problem is that everyone accuses and relies on others to react and act!

Now I see that private self-investment and private (and even public) companies are largely neglected! For most companies, it is mostly greenwashing or symbolic on advertising brochures or commercials!

Any new house or construction should have PV ... and when I say it is necessarily not with a law but with an investment MORALE! It should seem natural to do this to any project leader, just like you no longer build an uninsulated house!

Ditto for any major roof renovation!

Ditto for the companies which have tens of thousands of m² of roof and which are big consumers of current!

Ditto for urban transport companies! The RATP should erase its electricity consumption! She has the financial means!

Personally, if you have the means to buy an electric vehicle (scooter included ...) then you must either have a 100% green contract or condition it for PV erasure with a personal installation ... again this is is the MORAL obligation I am talking about ...

The list is long it's not the ideas that (me) miss!