Ecosystems across Australia are collapsing under climate change

a series of sudden and catastrophic ecosystem shifts that have occurred re cently across Australia.

e and extreme weather events, are overwhelming ecosystems? natural resilience."

othingness, except excess heat, so no one really cares just yet.

0 ft peaks emerging just in time to save the planet. That's so much more re asonable. Right now the Earth is a ticking time bomb about to release unpre cedented levels of methane into the atmosphere, and this will kill nearly a ll lifeforms quite rapidly, as in a few months time frame.

Nobody knows, but it has happened.

formatting link

But that was a very long time ago and the sun was somewhat smaller then.

A lot of CO2 is unlikely to kill everybody, but it is likely to mess up our current crops and create a population crash.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
bill.sloman
Loading thread data ...

bes a

red

ange and

al resilience."

y
5,000 ft

ase

ill

nsitive_Sunglasses

John Larkin thinks that he can recognise good electronic design.

He does seem to confuse "good" and "profitable".

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
bill.sloman

not to mention the animals too :-) m

Reply to
makolber

Ah, science by analogy. Easier than thinking.

--
John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 
picosecond timing   precision measurement  
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
John Larkin

Perhaps if our sun went nova you would get the energy required to vaporize vast areas of arctic tundra in a very short period of time, fortunately it apparently is not of the size to have that likely to happen.

Speaking of risks, are there any stars nearby which could go nova or super-nova? Is that a real potential risk to life on earth...

Nope, no stars within 50 light years are capable of going super-nova according to present theory.

formatting link

Or maybe not:

formatting link

The above is from 2002, and at the time the concern was super-novas within 150 - 200 light years. I assume the theory has been improved if NASA says the risk is only within 50 LY.

Back to humans being the biggest threat to life as we know it.

John :-#(#

Reply to
John Robertson

Don't pick me! Don't pick me!

Reply to
bitrex

Ayn Rand was enthralled with capitalism in the way a person who'd never worked a real job might be.

Reply to
bitrex

No, critical thinking by rejecting hypotheses that have already been tested and found wanting. No analogy on offer, just an example of 'a mechanism that...'.

Reply to
whit3rd

Why would all that methane ice all over the world, at various depths and latitudes and temperatures, decide to blow up like a popcorn kernal, all at once?

It wouldn't.

--
John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 
picosecond timing   precision measurement  
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
John Larkin

Why does a balloon pop all at once? Latera sound waves in a sheet would be one such mechanism. Don't encourage illogical optimism with statements you can't support, even by analogy. That's deception, has no redeeming value.

Reply to
whit3rd

It doesn't.

--
John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 

lunatic fringe electronics
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
John Larkin

:

l*

o you not understand?

is-year-2/

rming-tipping-point/

rld

nd anything except the evidence at hand. Clearly you're scared to death.

Pointless to be afraid because there's nothing that can be done about it. I t only recently dawned on the geniuses that the Earth is not warming unifor mly around the globe. Latitudes above 70o at both poles are heating at 8x t he rate of equatorial climate, and this is exactly the territory that is th e most dangerous. Revised estimates have already put the global average abo ve the pathetically inadequate Paris agreement avoidance endpoint for the y ear 2030.

Reply to
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred

The problem is that if a small proportion let go, it would make the atmosphere warmer, making it more likely that another small proportion would hit the unstable region and release more methane.

It's called positive feedback.

When it last happened, setting off the

formatting link

the first pulse was spread over two thousand years, so it wasn't all that quick.

However, we are injecting more a lot more carbon per year at the moment.

" However, the amount of released carbon, according to a recent study, suggest a modest 0.2 gigatonnes per year (at peaks 0.58 gigatonnes); humans today add about 10 gigatonnes per year."

Your confidence may be ill-founded.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Reply to
bill.sloman

Excellent observation. Now let's talk about electronic design, which is the group topic.

--
John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 
picosecond timing   precision measurement  
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
John Larkin

If you put a pan of water on the stove and heat it, it will start to simmer and somewhat later boil, but all the water does not turn to steam at the s ame time. Because it takes energy to vaporise the water. Even if you use a pressure cooker, you can not get all the water to turn to steam when you vent the pressure cooker. I do not think methane would act differently. And do not believe that it is illogical optimism to believe that vaporising methane ice would require energy.

Dan

Reply to
dcaster

er and somewhat later boil, but all the water does not turn to steam at the same time. Because it takes energy to vaporise the water. Even if you u se a pressure cooker, you can not get all the water to turn to steam when y ou vent the pressure cooker. I do not think methane would act differently. And do not believe that it is illogical optimism to believe that vaporisi ng methane ice would require energy.

It was May 18, 1980, in the early morning, when Mount St. Helens erupted. There was a mile-high plume, ash clouds, but mainly just vast amounts of steam, which had been subterranean water an hour earlier. Nearby, the trees got so hot that the y exploded (I was there a week or so later, digging into the ash and finding toothpick

-sized bits of wood). So, it's no stretch of the imagination to think that buri ed clathrate can, when heated, become unstable to minor shifts in the overburden that keeps i t at enough pressure not to become gas.

Even though it takes energy, the issue is stability against the perturbatio ns that occur. Mt. St. Helens was technically erupting for a year or three, doing mound-bu ilding movement, but it's the initial explosive event of May 18 that we all find m emorable.

Reply to
whit3rd

LOL! Pot calling the kettle black!

Rick C.

Reply to
gnuarm.deletethisbit

It doesn't in the same way that *nothing* is simultaneous. There is always some minute amount of time between events.

Rick C.

Reply to
gnuarm.deletethisbit

er and somewhat later boil, but all the water does not turn to steam at the same time. Because it takes energy to vaporise the water. Even if you u se a pressure cooker, you can not get all the water to turn to steam when y ou vent the pressure cooker. I do not think methane would act differently. And do not believe that it is illogical optimism to believe that vaporisi ng methane ice would require energy.

The ice is not frozen methane. Methane is simply dissolved in the ice in t he same way it is dissolved in water. The process of releasing methane at warmer temperatures is much more like the CO2 being released from a bottle of soft drink. When cold the CO2 is highly soluble and releases slowly if at all. When it warms up it releases much more quickly. Under the right c onditions such as an abrupt lowering of pressure the CO2 leaves solution ve ry rapidly.

It wouldn't hurt to read about the process rather than just relying on the many noise sources you find here.

When JL disbelieves various aspects of AGW because he has read some bad sci ence on a web site is one thing. He has simply trusted a bad source. But when he makes up science in his own head and ignores the opinions of expert s because he has read virtually nothing about the topic just shows what a t ruly poor thinker he is. JL would do well to heed his own advice and stick to posting about electronics where he is at least familiar with the topic and stop posting about things he not only is ignorant of, but refuses to do any objective studying.

There are none so blind as those who refuse to see.

Rick C.

Reply to
gnuarm.deletethisbit

er and somewhat later boil, but all the water does not turn to steam at the same time. Because it takes energy to vaporise the water. Even if you u se a pressure cooker, you can not get all the water to turn to steam when y ou vent the pressure cooker. I do not think methane would act differently. And do not believe that it is illogical optimism to believe that vaporisi ng methane ice would require energy.

You don't *think*!??? Why don't you read a little and learn what will happ en? It's not like this requires original research.

Rick C.

Reply to
gnuarm.deletethisbit

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.