text:
Secretive Irish Climate Science Denier Group Steps Up 'Bizarre' Parliamentary Lobbying 22:27 Sep 27 0 comments EU Commission proposes new strict EU-wide rules on single-use plastics 12:29 May 29 0 comments Protecting WIldlife in Ireland from Hedge Cutting and Gorse Burning 23:37 Feb 23 0 comments WRECK THE « CLIMATE CHANCE » SUMMIT! At Nantes, France, from 26 to 28 September 2016 20:04 Jul 17 0 comments Why the corporate capture of COP21 means we must Kick Big Polluters Out of climate policy 22:47 Dec 03 3 comments more >>Blog Feeds Anti-EmpireUkraine Buys Huge Amounts of Russian Fue... Fri Jan 20, 2023 08:34 | Antonia Kotseva Turkey Has Sent Ukraine Cluster Munition... Thu Jan 12, 2023 00:26 | Jack Detsch New Israeli Government Promises to Talk ... Tue Jan 10, 2023 21:13 | Al Majadeen Russia Training Iranian Pilots Ahead of ... Tue Jan 10, 2023 15:19 | The Times of Israel Lukashenko Abolishes Copyright Protectio... Tue Jan 10, 2023 15:05 | Nikki Main The SakerA bird's eye view of the vineyard
Alternative Copy of thesaker.is site is available Thu May 25, 2023 14:38 | Ice-Saker-V6bKu3nz
The Saker blog is now frozen Tue Feb 28, 2023 23:55 | The Saker
What do you make of the Russia and China Partnership? Tue Feb 28, 2023 16:26 | The Saker
Moveable Feast Cafe 2023/02/27 ? Open Thread Mon Feb 27, 2023 19:00 | cafe-uploader
The stage is set for Hybrid World War III Mon Feb 27, 2023 15:50 | The Saker Lockdown Skeptics
Nick Dixon and Toby Young Talk About Rishi Sunak Losing Two By-Elections, Sadiq Khan?s Woke Makeover... Tue Feb 20, 2024 22:10 | Will Jones
If You Think Parliament Will Get Any Opportunity to Scrutinise the WHO Pandemic Treaty, Think Again Tue Feb 20, 2024 18:34 | Shiraz Akram
Covid Vaccines Linked to Large Increase in Heart, Blood and Neurological Disorders, Major Study Find... Tue Feb 20, 2024 15:48 | Will Jones
Justified Tyranny Tue Feb 20, 2024 13:00 | Dr David McGrogan
The Fact the Government Has Had to Tell Teachers to Ban Mobile Phones in Schools is a Glimpse of Wha... Tue Feb 20, 2024 11:11 | Mike Fairclough Voltaire NetworkVoltaire, international editionBenjamin Netanyahu on borrowed time, by Thierry Meyssan Tue Feb 20, 2024 07:00 | en Jewish separatists in Biafra want to proclaim a second Israel Sat Feb 17, 2024 03:32 | en Thierry Meyssan interview with Monika Berchvok, by Thierry Meyssan Tue Feb 13, 2024 15:07 | en In Jerusalem, the "Conference for the Victory of Israel" threatens London and Wa... Tue Feb 13, 2024 07:05 | en Voltaire, International Newsletter N°73 Mon Feb 12, 2024 10:07 | en |
Runaway Global Warming May Have Started. Has Arctic Methane 'Bomb' Just Gone Off?
international |
environment |
Sunday March 10, 2013 22:31 by T
2012 Measurements show dramatic rise in methane emissions from the Arctic All the worry about Global Warming has tended to focus on carbon dioxide emissions but the real threat may be methane emissions.... In the past 5 years there have been major changes happening up in the Arctic. The annual summer melt of the sea ice floating on the Arctic Ocean has greatly increased, exposing a much larger area to heating during the summer months which in turn has warmed the ocean enough that the frozen methane hydrates on and below the seabed are beginning to melt, causing methane gas to bubble to the surface. The trouble is methane is up to 100 times (over initial 20 year period of release) more effective than carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas and the estimated quantity of methane hydrates suggests the amount of carbon contained in them exceeds all the coal, oil and gas burned so far. And should the tundra melt in Siberia then the huge area of peatland will resume decomposing thereby emitting a very large quantity of carbon dioxide. This scenario would take us past extinction danger point which is reckoned for a rise of 6oCelsius or more would be close to certainty.
Related Indy Links:
Study: Arctic sea ice decline may be driving snowy winters seen in recent years
| Arctic Sea Ice Shrinking At 'Unprecedented' Levels
| Special issue on the Arctic: After the ice
| Arctic sea routes open as ice melts
| Arctic Turning into a Sea of Foaming Methane. Positive Feedback has kicked in
| The Arctic has already measurably warmed over the past three decades, but this albedo flip from white ice/snow reflecting up to to 85% of the warm sunlight to a dark ocean that only reflects 15% or in other words absorbing 85% means the process is feeding back on itself. Combined with the extra warming caused by a rapid rise in methane emissions, it appears we are on the cusp of runaway climate change. Scientists involved with monitoring the Arctic are so alarmed and concerned that a group of them formed the Arctic Methane Emergency Group earlier in 2012 to draw attention to this critical situation and in the hope that something will and can be done. Regrettably due to capture of the political process and of the shaping of public opinion by the Coal and Oil & Gas industries there is a very high probability that exactly nothing will be done. There is a small chance with an all out war-type footing effort that some form of geo-engineering effort might mitigate the methane emissions, but given the vast area over which methane emissions are already occurring, it is likely that it is already far too late and we will be well into the depth of the dynamics of this process before there is any sort of realization emanating from a concerned public who will have by that stage managed to partially see through the decades of propaganda on just that particular topic as opposed to all the other daily lies and distortions from the media about many other aspects of society. This may not be the first time this has happened on Earth. Back in the late 1970s when it was first suggested that a meteorite caused the extinction of dinosaurs 65 million years ago because of the discovery of a relic meteorite impact zone in Central America matching that time; this theory was then applied to most other extinctions, but it triggered a flurry of science in this research area. Gradually it was realized that not all extinctions were of meteorite origin and in the case of the Permian extinction 250 million years ago where 90% of all forms of life were extinguished not just on land but in the oceans, it has since been determined this was very likely caused by a rapid heat pulse. The most likely culprit identified is methane. Another extinction event 55 million years ago known as the Paleocene-Eocene was also accompanied by a rapid heat rise. Again methane is thought to have been the trigger although there would have been other processes occurring to initiate the warming in the first place to then trigger the sudden release of methane clathrates.
So there appears to be a precedent for this and the numbers at the present time unfortunately add up. The observations and feedback effects that we are seeing already are:
Turning now to the actual data, this is the situation as it stands. The Arctic sea ice grows and wanes with the seasons each year and as expected tracking the long dark winter nights and long warmer summer days with the maximum melt occurring typically in September at the end of the Arctic summer. This has been tracked by satellite every day every year since 1979. Over the last decade, more and more of this ice has melted each summer with 2007 smashing all records up to last year (2012) when it was broken again. Compared to the 1979 to 2000 average where the minimum extent was roughly 7 million square kilometres, this had fallen 3.5 million sq km (see figure 2). At the same time the average thickness of the ice has thinned. The ice used to be several meters thick and consisted of ice from 1 year old to 5+ years old. Now most of the multi-year old ice is gone and the bulk of it is only 1 year old. Given it is so young it has less time to grow and therefore is much thinner making it easier to break and melt. The thinning of the ice has been happening steadily since the 1980s and is thought to have been melted by warmer ocean penetrating the Arctic and melting it from below and the steadily increasing air-temperatures above doing the job from that side. Normally the Arctic tundra (Fig 3) which is composed of the vast areas of Northern Canada, Alaska, and Siberia would have snow on the ground for much of the year. This snow cover has been melting too and getting smaller with a result that as the dark soil and vegetation is exposed a much greater load of heat could be absorbed during the summer months and this has resulted in feedback on the melt process and increased air-temperatures. And from figure 4, it is evidently accelerating. At one time it was thought we would have an end of summer Arctic ocean free of ice in 2070. Given the actual changes, the IPCC model is now saying in 2030 but this is wildly optimistic and the data itself (Figure 2) strongly suggests it will be in just 3 years time in 2015. However it is not a case that bad things start happening in 2015. They are already happening now. Vastly increased areas this year and for the last few years have already been absorbing and storing huge quantities of solar energy in the Arctic ocean and heating it. It then takes time for this heat to dissipate over the winter. Turning to the methane hydrates also known by the name methane clathrates, these exist in the permafrost and in the frozen muds on the seabed. They are actually crystals of water and methane molecules and they are stable below 0°Celsius. Deposits occur throughout the Arctic along the huge expanse of shallow seas along the East Siberian Shelf and in deeper waters around Svalbard off Norway and around Greenland and Northern Canada. In the shallow seas the methane can escape directly to the atmosphere with little absorption by the water but in deeper waters it can be oxidised and or absorbed more although if there is too much it can be saturated in the water and therefore escape beyond that point. When the methane reaches the atmosphere it typically has a lifetime of 20 years and is broken down by free reactive hydroxyl (-OH) molecules in the air. If the hydroxyl level falls then the methane hangs around longer. And given that hydroxyl molecules are formed from ozone then any reduction will have negative effects. The hydrates remain in place so long as the seabed temperature does not rise above zero and the water temperature too. Because of the presence of salt in sea water, the water temperature can be still liquid slightly below zero Celsius. The sea-ice effectively puts a cap on the whole thing keeping warm sunlight out and the Arctic ocean temperature cold. The wind also has little influence and so there is little disturbance or mixing to the water and because it has been this way for a very long time, it is separated into stable layers with the net effect that historically no heat was reaching the seabed to cause melting. This is no longer the case and greater mixing is happening. During research cruises off Siberia from 2003 through 2008 Russian scientists detected saturated levels of methane at numerous depths and elevated levels in the atmosphere. Reports of hundreds of plumes of bubbles tens of meters across rising from the seabed off the Svalbard archipelago also began to appear in 2008. In 2012 the Russian scientists had found methane bubbles plumes 1 km across over a wide area. It seems emissions have increased dramatically. But as it so happens there is a satellite called AQUA, launched in 2002 that is capable of measuring methane in the atmosphere and the data it is producing backs up the in-situ ground/sea observations. The series of images in figure 5 show the differences between 2008 and 2011 for November the figures for December 2012 while figure 6 shows measurements made in-situ (i.e. on the ground/sea) with a large increase in 2011 and 2012. One could argue that maybe these in-situ figures are just an anomaly in that area but the satellite measurements show it is across the board. And should we wait until all the readings have gone off the scale before reacting? It seems some scientists who are not even GW deniers are taking that approach and it is most likely because they are terrified of being called alarmists. Research led by Natalia Shakhova detected significant methane emissions from the East Siberian Arctic Shelf which is only about 50 meters (164 feet) or less deep and these emissions equaled total emissions from all other world oceans. The study, published in Science, found that more than 80% of the deep water and more than 50% of surface water had methane levels more than eight times that of normal seawater. In some areas, saturation levels reached more than 250 times that of background levels in the summer and 1,400 times higher in the winter. In other words the methane has been bubbling out and absorbed by the water. Shakhova said: "The release to the atmosphere of only one per cent of the methane assumed to be stored in shallow hydrate deposits might alter the current atmospheric burden of methane up to 3 to 4 times." Existing weather polar orbiting satellites are capable of measuring the sea-surface temperature and this data too has been showing increases and the anomalies appear to be strongest in the very areas where measurements show methane emissions are highest. This would seem to confirm that at a local level the methane is already having enhanced regional warming effect. Figure 5 shows one such set of measurements for November 2011. The long term increasing temperature trend is shown in figure 8 and an exponential curve is fitted to it to show where it might be leading. The sea around Svalbard (Spitsbergen) is one such place where it has warmed and in the daily sea-ice cover maps generated by the National Snow and Ice Data Center, this is main area that is having trouble freezing over during the annual winter freeze. In figure 9 the orange line represents the sea-ice boundary and the white areas are obviously sea-ice extent on that date. As can be seen a huge area remains exposed (as of Jan 10th 2013) and this means as soon as the sun returns in spring, this will be absorbing sunlight whereas normally this might not occur until much later in the summer. Since then much of the area has since frozen over but this will be very young and thin ice that will quickly break up and melt come the spring. To give some perspective to this, another few facts need to be considered. To just turn ice that is very slightly below 0°C into water requires 334,000 joules of energy for every kilogram or basically for every one litre of water. However the same quantity of heat applied to water at 0° would bring it to 80°C. This means that once all the sea-ice is melted over the entire Arctic ocean in the summer in a few years time, then 100% of this heat will go into heating the water. Now this is not to suggest it will raise it anywhere near 80° because one year old ice was about 1 metre thick whereas the water varies from 50m to 100s of meters in depth and so the volumes are far greater and the same quantity of heat is therefore spread much thinner leading to a smaller overall temperature rise. But while the ice capped the ocean, no heat would have been entering from above, and this changes dramatically with it removed and in the process allowing winds to stir up the ocean and completely changing the weather in the Arctic. Indeed last Aug 2012 a huge stormed churned up the Arctic Ocean for several days battering what remained of the sea-ice. See Huge Cyclone Batters Arctic Sea Ice. You are now entering the non-linearity zoneThese are extracts from a blog entry by scientist Paul Beckwith. Full text is herePush something and it moves a little. Push it a little more and it moves a little more. This is called a linearity response. But sometimes a little push can lead to something totally unexpected! This is called nonlinearity and, contrary to what one might think, nonlinearities are inherent in most systems - like our atmosphere, for example. In fact, abrupt and unexpected change happens at some point in most systems - we even have a saying for such unexpected outcomes: a tipping point. Until recently, our atmosphere and oceans behaved like linear systems: incremental dumping of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere caused incremental changes, like rising temperatures and predictable rates of ice melt. But things are now changing unexpectedly fast nonlinearity is kicking in! We only have to look at the rapidly vanishing arctic icecap for astonishing evidence........... ....... The rapidly disappearing Arctic icecap is a tipping point in motion. In all likelihood, statistically speaking, its gone, history. Within a few years when the ice disappears entirely, for the first time in 3 (or as many as 13) million years, hold on because our weather patterns will be drastically destabilized. Most folks in my field are still reluctant to acknowledge this 800 pound gorilla staring us right in the face..... The difference in temperature between the equator and the poles is the engine that drives the climate / weather system and causes the winds to blow towards the poles. As part of that dynamical process, each hemisphere of the Earth has three main atmospheric circulatory cells and they are the Hadley cell from the equator to the tropics (~ 30° North/South, the Ferrel cell generating the westerly winds between the tropics and approx 60oN/S and the Polar cell which contains cold polar air. The polar jet stream separates the mid-latitude mild air-mass from the cold polar air-mass and in the process keeping the cold air within the Arctic for most of the time. Nearly all the storms and cyclones in the Atlantic track the position of the polar jet stream. It forms a high speed wind that circles the globe (at 60N/S) and fluctuates to some degree due to atmospheric (Rossby) waves that pass along it. However as the temperature difference becomes less due to warming in the Arctic, the intensity of the jet stream winds reduce and this has been observed in the past decade or so. Because it is weaker it is less stable and larger waves can be induced in it and this has resulted in warm air masses penetrating further into the Arctic. The reverse has also occurred where large tongues of polar air have reached further southward than normal and the two cold spells (over Europe including Ireland) in November and December in 2010 are an example of this. (See figure 10 for an illustration of this jet stream weakening where it swung south and pinned hurricane Sandy drawing it Westwards inland instead of the typical track North and Eastwards). As a result of this weakening, the Jet Stream is also becoming stuck over geographical features. Again the series of wetter summers over UK and Ireland in the past 5 years are examples of blocking actions, where the same persistent pattern is stuck over the same place. The contrary is that other areas suffering hot dry periods had these conditions persisting too. It is these very conditions that led to crop failures in the Russia in 2010 and in USA in 2012. In figure 11, produced by Complex System Institute they demonstrate the linkage between crop failures, food prices increases and food riots and social unrest. This weakening effect of the polar jet stream is pretty much documented at Sea level pressure changes since 2007 where a series of average monthly pressure charts are presented and two of the charts are shown below in figure 12 and they depict for air pressure in June 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2012 and differences compared to the average for the period 1948 - 1978. A persistent low pressure is evident over UK and Ireland and these correspond to the very wet summers of those years. This ties in with the idea of the jet stream getting stuck in a blocking pattern. It should be clear then that the measurements from weather stations, research cruises and data from satellites leave no doubt that major changes are occurring and with increasing rapidity and while many scientists even at this late stage will hedge their bets for fear of losing their jobs, it is quite clear to me and obviously to those who formed the Arctic Methane Emergency Group that we are already at the beginning of runaway Climate Change/Warming. We are well past the point of that frequent phrase we hear trotted out so often in the media to calm everyone down that there is 10 more years or 5 more years. These are excuses to continue as we are. And whilst I was never a fan of geo-engineering in the vain hope that the right thing would be done, I would have to concede that there is now no option. It goes without saying though that this should nor cannot be a solution that allows business-as-usual. The predatory capitalist system cannot co-exist with an viable planet and we should not forget that the old Soviet system in the USSR was vastly wasteful of energy and thus had high emissions and destructive of resources too. We are faced with triple problems and they are 1) tackling the climate, 2) destroying the present dominant political-economic system and 3) fixing 1) and replacing 2) with a sustainable system. We could add a third problem which is the ongoing ecological problem but we will leave that aside here for the sake of brevity. At a minimum, should geo-engineering be taken on, then at the same time the entire functioning and structure of society would need to be rapidly changed to make use of the time that geo-engineering would buy. The key challenge is that any complex society of whatever political form by its very nature uses a lot of energy and resources and yet a way has to be found to change this even though it appears to be an inherent property of such systems and therefore it is possible that you can't have a complex society with low energy use. (See for example: The Collapse of Complex Societies by Joseph Tainter). It may be impossible but there is no option but to try and the only way to reduce energy and resource usage is by greatly increasing sharing and in an urban environment the most obvious way would be to switch as much transport as possible away from the current form of the private car into walking, cycling and mass public transit. One way to encourage this would be to expand it and make it free. For example in the case of Dublin Bus, there are only about 2,000 buses to serve close to a million people so quadrupling the number of buses to 8,000 would give a vastly improved service and yet the same city probably has in the region of 300,000 cars. So the saving in all the fuel, resources and emissions to serve those vehicles would be huge -if replicated across every major city. Another change would be to set a very high standard of energy use for all buildings and then have them retrofitted to meet that standard. In parallel to a global scale program to reduce energy usage, there would also be a need for a wartime type like effort to further increase renewable energy whilst at the same time quickly phasing out fossil fuel usage although that is not necessarily as technically easy as some proponents would say it is. But the changes would not stop at energy usage because land usage and other effects of society on the environment would have to dealt with too. For example it may be necessary to rapidly increase the level of forestry and reduce agricultural land to increase the size of the carbon sinks again. Given it takes 10 kg of plant material to generate 1 kg of meat then this implies a reduction in the consumption of meat to offset reductions in agricultural output but still providing enough. However while these appeals to rational behaviour are all fine, we all know that none of this is likely to happen. What person now is going to want that level of change, demand it or support it if to them it just seems that the weather is either a bit milder, wetter, dryer or hotter? Besides the enormous powerful vested interests that would be challenged and who would use the forces of the State to batter anyone into the ground. No, it is only when agriculture has been so disrupted by weather that is unseasonal and unsuitable to the conditions for crop growth, followed by the associated unrest that the political base for that sort of change could begin to form. Yet for things to get to that stage, we would be even further into runaway climate change and higher up that exponential curve in figure 8. It is thus hard to see how anything can be done and will be done. Humans are just not good at getting worked up emotionally over abstractions like global problems and react much better to immediate and in your face events. Probably the only way to stimulate responses to these more abstract issues is through saturation propaganda and this implies a very unsettling, dangerous and unreliable way to solve it because this is the same technique used to send millions off to war or to buy overpriced property or most ironically to be prolific consumers. It is the very same politicized tool that has played a major role in us getting to our situation. The only way to break the reckless, suicidal and immature behaviour of society as it lurches forward in a stupor towards multiple fatal global problems is to get on a sustainable path and break the stranglehold of the present system is for people everywhere to be far more aware, mature, educated and not just in the academic sense but in the life and nature sense and to be clued in and empowered enough to want and be able to make rational informed decisions. So the real challenge is getting there. The current capitalist system has managed to create a largely narcissistic dumbed-down society where people invest all their intellect and attention in having encylopaedic knowledge of unimportant trivia because by virtue of saturation trivia it is a way of saying to people there is nothing to worry about, everything is working fine and all you have to worry about is watching this TV SOAP or following the daily life of these vain celebrities. Because if there really was a problem then surely this shit wouldn't still be broadcast and since it is, then all is generally fine. In the meantime back in the real world massive problems loom but since the system in control can't deal with them, it denies them and shuts them out for everyone else. These problems also are a threat to their power and status because it should be clear to anyone that solving them requires a radical overhaul of the structure of society. We can't blame this solely on the capitalist system although it is really a creditism system since it has been debt fueled for quite awhile because the same dynamics would probably apply to any form of hierarchical power group whatever political label was used on it. Alas, there is no time for these changes to happen to get us where we need to be. It is too late. So one ought to consider whether we are just another failed natural experiment at trying to make the transition from individual intelligence to collective intelligence whilst grappling with the Pandora's box opened by technology and take on the inherent responsibility to not just ourselves but the wider biosphere that comes with attaining great knowledge. From an outside perspective it certainly looks like these seemingly inbuilt natural challenges are a way of preventing the lunatics and psychopaths escaping from the asylum which in our case is the Earth itself. And so just like over the course of evolution, many species have tried out different forms, failed and gone then there is no reason to believe we are not just one of the many failures as statistically this is probably more likely than the successful cases and in this sub-domain of evolution of intelligent civilisations, the testing ground occurs at a much broader scale across entire galaxies with 100s of billions of planets thereby giving it the sheer numbers of trials it needs, in the same way that say one in a billion cells might have the right mutation to acquire some particular capability, to get to the next point in its evolutionary path. Therefore the best you can do is follow the links to blogs and articles provided and at least try and understand what is happening and keep an eye on the Arctic sea ice melt in 2013 and see how things unfold.
Related Links: Definitions
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latent_Heat |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadley_Cell |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jet_stream |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methane_clathrate |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arctic_Ocean |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permian_extinction |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleocene-Eocene_Thermal_Maximum |
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Tainter |
Methane-driven oceanic eruptions and mass extinctions |
Wipeout: the end-Permian mass extinction |
Beyond methane: Towards a theory for the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum
Comments (110 of 110)
by Janes Hanson Tue Mar 05, 2013 04:47
This video refutes the Global Warming consensus proposed by the government scientists. Caption: Video Id: fWDc6lpcqzc Type: Youtube Video
by mac the knffe Sat Mar 09, 2013 22:12
No it very much dosnt, unfortunately for the rest of us refute anything based as it is on half truths, selective facts and misleading interpretations of science.Smacks of another half arsed effort by deniers and co to cloud the facts and delay the kind of action we need to stop a disaster.
by Mike Czech Mon Mar 11, 2013 18:33
13 years ago a Leading "Climate Scientist" at the CRU said
" According to Dr David Viner, a senior research scientist at the climatic research unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia,within a few years winter snowfall will become "a very rare and exciting event". "Children just aren't going to know what snow is," said.Dr Viner of the CRU" Anyone interested in a less ridiculous, alarmism-free look at recent global temperatures can see graphs here: http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/rss/from:1997/plot/rss...trend
by T Mon Mar 11, 2013 21:00
You clearly haven't read the article because you don't address any of the points.
by Mike Czech Mon Mar 11, 2013 21:19
it's just the usual alarmist/Sky-Is-Falling/"OMFG We're all gonna DIe!!!" crap, except this time they have merely substituted Methane, instead of CO2, as the nefarious Boogy-man that's supposedly gonna kill us all
by Rational Ecologist. Mon Mar 11, 2013 21:30
I'll listen to James Hansen and his colleagues. If you want to fool yourself that Climate Catastrophe is not imminent, then nothing will convince you otherwise. I came at this issue very sceptically and with a very open mind, listening to both sides(we are all on the same side on this) and have, atfer extensive research, came to the conclusion that the preponderance of the evidence points to DISASTER!! I do hope I am proved wrong: I am no Cassandra.
by Mike Czech Mon Mar 11, 2013 21:40
Relying on so-called "experts" to interpret it for me is just another way of saying "I prefer someone else to do my thinking for me".
by Mike Czech Mon Mar 11, 2013 22:02
In 1988, Hansen was asked for a prediction of what the scene outside his window would look like in 40 years time:
He looked for a while and was quiet and didnt say anything for a couple seconds. Then he said, Well, there will be more traffic. I, of course, didnt think he heard the question right. Then he explained, Well we're half way through Hansen's 40yr prediction and a grand Total of NONE of these things Hansen predicted look even remotely like they are going to occur within the 40 yr timeframe. For example there has been NO significant change whatsoever in the rate of sea-level rise, since Hansen made his little "prediction". It really does not get more "wrong" that that.
by T Mon Mar 11, 2013 22:09
Again you clearly haven't read the article. There was no mention of James Hansen in the article. The article is mostly about what has happened and is happening.
by Mike Czech Mon Mar 11, 2013 22:17
@ RE "I do hope I am proved wrong: I am no Cassandra."
- http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=llJeAAAAIBAJ&sjid=...hl=en - The Press-Courier (Milwaukee) June 11 1986 - Staying in 1986 for the moment, we have this unequivocal prediction:
- http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=n39JAAAAIBAJ&sjid=...hl=en - The News and Courier, June 17th 1986 - Going back to 1982, we find Hansen arguing that if fossil fuel use was restricted, England might be a tropical paradise by 2050. If we carried on as normal, the world would be back in the sort of heat last seen in the age of the dinosaurs.
If there were slow growth in the use of hydrocarbon fuels, the world in the middle of the next century would be as warm as it was 125,000 years ago, when lions, elephants and other tropical animals roamed a balmy southern England. Pursuing present plans for coal and oil, Hansen found, the climate in the middle of the 21st century would approach the warmth of the age of the dinosaurs - http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=CZJVAAAAIBAJ&sjid=...hl=en - The Leader-Post, January 9th, 1982. - By 1989, far from toning it down, Hansen was starting to really turn up the heat, predicting totally unprecedented warming so far as mankind was concerned:
Computer models by Hansen and others suggest that by the middle of the next century earths average temperature may rise 4 to 9 degrees Fahrenheit, possibly altering storm patterns, making crops fail, and raising sea levels to flood low-lying coastal areas. - http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=aKxdAAAAIBAJ&sjid=...hl=en - Observer-Reporter, December 7th, 1989 - And in 2006, he was still going strong. Unabashed by the failure of the world to warm significantly, Hansen was still predicting massive temperature increases. Remember that in the interview below, with a British newspaper, he is talking in degrees Celsius for temperature, and in metres (one metre = 3 feet) for sea level rise:
- http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change....html - The Independent, 17th February, 2006 - Thats a 25 metre 75 feet rise in sea level by the end of the century. So far, it doesnt look like this one will fare any better than the rest. So when it comes to making predictions about the climate Hansen is clearly a failure Oh, by all means, pay as much attention as YOU like to Dr Hansen's ridiculous "predictions" - but please have the basic decency and common courtesy not to go around demanding that the rest of us pay any attention to this obvious failure
by T Mon Mar 11, 2013 22:35
I get it. By attacking the prediction that one individual made years ago, you want us to discard regard all the observations and assume that all the climate scientists are wrong. It seems then there is nothing to worry about with all that sea-ice melting further back each year in the Arctic and the methane readings are nothing to worry about too because as you were saying it is just scare mongering.
by Mike Czech Mon Mar 11, 2013 23:05
Again you clearly haven't read the article.
Back in Feb 2012 Jason Box published a paper where he observed at the increasing amounts of global soot reaching the Arctic was darkening the surface and predicted that as more wildfires break as the climate warms this soot load would increase to the point that eventually it would have the effect of lower the reflectivity of the Greenland ice sheet enough to cause the whole thing to start melting. He predicted this would happen within a decade. In fact this is exactly what happened just a few months later in July 12th 2012 where the entire surface of the ice sheet was melting for at least one day. To investigate this the Dark Snow Project has been launched to carry out research next year in Greenland and they are using crowd-sourcing to try and fund it. Some here may remember the event in question - at the time the media was full of headlines stating that "90-something % of Greenland melts" which was a completely inaccurate description of the event and went unchallenged by the majority of the AGW alarmist community. What really happened was that for a brief moment in time a very thin layer of melt watered appeared on the surface of the Greenland Ice Sheets. Far from being "unprecedented" this event was completely expected as such events occur approx every 150yrrs. The last such occurred in 1889. So basically this event was right on time. But that didn't stop the media claiming it was "unprecedented" and none of the leading so-called Climate "Scientists" that support the AGW theory bothered to take the time to publicly correct the media's blatantly false portrayal of this event NASA was responsible for the press release and correctly placed this event in it's historical context, as in this line: Ice cores from Summit show that melting events of this type occur about once every 150 years on average. With the last one happening in 1889, this event is right on time, says Lora Koenig, a Goddard glaciologist and a member of the research team analyzing the satellite data. But if we continue to observe melting events like this in upcoming years, it will be worrisome. (See more on this blatant alarmist misrepresentation here: http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/07/25/unpreceden...ears/ ) And now whoever wrote that article which T has cobbled together above, is curiously trying to claim that this completely expected and right-on-time event is actually proof of some theory of his - (Dark Snow Project) Nowhere in the piece I excerpted above (Dark Snow Project) is it stated that this melting event was already predicted and completely expected, merely as a result of studying the historical record. With that sort of carry on, that level of unscientific behaviour, why would anyone pay any attention to anything this person claims?
by Mike Czech Mon Mar 11, 2013 23:14
"I get it. By attacking the prediction that one individual made years ago, you want us to discard regard all the observations and assume that all the climate scientists are wrong"
by T Mon Mar 11, 2013 23:57
The Dark Snow Project is about the decreasing albedo of Greenland which has occurred and it is due to the annual winter snow melting and exposing the underlying ice which contains a lot of grit, soot and other dark material from basically aerosols from industrial activity. And it was Jason Box who theorized that this would leading to an increase absorbition of solar radiation in the summer months and would lead to more widespread melting across a wider area of the surface. He thought it would take ten years. In fact it happened within a few months of him suggesting it. You are speculating this is a one off 150 year event. Actually previous summers had seen increased annual summer melt over Greenland.
by Mike Czech Mon Mar 11, 2013 23:59
" if for some strange reason we do have an Arctic free of ice in 2015 / 2016 during the minimum, are we to suppose it is not really true or nothing to worry because James Hansen's predictions about New York didn't come true on time "
When each predicted date approaches and the prediction is shown to be nothing but hysterical alarmist nonsense, a great palaver is convened and "hey, presto!" a new date, far off into the future, is conjured out of thin air, (or out of some pseudo-scientists rear-end, for all we know) And BTW Hansen has had a lot more than ONE prediction fail.
by Mike Czech Tue Mar 12, 2013 00:09
"You are speculating this is a one off 150 year event."
by T Tue Mar 12, 2013 00:17
Mr. Box did not write anything about methane with regards his paper (which is linked) in relation to methane.
by Mike Czech Tue Mar 12, 2013 00:28
Mr. Box did not write anything about methane with regards his paper (which is linked) in relation to methane.
by Mike Czech Tue Mar 12, 2013 00:34
So far you have yet to even acknowledge that NASA have stated that this melt event is completely expected and happen s approx every 150 yrs.
by mac the knife Tue Mar 12, 2013 01:36
Re Czech it out
by Mike Czech Tue Mar 12, 2013 01:55
Gas Outlets off Spitsbergen Are No New Phenomenon - http://www.geomar.de/index.php?id=4&no_cache=1&tx_ttnews[tt_news]=903&tx_ttnews[backPid]=185&L=1 FS MARIA S. MERIAN journey: MSM21/4 Head of Expedition: Prof. Dr. Christian Berndt (GEOMAR) Length of Expedition: 13th Aug. 2012-11th Sept. 2012 Place of Departure: Reykjavik Research Area: West of Spitsbergen Place of Arrival: Emden Further Information on the GEOMAR expedition page September 19, 2012/Kiel. Marine scientists from Kiel, together with colleagues from Bremen, Great Britain, Switzerland and Norway, spent four and a half weeks examining methane emanation from the sea bed off the coast of Spitsbergen with the German research vessel MARIA S. MERIAN. There they gained a very differentiated picture: Several of the gas outlets have been active for hundreds of years. Frequent storms and sub-zero temperatures nature drove the marine researchers that were assessing gas outlets on the sea bed off the coast of Spitsbergen for four and a half weeks to their limits. Nevertheless the participants were very pleased when they returned: We were able to gather many samples and data in the affected area. With the submersible JAGO we even managed to form an impression of the sea bed and the gas vents summarised the chief scientist Professor Dr. Christian Berndt from GEOMAR | Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research Kiel. The reason for the expedition was the supposition that ice-like methane hydrates stored in the sea bed were dissolving due to rising water temperatures. Methane hydrate is only stable at very low temperatures and under very high pressure. The gas outlets off Spitsbergen lie approximately at a depth which marks the border between stability and dissolution. Therefore we presumed that a measurable rise in water temperature in the Arctic could dissolve the hydrates from the top downwards explained Professor Berndt. Methane could then be released into the water or even into the atmosphere, where it would act as a much stronger greenhouse gas than CO2. In fact, what the researchers found in the area offers a much more differentiated picture. Above all the fear that the gas emanation is a consequence of the current rising sea temperature does not seem to apply. At least some of the gas outlets have been active for longer. Carbonate deposits, which form when microorganisms convert the escaping methane, were found on the vents. At numerous emergences we found deposits that might already be hundreds of years old. This estimation is indeed only based on the size of the samples and empirical values as to how fast such deposits grow. On any account, the methane sources must be older says Professor Berndt. The exact age of the carbonates will be determined from samples in GEOMARs laboratories. . . . . . . The graph below was posted earlier showing a spike in methane 2011/2012 - the above news report refers to what happened when the source of that 'spike' was investigated by a ship-based Scientific expedition. So . . . . Panic over! Phew!!!!! almost had me going there T. I actually foolishly thought for a minute or two that maybe this methane bogey-man you were waving around the place was actually something to worry about but as usual it's just, as I stated in my 2nd comment on this thread ,more of the usual climate-alarmist dramatic-hand-waving nonsense. You'd think I'd know better by now, eh? So it seems I was right when I earlier stated
by Mike Czech Mon Mar 11, 2013 21:19 "it's just the usual alarmist/Sky-Is-Falling/"OMFG We're all gonna DIe!!!" crap, except this time they have merely substituted Methane, instead of CO2, as the nefarious Boogy-man that's supposedly gonna kill us all I guess the Clima-bots finally realised that people were becoming aware that we've had 16yrs of constant CO2 rise while Temperatures have remained flat over that time. "
by Mike Czech Tue Mar 12, 2013 03:30
- The Arctic ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot, according to a report to the Commerce Department yesterday from Consul Ifft, at Bergen, Norway. - - Reports from fishermen, seal hunters and explorers, he declared, all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone. Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met with as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes. Soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters showed the gulf stream still very warm. - - Great masses of ice have been replaced by moraines of earth and stones, the report continued, while at many points well known glaciers have entirely disappeared. Very few seals and no white fish are found in the eastern Arctic, while vast shoals of herring and smelts, which have never before ventured so far north, are being encountered in the old seal fishing grounds. - Click the image below to see the full article or download the PDF of that page which exists @ http://docs.lib.noaa.gov/rescue/mwr/050/mwr-050-11-0589...a.pdf -(from NOAAs archives)
by Mike Czech Tue Mar 12, 2013 03:37
climate alarmism through the ages - disappointingly unoriginal
by fred Tue Mar 12, 2013 05:31
how very scientific of you Mike!
by Mike Czech Tue Mar 12, 2013 06:01
You dismiss the report of the Scientific Expidition which thoroughly discredits T's Methane "Bomb" scare-mongering claims, which turn out to be little more than the usual Climate-Alarmist nonsense, and all because of a reprint of a newspaper article from 1922?
by Mike Czech Tue Mar 12, 2013 06:10
" you'll forgive me if I don't trust what you have to say very much!"
by T Tue Mar 12, 2013 23:28
I note the recent expedition found microorganisms and evidence yet to be confirmed that some of these vents that were leaking methane could be hundreds of years old. This is exactly as you would expect. The methane in the Arctic has been probably there from thousands to perhaps millions of years and I am sure and confident that it is continually made, leaks and is a source of food for these microorganisms. Some of the discussion around methane leaks suggest it would be expected at the head of glaciers where they meet the sea and other edges. On average you would expect a certain background level of emissions and nobody would dispute this. The difference is and why fig 6 was used is that these emissions have suddenly risen. Fig 6 is for just one area, but the satellite data was shown in figure 5 to demonstrate that it is not just a local occurrence and the levels of emissions have risen in recent years and seem to change quite rapidly.
by fred Wed Mar 13, 2013 08:16
"where did i do that? I don't remember comparing any scientific data from 2012 with any article from 1922.
by Mike Czech Wed Mar 13, 2013 09:17
Despite all your blather about "Science" you have yet to even discuss any. So far all we have out of you is (completely against the rules) personal attacks - I guess that's what one has to do if one wants to comment bu actually has noting to say worth Listening to.
by mac the knife Wed Mar 13, 2013 11:24
my, but you have lots of time on you hand czech! now that youve taken to citing scientific evidence lets hope you will read a few more peer reviewed journals among the 99.999% out there confirming and warning of the dangers of climate change induced by fossil fuel use....or maybe just keep pedaling the carbon multinationals myths for them, seems to be working for you.
by Rational Ecologist. Wed Mar 13, 2013 12:17
Well, I've never been referred to as a troll before; however, I have been called much worse. Generally, that is more of a reflection on the other person, rather than me.
by fred Wed Mar 13, 2013 16:48
see here:
by Joe Snow Tue Apr 02, 2013 13:37
It's a pity the entire article is a mish-mash of questions, theories, hysterical fears, apocolyptic outcomes and what most non-government scientists call, 'junk science'. I prefer to read actual scientific argument from both sides of the Global Warming argument. And yes, I did read it, so don't try to dismiss my criticism with that glib rebuke, as you have done above.
by fred Wed Apr 03, 2013 19:24
Joe, governments and their masters do tend to have agendas and are opportunistic and will use anything available to further those agendas. I don't disagree.
by T Mon May 06, 2013 22:29
This video was put together by Andy Robinson in an attempt to convey how over the past decade the Sea Ice volume has been dramatically declining. It is only a few minutes and is well worth viewing because it graphically demonstrates what is happening Caption: Video Id: YgiMBxaL19M Type: Youtube Video
by Fuckin Freezin Sat May 11, 2013 20:44
Alaska Endures Record Cold While Still Buried Under Snow - http://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/alaska-exper...41665 May 11, 2013; 8:07 AM The five-week period from April 3 to May 7 was the coldest in 109 years of record keeping at Fairbanks, Alaska, according to the National Weather Service (NWS). Temperatures during this period averaged only 19.9 degrees and broke the old record for the same stretch of days set in 1924. According to Expert Senior Meteorologist Joe Lundberg, "Fairbanks has not had a day above 50 degrees since Oct. 4, 2012." The chilly streak was the fourth longest on record. The normal high for May 8 is 58 degrees at Fairbanks. To go along with the cold, the city still had 10 inches of snow on the ground as of the midday hours on May 8, this was despite having a near-average amount of snow for the winter season at 68.5 inches. The average amount for Fairbanks is 64.5 inches. Snow has been consistently covering the ground since Oct. 15 in Fairbanks............ ...............The record for the greatest number of days with 0.50 of an inch or more of snow on the ground for Anchorage is 193 days set during the winter of 1971-72, when snow was on the ground from Oct. 23 to May 3. Anchorage has received about 92 inches of snow so far this winter season, compared to a normal of about 75 inches. "Runaway Global Warming" me arse
by Rational Ecologist Thu May 16, 2013 17:12
I was sitting having a coffee in Dunleary a few years ago and was eavesdropping on two D4 types(Ross O' Carroll Kelly shtick of the south Dublin area), talking about the weather, when one said to the other and I quote "I'll believe in Global Warming when it's not so cold in Dalkey in June!". They both probably got into their Land Rovers to negotiate the local, treachorous terrain of South Dublin and did their bit to combat the Dunleary mini ice age.
by Scott Schafer Fri Jul 26, 2013 16:15
Those who say that global warming isn't happening because surface temperatures have been flat for the past sixteen years are either misinformed or are being disingenuous. The warming trend has slowed on land, but has accelerated in the deep ocean.
by T Mon Oct 21, 2013 16:46
The picture attached here is of University of Alaska Fairbanks research Katey Walter lighting a pocket of methane on a thermokarst lake in Siberia in March of 2007
by Crazy Cat Sat Nov 09, 2013 11:52
Greenhouse Gases Hit New Record High, an article from Environment News Service
by Crazy Cat Sat Nov 30, 2013 10:11
Study doubles estimate for methane venting from shallow Siberian Arctic waters. Article from the Alaska Dispatch:
by Real Science Sun Dec 01, 2013 13:40
This "arctic-methane-released-at-blinding-speed" meme is alarmist chicken-little nonsense - Climate alarmists make these scary-sounding claims about Arctic Methane at this time every year becase they can then run arond trying to scare people by babbling excitedly that "methane has increased recently"!!!!!!- well guess what? Arctic Methane ALWAYS increases at this time of the year. - and these alarmists already know that before they try to con people by babbling about an increase in methane see for yourself - see the graph of "Methane (CH4) by Latitude" here presented by the Earth System Research Laboratory. - http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/globalview/ch4/ch4_in....html The Methane distribution data is presented "by Latitude" because there is a very uneven world-wide distribution - most of it sits over the Arctic and nearby regions - but you don't get told that by the Alarmists when they show you big scary graphs all decked out in red over the attic. Astute observers will note that those all-decked-out-in-red graphs that the alarmists are so fond of are to be seen in the very misleading, and anyway now proven to be alarmist nonsense , article above. What these dishonest people do not tell you is that because of how Methane is so unevenly distributed, the Arctic will always have extremely high concentrations of Methane - the Arctic areas will ALWAYS have the highest concentrations - but the Alarmists don't tell you that because then you might not get so alarmed by their nonsense. anyone presenting such graphs of methane distribution are nothing but charlatans - less than 5 minutes research will show anyone that presenting methane in such a way is completely dishonest. Here is a link to an HONEST attempt to graphs Methane by Latitude - http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/globalview/images/gvc...e.gif - this graphic will also show that Methane increases at this time of the year, EVERY YEAR Also note that Methane is measured in "parts per billion", btw, not "parts per million" like CO2, and also degrades quite quickly in the natural environment - again not something the Alarmists have a habit of mentioning And again, according to the ESRL, here are the "NOAA In Situ Methane (CH4) Measurements" - http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/obop/mlo/programs/esrl/met...html- ESRL states, regarding trends in the data: "Methane was steadily increasing in the 1980's, it's growth rate slowed in the 1990's, and it has had a near-zero growth rate for the last few years."The EPA states that the near zero growth rate is a result of emissions-lowering efforts Below are 3 graphs - the first shows Temp Anomalies over the past decade - absolutely no sign on Runaway Anything in that graph - certainly no sign of runaway global warming The second and 3rd graphs are simple, accurate and easy to understand graphs of Methane Distribution by Latitude
by Crazy Cat Sat Dec 28, 2013 14:33
An article from the National Academy of Sciences:
by Crazy Cat Sun Dec 29, 2013 14:49
An excellent talk from Professor James White from the university of Colorado on
by FFS Thu Jan 09, 2014 11:38
It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his job depends on not understanding it. Upton Sinclair US novelist & socialist politician (1878 - 1968) Caption: Video Id: YtevF4B4RtQ Type: Youtube Video
by T Thu Jan 09, 2014 22:32
Ah yes that was the programme that appeared on the TV a few years back. Soon after it came out, a number of scientists who were interviewed on it, said they were taken out of context and misrepresented. Then when the points raised in it were analysed, each one was debunked and it was shown that many of the facts in it were not facts and the programme was just blatantly fraudulent
by FFS Tue Jan 14, 2014 12:35
Since this article, (of what looks to me like a pseudo scientific hodge-podge of deliberately misleading graphs and hilarious misdirection), was published, T, nearly a year has passed. "Has Arctic Methane 'Bomb' Just Gone Off?"is a fairly resounding "No!"
by FFS Tue Jan 14, 2014 15:13
Earlier you said
by T Tue Jan 14, 2014 22:58
To answer the methane bomb question as to whether it is gone off. I would say we are right in the middle of the process and it will unfold for many more years yet.
by ffs Wed Jan 15, 2014 00:26
Tsk tsk The methane bomb question as to whether it is gone off. I would say we are right in the middle of the process and it will unfold for many more years yet. Jaysus T, thats some load of crap youjust cobbled together in that sentence. So you have to make some nonsense up, i understand that, since you tru-believers can NEVER admit any error, but really? Right in the middle huh? Oh, scary Whatever it is youre doing T, I can assure you it aint science - PR or marketing more like Once again this year the sea-ice has largely failed to form to it's traditional 30 year extent in the Barents That quite a obfuscatory statement, especially since this years ice has seen a 26 percent rise on the previous year, and theres loads more multiyear ice as well You trubelievers dont appear to do science nor honesty very well
by ffs Wed Jan 15, 2014 00:35
Way up on last year T, and lots on multiyear ice there as well
by ffs Wed Jan 15, 2014 00:45
All that those dishonest graphs you use show, T, is a slightly different DISTRIBITION of methane, from 2013 to 2014
by hahah Wed Jan 15, 2014 17:03
Methane is unstable and breaks down quickly in the atmosphere, and even if it doubled would have essentially no impact on the greenhouse effect. In the tropics, the effect would be an increase in downwelling longwave radiation of about 0.04%.
by fred Wed Jan 15, 2014 20:27
I watched your video FFS, and it was interesting and I found it quite convincing.
by FFS Wed Jan 15, 2014 20:58
I completely get what you are talking about Fred
by T Wed Jan 15, 2014 21:06
I don't know what is dishonest about the graphs. It seems you have to rely on insults to make your point. I don't wish to engage in this type of ignorant behaviour.
by FFS Thu Jan 30, 2014 13:19
I don't know what is dishonest about the graphs. It seems you have to rely on insults to make your point. I don't wish to engage in this type of ignorant behaviour. T you're really obliging I must say. Other than quoting YOUR OWN WORDS from the recent past, I don't even have to do hardly anything to demonstrate how dishonest your use of of a graph from JANUARY to bamboozle people once again. Here's something T already knows and so does anyone that knows anything about Sea Ice and Honesty. SEPTEMBER sea Ice figures are what the climate Alarmists claim are relevant- T already knows this and we already know that T knows this. Well Done T! Here is what T had to say back in December 2011 Re: Pure nonsense form the climate Alarmists - http://www.indymedia.ie/article/100976?search_text=Arct...86276 The Graph shown below, of Arctic Sea Ice in Sept, at the end of the melt season, is the sort of Graph T Should have used if he was intent on a reasonably honest representation of the situation. As anyone can see the Sept level for 2013 lies well within the 2 Standard Deviation boundary. For some reason T does not want to display that sort of info himself. No! He'd rather talk about Dec2013/Jan2014 rather than September 2013 T might be the only man on earth concerned with JANUARY Sea Ice Levels in the Arctic The figure regarding sea-ice has increased by 25% over last year is simply wrong. Now T that's just a blatantly false statement from you, and anyone can see this for themselves simply by looking at the graph posted below. The source for that graphs is the US National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/files/2013/09/Figure2...6.png which is the Official repository of such info Both T's unrepresentative graph and my much more informative Graph come from the EXACT same source - the difference is that T is trying to misrepresent the 2013 figures by referring to the completely irrelevant Dec 2013 figures and ignoring the highly relevant September 2013 figures, while I am not For some reason known only to himself T chose to completely misrepresent the situation by choosing to play "hide-the-ball" by concentrating on Dec 2013/ January 2014
by FFS Wed Feb 05, 2014 11:57
Earlier, T said : Methane remains in the atmosphere for approximately 25 years. That is just blatant dishonesty, T. Anyone could check for themselves how long Methane stays in the atmosphere by simply googling "how long does methane remain in the atmosphere?" - the very first 2 articles I got were
In fact ALL the sources I checked on that page gave a figure of 12 years for methane (CH4) So why would you come out with a figure that is 100% more than the real figure? That is very strange indeed, T. What are you trying to do? Deliberately Mislead people? Or is it that your knowledge of this subject so bad that you don't even know the most basic facts about this subject? And all this despite cobbling together a hodge-podge of alarmist nonsense on the subject and posting it here, complete with silly (mis/un)representative graphs, all decked out in red, meant to scare the pants off, and living daylights out, of anyone that didn't check out your statements too closely ? I guess that was what all the graphs were for - to distract people from the fact that almost everything in T's article is false, completely unrepresentative nonsensical hyperbole is the absolute kindest description one cold offer The important point in them is that methane emissions are continuing to escape from the various regions around the Arctic and my reading of them which is plain for anyone to see is as I stated in the original comment. But, T, that is almolst exactly as was said in an earlier comment on this thread Arctic Methane ALWAYS increases at this time of the year. [AND it always increases most in the latitudes T is highlighting - always - every year - T never once mentioned that FACT- Why Not?]
by Rational Ecologist. Mon Feb 10, 2014 13:07
Please check out a film titled 'Chasing Ice' on the topic of glacial retreat.
by FFS Thu Feb 13, 2014 22:04
We wouldn't want ye to end up like this guy . . . . "Children just won't know what Snow is!" Plenty of Ice about too - Next I spose some ridiculously gullible Climabot will reply that it's all been predicted. Warming=ICE, according to the Clima-Zombies
by FFS Thu Feb 13, 2014 22:19
On the ground in 49 of 50 US states
by FFS Thu Feb 13, 2014 22:46
According to leading Climate "Scientists" in 2000 Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past - http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/snowfalls-are-....html
These so-called Climate "Scientists" mentioned above have really ended up looking very stupid indeed No wonder people read the words of these fools years later and think "What a bunch of idiots!"
by Crazy Cat Fri Feb 14, 2014 16:13
I just read this! From the Los Angeles Times
by FFS Fri Feb 14, 2014 16:45
So according to the scientifik genius above If it's warm it's because of Globull Warming Wow. You Climabots have no shame whatsoever, do ye? So basically: everything is "proof" of your pet theories? there seems to be no set of circumstances that would prove you people wrong, on ANY level - (according to yourselves, that is) THAT is almost identical to the certainty people with irrational Religious beliefs display in that face of contradictory evidence - which makes your linking to that silly LA Times Cartoon much more ironic than you initially thought it be, I'd say. For example T has yet to admit that his whole article is founded on a thin tissue of hysterical alarmist ignorant pseudo-scientific clap-trap, backed up by a plethora of (mis/un)representative big-scary graphs topped-off with an unhealthy amount of deliberately misleading statements, all wrapped up in an appalling disregard for actual empirical scientific evidence. Despite been proven wrong on pretty much ALL his major Scare-issues, T continues on regardless, clinging desperately to his discredited Beliefs regarding Global Warming Sounds like Religion to me
by co2 Fri Feb 14, 2014 18:45
It is climate change,this is not a scam this is our future,and the future of our children and our childrens children if we ever get to that,the future for them looks very bleak.
by FFS Sun Feb 16, 2014 14:30
Oh won't someone please think of the CHILDREN!!!!! (they might MELT!!!!) It is climate change,this is not a scam this is our future,and the future of our children and our childrens children if we ever get to that,the future for them looks very bleak Really, it's a cheap and pathetic attempt at melodrama, a quick fix of cheap emotionalism, to distract from the fact that there's little to no real evidence to back up any of your pet theories. No matter how much silly misguided emotional investment you personally have in these silly theories, writing "It IS too!" as a counter argument is just childish, tbh The facts remain polar bears are dying Oh Really? FACTS, eh? Where? I don't see any "facts" about "Polar bears dying", anywhere. DO PLEASE show me these "facts" (as you call them) this completely misleading, reference to "Polar Bears dying" is just more silly emotionalism, based on nothing at all other than moronic marketing campaigns complete with fake photoshopped imagery showing cute little balls of white fluff innocently frolicking on melting Icebergs, or some other fake nonsense. some people will swallow anything if you put a picture of something cute and fluffy in it - kittens, puppies, likkle polar bear cubs etc etc.
by Frosty Sun Feb 16, 2014 23:14
Movie of Sea Ice Thickness Measurements
Click the image below for Dec/Jan movie - T seems to be interested only in Dec/Jan for some reason Lots of multi-year ice, in direct contradiction to statements made here by others
by Spider Mon Feb 17, 2014 10:34
Here's one for you guys:
by FFS Mon Feb 17, 2014 11:25
TRDV - Too retarded - didn't view.
by co2 Mon Feb 17, 2014 11:56
Oh won't someone please think of the CHILDREN!!!!! (they might MELT!!!!) Your responses are childish,and melodramatic if anything.The polar bears are dying,their evniornment is rapidly changing,the ice caps are melting.ARE YOU DENYING THE ICE CAPS ARE MELTING??http://www.nwf.org/Wildlife/Threats-to-Wildlife/Global-....aspx http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/aug/06/star...-melt Do you think 7 BILLION PEOPLE LIVING AND EATING,SHITTING AND GENERATING RUBBISH,USING TOILET PAPER,BUYING DUPLICATE PRODUCTS,BUYING FASHION TRENDS EVERY MONTH - IS SUSTATINABLE??? It is anti - envionrmenalist bigots like you that would DENY, DENY, DENY, DENY, CLIMATE CHANGE,EVEN WHEN YOU ARE UP TO YOUR NECK IN WATER WADING THROUGH IT! There is a lot of ignorance,and selective ignorance moreso that we need to crack,this is half the challenge,which is why enviornmentalists get shouted down and ignored in most cases. There was a right wing politician in america,who was asked about saving the fish populations in the waters of the US,and his response was arent fish stupid???!!! There are a lot of thick bigots that need to be shunned for what they are.
by FFS Mon Feb 17, 2014 12:31
Cllimabots say that settled global warming science says winters will be colder, . . . or warmer . . . . or whatever. Doesn't matter because Whatever happens they will go on to claim it to be proof of their theories. They even seem to believe that they have always believed that.
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/tar/wg2/index.php?idp=674 -
Climabots have no interest or knowledge in what actual science says, but then neither do most of the Climate "Scientists" themselves.. They just want the peasants to shut up and do what they say. Here is a plot of JANUARY temperatures, since the IPCC made their 2001 statement
by FFS Mon Feb 17, 2014 14:14
Healthy polar bear count confounds doomsayers - http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/healthy-po...2523/
The number of bears along the western shore of Hudson Bay, believed to be among the most threatened bear subpopulations, stands at 1,013 and could be even higher, according to the results of an aerial survey released Wednesday by the Government of Nunavut. \Thats 66 per cent higher than estimates by other researchers who forecasted [that's "Forecast" - NOT "counted"] the numbers would fall to as low as 610 because of warming temperatures that melt ice faster and ruin bears ability to hunt. The Hudson Bay region, which straddles Nunavut and Manitoba, is critical because its considered a bellwether for how polar bears are doing elsewhere in the Arctic. survey done by the Government of Nunavut, here: http://env.gov.nu.ca/sites/default/files/foxe_basin_pol...2.pdf Regarding fluffy polar bear images - the image below is the sort of thing usually used to pluck at the heart-strings of the gullible - source : http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-4095333-the-last...r.php Stock photo description reads:
by FFS Mon Feb 17, 2014 14:21
by FFS Mon Feb 17, 2014 14:44
2013 - Nice thick Multi-year Ice, currently plentiful
by FFS Mon Feb 17, 2014 14:54
There is a lot of ignorance,and selective ignorance moreso . . . . There certainly IS a lot of ignorance about this subject - the level of ignorance on display here as regards basic facts is astounding to be honest . . .this is half the challenge,which is why enviornmentalists get shouted down and ignored in most cases. Actually imho the reason "environmentalists" get ignored is because when questioned they often display a general all-round ignorance of a subject they claim to know much about, as well as displaying a complete disregard for what the empirical evidence says instead choosing to rant about mere "forecasts" or inaccurate Model "predictions") then there's the completely ridiculous things they say such as "OMFG!!! . . . it's a Methane Bomb!!!!!" . . . . . .
by fred Mon Feb 17, 2014 16:11
So...FFS, are you saying that there is no man made climate change, everything is hunky dory and we should keep relying on fossil fuels and dig up and use every last drop of oil and there will be no consequences?
by Rational Ecologist. Mon Feb 17, 2014 17:05
FFS, are you saying that the IPCC are totally wrong and that CO2e is not a problem and that we have nothing to worry about? Yes, some of the xtrapolations taken from the overall background situation tend to be sensationalsit and inaccurate, however, this does not negate the climate science. Glacial retreat is a fact, based on observation, especially in North America.
by ffs Wed Feb 19, 2014 10:52
Someone show me just One piece of evidence ( actual evidence, not media claptrap) that prooves that the co2 in the environment has the effect on temp that you people claim it has.
by ffs Wed Feb 19, 2014 11:39
Glacial retreat is a fact, based on observation O'Rly? A "fact", eh? http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/feb/08/glaci...tains The Himalayas and nearby peaks have lost no ice in past 10 years, study shows
The discovery has stunned scientists, who had believed that around 50bn tonnes of meltwater were being shed each year and not being replaced by new snowfall. this came AFTER the IPCC stated in it's 2007 report that Himalayan Glaciers will melt by 2035" - some may also recall that the claim was clearly shown to be complete and utter nonsense. but not by Climate "Scientists" - they happily agreed with it, the loons, or kept silent. Himalayan glaciers melting deadline a mistake (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8387737.stm) By Pallava Bagla in Delhi
The UN panel on climate change warning that Himalayan glaciers could melt to a fifth of current levels by 2035 is wildly inaccurate, an academic says. J Graham Cogley, a professor at Ontario Trent University, says he believes the UN authors got the date from an earlier report wrong by more than 300 years. He is astonished they misread 2350 as 2035. Not only that but the glacier all Melt by 2035" claim was taken not from any scientific publication but lifted wholesale from a WWF Marketing campaign. Some people will believe anything
by co2 Wed Feb 19, 2014 13:36
Exactly 76 years ago, Guy Callendar presented first evidence the Earth was warming & CO2 was responsible along with other greenhouse gases such as ch4 methane..
by Rua Wed Feb 19, 2014 13:43
Tyndall measured greenhouse effect in 1861. Arrhenius did theory in 1896. Callendar showed obs evidence in 1938.
by Rational Ecologist. Wed Feb 19, 2014 13:56
Glacial retreat is a fact in North America and elsewhere.
by FFS Wed Feb 19, 2014 14:37
Exactly 76 years ago, Guy Callendar presented first evidence the Earth was warming & CO2 was responsible along with other greenhouse gases such as ch4 methane.. thats not what I asked you for - I asked you for "evidence ( actual evidence, not media claptrap) that proves that the co2 in the environment has the effect on temp that you people claim it has." and you did not provide it. You people claim that a doubling of CO2 in the atmosphere causes 2 to 4 degrees Celsius of additional Warming - this is known as Climate Sensitivity or Radiative Forcing. Deny it if you want , but that is the claim of the Climate Scientists that started this scam so far there's not a scrap of real empirical evidence that a doubling of CO2 in the atmosphere causes 2 to 4 degrees Celsius of additional Warming greenhouse gasses No neither Tyndall nor Arenhuis provided empirical proof for the effect of CO2 doubling inj the atmosphere causing to 2 to 4 degrees Celsius of additional Warming Glacial retreat. The facts say otherwise - again I repeat - and note that The Himalayas hold the planets largest body of ice outside the polar caps http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/feb/08/glaci...tains The Himalayas and nearby peaks have lost no ice in past 10 years, study shows
The discovery has stunned scientists, who had believed that around 50bn tonnes of meltwater were being shed each year and not being replaced by new snowfall. despite being informed of this you continue to ignore it and continue to repeat your claim without any evidence to back it up That's Religion, not Science
by FFS Wed Feb 19, 2014 14:42
So, on a sparsely visited site, 3 replies appear within minutes - all saying the same thing?
by FFS Wed Feb 19, 2014 14:45
Anti-Climate Deniers Well I have to concede on that one I actually do deny the existence of an Anti-Climate There, I said it !!!!
by FFS Wed Feb 19, 2014 14:57
Callendar actually proposed a logarithmic relationship between CO2 levels and global temperature
by FFS Wed Feb 19, 2014 15:06
In a 1938 paper , (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/qj.497064275...3/pdf) Callendar implicitly discounted the arguments for substantial positive feedbacks on initial forcing that characterize subsequent claims by the latter-day so-called Climate "Scientists", observing the negative feedback from clouds as follows:
Thus a change of water vapour, sky radiation and temperature is corrected by a change of cloudiness and atmospheric circulation, the former increasing the reflection loss and thus reducing the effective sun heat. This is in contrast to the claims that People here are trying to attribute to him
by Rational Ecologist. Wed Feb 19, 2014 16:00
I speak only for myself and have been posting to this site for years.
by co2 Wed Feb 19, 2014 16:38
Exactly 76 years ago, Guy Callendar presented first evidence the Earth was warming & CO2 was responsible along with other greenhouse gases such as ch4 methane.. thats not what I asked you for - Well im sorry that truthful unbiased answer doesnt fit in with your anti climate diarrohea,its been going on for ages now you have hogged up whole pages with your anti climate clap trap.
by Rua Wed Feb 19, 2014 17:41
by Crazy Cat Thu Mar 20, 2014 15:48
What the scientists have to say:
by fred Sat Apr 05, 2014 21:29
Very sobering stuff from Guy McPherson. Game over. The Clathrate bomb HAS gone off.
by fred Sat Apr 05, 2014 21:56
detailed December 2013 article on the methane problem from Malcolm light, whose work
by Crazy Cat Sun Jun 22, 2014 13:48
This article, by Pavol Stracansky :
by FFS Sun Jul 27, 2014 00:56
The actual situation, straight from the sources
by FFS Sun Jul 27, 2014 01:08
[comment has been edited to remove unnecessary insulting language] On the earth the supply of water vapour is unlimited over the greater part of the surface, and the actual mean temperature results from a balance reached between the solar constant and the properties of water and air. My guess would be that you don't realise the significance of the earlier statement " Guy Callandar . . . implicitly discounted the arguments for substantial positive feedbacks on initial forcing" you, , are the one that brought him into the conversation in the first place Callandar's research actually explicitly rules-out "Runaway Positive Feedbacks" The paper in question is linked above, but here it is again anyway, - http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/qj.497064275...3/pdf
by FFS Sun Jul 27, 2014 01:51
"Glacial retreat is a fact, based on observation" That very definitive sounding statement was quickly reduced to "Glacial retreat is a fact in North America and elsewhere." which was once again quickly reduced to "Glacial retreat in North America" All of this was done, of course while not acknowledging the inaccuracy of any of the previous definitive sounding statements by this giant of the eco-sphere because, as you Religious Believers have so consistently demonstrated, like religious nutters everywhere, you cannot ever admit to ANY inaccuracy EVER. At this rate it'll soon be reduced to something like "Glacial retreat in ONE North American Valley" or somesuch
by Wageslave - (moderator) Sun Jul 27, 2014 02:10
No need for personal abuse in comments, just present your info / arguments ok?
by Crazy Cat Sat Aug 02, 2014 08:19
' Just a week into the methane sampling program and SWERUS-C3 Arctic expedition scientists have discovered vast methane plumes escaping from the seafloor of the Laptev continental slope.' Article from the Watchers:
by KM Wed Aug 13, 2014 14:46
Temperatures in the Arctic have risen twice as fast as the rest of the world since 2000, and this could have triggered changes to global wind patterns, which have brought extreme weather to lower latitudes, the researchers said.
by Crazy Cat Thu Oct 29, 2015 10:07
Ancient lowmolecular-weight organic acids in permafrost fuel rapid carbon dioxide production upon thaw.
by Crazy Cat Wed Dec 30, 2015 09:49
Came across thid article from 'The Watchers', can't say I've heard anything about it in the news:
by Crazy Cat Sat Jan 09, 2016 16:29
A more in depth article from Grist:
by Pesky Pete. - Disorganised. Sun Jan 10, 2016 20:32
An individual one off volcano disaster is not important.
by Mossy Thu Jul 21, 2016 19:44
Excellent article. Runaway climate change is already underway. By the time our corporate managed societies get serious about doing anything about it it will be far too late. The vicious cycles feeding ever increasing global warming are already underway and in all likelihood irreversible, even if we stopped burning fossil fuels completely. It's the ultimate failure of capitalism where costs to society in general are called "externalities" and aren't factored into the decision making process. So the environment has always come way down the list of priorities as corporations compete for ever increasing profits. Governments have gone along with this because corporate influence and power is massive. Corporations own the press (literally media is itself big business and most media outlets are owned by larger conglomerates) and they dominate politics with money and lobbying. And now life on earth is seriously threatened. It's sad that we have let this happen and even sadder to see that there are still people like Trump who won't accept the overwhelming evidence that we are destroying our planet. In our life time we will see the complete melting of the ice caps, desertification, massive soil erosion, extreme whether events, mass extinction of plants and animals, rising sea levels, flooding of huge urban centres, millions of people displaced, famine and water shortages, resource wars, and so on and on. People are sleep walking into this because we live in a business run society where the interests of powerful corporations are paramount. Noam Chomsky has been writing extensively about this for decades. His book 'Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media' should be essential reading for anyone that works in media or who wants to understand how the mass media keeps people docile and passive and willing to be exploited.
by IceBergen Mon Jul 25, 2016 23:20
by Crazy Cat Fri Aug 05, 2016 11:08
NOAA has just released its 2015 State of the Climate report:
by Astral Surfer Thu Aug 11, 2016 11:56
I notice that in the past year or two the number of comments being posted on this and other Indymedia threads has dwindled. Indymedia Ireland used to be a forum for lively interaction between visitors expressing firmly held diverse viewpoints. What accounts for the falling off of interest in Indymedia Ireland? The launchers of the site so many years ago quite rightly envisaged it as an alternative news, information and debating site. The posting of news, opinions and announcements on happenings in Ireland and other parts of the world was and is supposed to be up to those individuals and groups that had important things to publicise and comment on. Where are all these people lately? The world hasn't got better; Ireland hasn't got better. Have people become duller, or have they drifted off to other, possibly more lively, websites? I'll continue in hope to visit this site. It deserves a stronger culture of visitor interaction.
by IceBergen Sat Aug 13, 2016 11:54
by IceBergen Sat Aug 13, 2016 12:08
A combination of cold cloudy weather and thick ice limits the possibilities for further melting this summer. It is shaping up to be a total disaster for climate alarmists. |


text:
Consumed by his own irrational fears and demons, Chantilly's Tony Tong had threatened to kill his wife for years. In October 2010, he did so; and last week in Fairfax County Circuit Court, he was sentenced to 30 years in prison.
"In his petition for leniency, the defendant said he 'was not able to control [himself] in a moment of anger,'" said Deputy Commonwealth's Attorney John Murphy. "But there's an abundance of evidence that the exact opposite was the situation. This defendant engaged in behavior over a long period of time to terrorize this victim and her family."
The crime occurred Oct. 22, 2010 in the Chantilly Green Estates community. Mistakenly believing his wife, Kathleen Tran, 44, was having an affair, Tong, 43, shot and killed her in a bedroom of their house. Both their sons, John, 18, and James, 16, were home at the time.
Following a preliminary hearing, Tong was indicted by the grand jury and, on July 18, 2011, he pleaded guilty to first-degree murder and use of a firearm in the commission of a felony. He returned to court last Friday, Feb. 3, for sentencing before Judge Lorraine Nordlund.
At the outset, in lieu of having the medical examiner testify, the defense stipulated that any one of the three shots Tong fired into his wife would have been enough to kill her. And ballistics expert Julian Mason Jr. testified that, although it could be done quickly, each shot fired from Tong's .45-caliber pistol "requires a separate pull of the trigger."
No one else testified, but Murphy noted that Tran's mother told him that, every night, she talks to her daughter's picture and tells her how much she misses her. He also said Tran "speaks" to the court through the record of her life with Tong.
"In 2006, she discussed that, since 2003, she'd been verbally abused by him, three times a week," said the prosecutor. "He threatened her, saying, 'If you tell anyone, I'll kill you and your family.' In January 2006, he told her to get a coffin because he was going to kill her."
Tran then fled — and even sought a restraining order against Tong — but she later withdrew it when he promised to seek treatment for his anger issues. However, Murphy said it's unclear whether Tong ever did so.
"She's a truly blameless victim and, on the night of the crime, she'd done nothing wrong," said Murphy. "She lived a life of quiet desperation. But she was also brave because she couldn't leave Tong because of her two sons. And her aged mother and family lived locally, so she knew he could get to them."
The night Tran died, said the prosecutor, "The defendant waited for her in the dark. He stalks her in her own house, confronts her with a loaded firearm in his pocket, follows her and berates her." Afterward, said Murphy, she urged her sons not to upset him.
Then Tran overheard the phone call Tong made to Vietnam, telling his sister he wouldn't be seeing her ever again. "[Tran] knows what that means," said Murphy. "She tries to leave the house, he forces her back inside. He blocks off her way to leave the bedroom and she is trapped; she can't get past him."
Eventually, said Murphy, she somehow summoned her courage and told her husband, "I don't have to do what you tell me."
"He dared her to repeat her words, she does and he starts to fire," said Murphy. "He shoots her the first time, and she screams and calls for her sons — and he pulls the trigger again. Then he says, 'We're both going to die, anyway,' and he shoots her again."
"There couldn't be anything more deliberate in the way he executed her for standing up to him," Murphy told the judge. "There's nothing sympathetic about this defendant; this was totally unjustified."
He then asked Nordlund to sentence Tong to 50 years behind bars, suspend 20 years – leaving 30 to serve – and place him on 20 years probation. Murphy said Tong needed someone watching his actions, once he's released, because Tran's relatives are "very concerned about [Tong] because of his threats to their family."
Public defender Todd Petit, however, wanted his client to serve no more than 20 years in prison for the murder. He noted that Tong entered an Alford plea of guilt — not admitting he'd committed the crime, but acknowledging the existence of enough evidence to convict him of it. Petit said Tong also did so because "he meant to take his own life."
"[He] at no time wanted to put his family through a trial," said Petit. "His boys are here in the courtroom and he doesn't want them to have to relive [what happened]."
Petit explained that, as a young boy in Vietnam, Tong lived through the war, and his father — who was in the military — was "ripped away from his family for years of internment and torture. As a young teen, [Tong] left his family to live on his own and support himself so his family wouldn't have to worry about him. He later became a U.S. citizen, but his depression and difficulties started when he was a child and had a profound effect on the rest of his life."
The night of the tragedy, said Petit, Tong "was angry because he truly believed [his wife] was having an affair. He'd already lost his father in Vietnam and didn't want that for his sons. It doesn't justify what he did; he wanted so much for the family to stay together that [he and Tran] lived in separate bedrooms."
"He thought she'd disrespected him, he was somewhat intoxicated and he did a horrible thing," added Petit. "The only reason we're here in court today is because his son tackled him, stopping him from pulling the trigger and taking his own life."
Then, crying, Tong stood and addressed the judge via a Vietnamese-language interpreter. Hearing his words, his sons also cried.
The slight-built, bespectacled man began by apologizing to his mother-in-law, his sister-in-law and his children. "I took away a child from my mother-in-law and a sister from my sister-in-law," he said. "And I caused my two sons to lose their mother."
"If there would be a miracle that would change things, I wish it was I who'd died, and not my wife, because she's the one who took care of my children," continued Tong. "All I can do now is express my apologies to them. I deeply regret what I did to my sons — who not only witnessed the death of their mother — but now see me being sent away. I implore Your Honor to give me a chance so that, later on, I'd still be alive to see my children."
But Nordlund had the last word. She said that, in her 30 years on the bench, she's seen spouses believe they're justified in hurting each other because of a misplaced sense of jealousy, anger or pain. But, she said, it doesn't give them the right to do harm. Said Nordlund: "A sense of craziness overtakes them and they fail to see the pain they inflict on everyone else around them."
"It's only now that you have murdered your wife that you feel regret," she told Tong. "And it's not because you've killed her, but because you won't get to see your kids. But she won't get to see them and they won't get to see her — you took that away."
Although Tran was the one who suffered years of "psychological and physical terror and bullying," said Nordlund, "All you could see was yourself and all you could hear was yourself. If you wanted to kill yourself, it makes no sense that you'd kill your wife first."
She told Tong, "There's nothing to defend this crime. There's terrible pain on both sides. I see your [sister and other relatives in the front row] crying because of what will become of you. And I see your sons and your wife's family crying, as well, sobbing over their loss."
"You were blinded by your own jealousy," the judge continued. "You committed the unspeakable crime of murder because you failed to listen to anyone but yourself or to reach out for help."
Nordlund then sentenced Tong to 50 years in prison, suspending 23, for 27 years to serve. She also ran the mandatory, three-year sentence on the firearm charge consecutively to that amount, for 30 years total. Furthermore, she told Tong, "You are not to initiate contact with your sons; only they can initiate contact with you."

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Showing Collections: 1 - 1 of 1
Lisa Mitchell papers
Collection — Multiple Containers
Identifier: MSS 2149
Scope and Contents
Collection consists of correspondence, reviews, film reels, press kits, and newspaper and magazine articles written by Mitchell. Also included are photographs, posters, and other materials regarding Merlene of the Movies and Divine Mercy, No Escape. Two prospecti on proposed books about Cecil B. DeMille and the 1956 motion picture The Ten Commandments are among the materials, along with musical programs from Annie, Fiddler on the Roof, and others. Also included are video tapes of Mitchell's...
Found in:
L. Tom Perry Special Collections