All Things Environment

[Bart]

Don't let facts get in your way. US life expectancy is lower today than in 2000.

Did I read the table wrong? From the data it appears life expectancy in 2020 was 78.93 and in 2000 it was 76.75. The percent increase in growth rate was less.

[Typical Lax Dad]

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-ne ... 180970942/

[Bart]

The earth will be fine.... https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/21/investin ... index.html

I don’t understand how life expectancy and quality of life keeps expanding when all I read are doomsday articles. How is this possible!

It will increase, until it does not. In all systems, the niche a species inhabits has a carrying capacity. For Humans that niche is rather large and our ability to modify our niche has allowed us to increase in both population and life expectancy. At some point, some point.......our niche will be depleted and our technology will not allow us to keep up and the population will crash. There will be some type of incident, a virus, a bacterium, two idiots arguing over resources and hitting a button, that will be "corrective" and bring the population back into what the niche can support.

I am not an alarmist by any means but ecologically it is more probable that this happens than not. How, when, where or why is anyone's guess.

The increased mobility of the human population coupled with the increase population size could facilitate this, imho. It only takes a viral or bacterial mutation that we can not correct for (solve/heal what ever you want to call it) to set this all in motion. Is the current virus the one? Probably not (I'm not a virologist so perhaps I should have said I hope not) but it certainly has the attention of the CDC and public health officials. What is troubling to me is how there have been several animal born agents that have skipped species.

[jhu72]

Don't let facts get in your way. US life expectancy is lower today than in 2000.

Did I read the table wrong? From the data it appears life expectancy in 2020 was 78.93 and in 2000 it was 76.75. The percent increase in growth rate was less.

Yup, I read it wrong. Rate of change down and the actual life expectancy value has reached what appears an inflection point, flat in its value (within statistics). Life expectancy appears to be in a holding pattern, at best. Certainly a big change from second half of the 20th century. But my statement that it was higher in 2000 was wrong (the rate of change (growth) was higher). 2014 through 2018 did see year over year decreases and 2019 saw a year over year increase in life expectancy.

[Typical Lax Dad]

The earth will be fine.... https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/21/investin ... index.html

I don’t understand how life expectancy and quality of life keeps expanding when all I read are doomsday articles. How is this possible!

It will increase, until it does not. In all systems, the niche a species inhabits has a carrying capacity. For Humans that niche is rather large and our ability to modify our niche has allowed us to increase in both population and life expectancy. At some point, some point.......our niche will be depleted and our technology will not allow us to keep up and the population will crash. There will be some type of incident, a virus, a bacterium, two idiots arguing over resources and hitting a button, that will be "corrective" and bring the population back into what the niche can support.

I am not an alarmist by any means but ecologically it is more probable that this happens than not. How, when, where or why is anyone's guess.

The increased mobility of the human population coupled with the increase population size could facilitate this, imho. It only takes a viral or bacterial mutation that we can not correct for (solve/heal what ever you want to call it) to set this all in motion. Is the current virus the one? Probably not (I'm not a virologist so perhaps I should have said I hope not) but it certainly has the attention of the CDC and public health officials. What is troubling to me is how there have been several animal born agents that have skipped species.

I was driving with my wife yesterday and I asked her about the Coronavirus. I asked her if it was concerning? She said it wouldn’t be a big problem until it showed up here. She said, it’s being quarantined....I told her the news on the US case had just broke...she had not see the news. We will see how it goes. Climate changes and forced habitat changes for people and animals could trigger a big problem down the road. Time will tell. We are already dealing with drug resistant bacteria. When I saw the decimation at the Rocky Mountain Forest about 10 years ago, I saw the impact of a changing climate. An “average” temperature rise of 2 degrees is enough to keep some species that would otherwise be killed off, or forced to hibernate, to live or continue to breed and overwhelm the habitat. It costs money eventually.

[jhu72]

.. we are most definitely going to perform the experiment.

[jhu72]

The earth will be fine.... https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/21/investin ... index.html

I don’t understand how life expectancy and quality of life keeps expanding when all I read are doomsday articles. How is this possible!

It will increase, until it does not. In all systems, the niche a species inhabits has a carrying capacity. For Humans that niche is rather large and our ability to modify our niche has allowed us to increase in both population and life expectancy. At some point, some point.......our niche will be depleted and our technology will not allow us to keep up and the population will crash. There will be some type of incident, a virus, a bacterium, two idiots arguing over resources and hitting a button, that will be "corrective" and bring the population back into what the niche can support.

I am not an alarmist by any means but ecologically it is more probable that this happens than not. How, when, where or why is anyone's guess.

The increased mobility of the human population coupled with the increase population size could facilitate this, imho. It only takes a viral or bacterial mutation that we can not correct for (solve/heal what ever you want to call it) to set this all in motion. Is the current virus the one? Probably not (I'm not a virologist so perhaps I should have said I hope not) but it certainly has the attention of the CDC and public health officials. What is troubling to me is how there have been several animal born agents that have skipped species.

… you are an alarmist if you believe man knows how to read a thermometer, correct for siting effects and then perform a mathematical average.

[jhu72]

Oh well, Trump has decided CC is not a hoax and Greta should concern herself more with "those dirtier places".

This is at least the second time in 3 years where he has declared CC not a hoax. Guess he figured taking on Greta in Davos would just have the euros laughing at him again. Deniers should not be concerned. He will change his mind again, probably by the time his plane touches down in DC.

[Typical Lax Dad]

https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/22/asia/chi ... index.html

[jhu72]

Oh well, Trump has decided CC is not a hoax and Greta should concern herself more with "those dirtier places".

This is at least the second time in 3 years where he has declared CC not a hoax. Guess he figured taking on Greta in Davos would just have the euros laughing at him again. Deniers should not be concerned. He will change his mind again, probably by the time his plane touches down in DC.

Washington Examiner spins a different tale. Not really surprising as this is meant for base consumption. No mention of calling CC "not a hoax". Wouldn't want his nut case fans to get the wrong (right) idea.

[Peter Brown]

Oh well, Trump has decided CC is not a hoax and Greta should concern herself more with "those dirtier places".

This is at least the second time in 3 years where he has declared CC not a hoax. Guess he figured taking on Greta in Davos would just have the euros laughing at him again. Deniers should not be concerned. He will change his mind again, probably by the time his plane touches down in DC.

Washington Examiner spins a different tale. Not really surprising as this is meant for base consumption. No mention of calling CC "not a hoax". Wouldn't want his nut case fans to get the wrong (right) idea.

It’s cold here in Colorado and it’s cold in Florida where I’m headed. Where’s the ‘warming’!

[njbill]

Try Australia. You know, in the hemisphere where it is summer now.

[jhu72]

Try Australia. You know, in the hemisphere where it is summer now.

The it's snowing/cold argument is and always has been nonsense. Climate change does not predict and there is no reason to expect the temperature to be elevated everyday, day after day across the whole earth. CC models show that some places on earth will see greater increases in average annual temperature than others. Lucky for us, North America is predicted to see a smaller increase than some other continents, outside of the far north. Australia, South America, Northern Asia, IIRCC are predicted to see the largest increases over this century. Nonetheless it will be bad enough during US summers to kill far more people due to heat stroke than seen in the century + in which records have been kept.

[Peter Brown]

Not too long ago, the 'scientists' were alarming us minions that a new ice age was comin'. Same boys now (echo'ed here on this website by FL Democrats) claim we are about to melt. Who am I to believe!

http://content.time.com/time/magazine/a ... 67,00.html

http://www.populartechnology.net/2013/0 ... rmism.html

(I could list 1000's of these links...I won't because you get - or should get - my point)

[RedFromMI]

Not too long ago, the 'scientists' were alarming us minions that a new ice age was comin'. Same boys now (echo'ed here on this website by FL Democrats) claim we are about to melt. Who am I to believe!

http://content.time.com/time/magazine/a ... 67,00.html

http://www.populartechnology.net/2013/0 ... rmism.html

(I could list 1000's of these links...I won't because you get - or should get - my point)

Your point also requires we suspend belief that scientists have not made any progress in figuring out how climate (and weather) works. First off the "alarmism" of that time was not as widely supported - in particular because not all scientists actually agreed with these conclusions. Second - the ability to employ supercomputers to make large scale calculations is tremendously better today than in those past times. (The first Cray supercomputer made its debut in 1976).

The alarmism was also overhyped by the media - it did help sell magazines and newspapers.

The agreement now on what is happening is quite a bit more universal than the situation in the 1970s...

[jhu72]

Not too long ago, the 'scientists' were alarming us minions that a new ice age was comin'. Same boys now (echo'ed here on this website by FL Democrats) claim we are about to melt. Who am I to believe!

http://content.time.com/time/magazine/a ... 67,00.html

http://www.populartechnology.net/2013/0 ... rmism.html

(I could list 1000's of these links...I won't because you get - or should get - my point)

Sure you can, so can I. Earth's climate is effected by two classes of physical phenomenon: 1) those which effect the source of earths heat energy at the source; and 2) what is going on inside and on the earths surface. You don't get a complete climate picture unless you consider what is going on with both.

Those hyperbolic articles were written when ONLY class #1 phenomenon were considered. The sun was "due" to go through a period of reduced solar output, both near term and less certainly long term. Ie, the earth was going to get colder. It is not clear if the long term reduction in output is or will happen. This "happening" was the source of the hyperbole.

When you consider (which was the case within a matter of a few years) phenomenon class #2, the earth was going to get warmer, because the effects of 2 were greater than 1.

So the question is, when the sun's near term output decreased (and it did), WHY DID THE EARTH NOT GET COLDER?? The temperature just kept going up.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Not too long ago, the 'scientists' were alarming us minions that a new ice age was comin'. Same boys now (echo'ed here on this website by FL Democrats) claim we are about to melt. Who am I to believe!

http://content.time.com/time/magazine/a ... 67,00.html

http://www.populartechnology.net/2013/0 ... rmism.html

(I could list 1000's of these links...I won't because you get - or should get - my point)

Sure you can, so can I. Earth's climate is effected by two classes of physical phenomenon: 1) those which effect the source of earths heat energy at the source; and 2) what is going on inside and on the earths surface. You don't get a complete climate picture unless you consider what is going on with both.

Those hyperbolic articles were written when ONLY class #1 phenomenon were considered. The sun was "due" to go through a period of reduced solar output, both near term and less certainly long term. Ie, the earth was going to get colder. It is not clear if the long term reduction in output is or will happen. This "happening" was the source of the hyperbole.

When you consider (which was the case within a matter of a few years) phenomenon class #2, the earth was going to get warmer, because the effects of 2 were greater than 1.

So the question is, when the earth's near term output decreased (and it did), WHY DID THE EARTH NOT GET COLDER?? The temperature just kept going up.

Because of Hillary?

[jhu72]

Not too long ago, the 'scientists' were alarming us minions that a new ice age was comin'. Same boys now (echo'ed here on this website by FL Democrats) claim we are about to melt. Who am I to believe!

http://content.time.com/time/magazine/a ... 67,00.html

http://www.populartechnology.net/2013/0 ... rmism.html

(I could list 1000's of these links...I won't because you get - or should get - my point)

Sure you can, so can I. Earth's climate is effected by two classes of physical phenomenon: 1) those which effect the source of earths heat energy at the source; and 2) what is going on inside and on the earths surface. You don't get a complete climate picture unless you consider what is going on with both.

Those hyperbolic articles were written when ONLY class #1 phenomenon were considered. The sun was "due" to go through a period of reduced solar output, both near term and less certainly long term. Ie, the earth was going to get colder. It is not clear if the long term reduction in output is or will happen. This "happening" was the source of the hyperbole.

When you consider (which was the case within a matter of a few years) phenomenon class #2, the earth was going to get warmer, because the effects of 2 were greater than 1.

So the question is, when the earth's near term output decreased (and it did), WHY DID THE EARTH NOT GET COLDER?? The temperature just kept going up.

Because of Hillary?

… that's a type 3 physical phenomenon But could be. She is responsible for just about everything else that goes wrong.

[Peter Brown]

Conservatives tend to laugh and sneer at the Green New Deal, but the frontal assaults on free market capitalism by the GND are quickly becoming Democratic orthodoxy.

When I say Democratic policies need to be buried and salted in the earth, I'm not kidding. The multitrillion-dollar Green New Deal manifesto isn't 'just' about saving the planet from climate change. It also includes a whole social justice agenda that includes everything from "Medicare-for-all," to a guaranteed job for all Americans, a $15-an-hour minimum wage, and even regulations on how often you will be able to drive your car and fly in an airplane. Dems never stop at what they purport to be doing.

Crush the Democrats at the ballot box and bury this folly once and for all.

[RedFromMI]

Conservatives tend to laugh and sneer at the Green New Deal, but the frontal assaults on free market capitalism by the GND are quickly becoming Democratic orthodoxy.

When I say Democratic policies need to be buried and salted in the earth, I'm not kidding. The multitrillion-dollar Green New Deal manifesto isn't 'just' about saving the planet from climate change. It also includes a whole social justice agenda that includes everything from "Medicare-for-all," to a guaranteed job for all Americans, a $15-an-hour minimum wage, and even regulations on how often you will be able to drive your car and fly in an airplane. Dems never stop at what they purport to be doing.

Crush the Democrats at the ballot box and bury this folly once and for all.

Alarmist much?