Please download the image above. print it and post it wherever you can legally of course.

To download, just click on the image and drag it on your desktop. Open the file (it's a JPEG) and print to your printer or at a local print shop, to fill an A4 or an A3. Or print bigger if you wish. Should you need a pdf (much sharper print definition), please contact the administration of the site or post a request on this site

The poster explains, in the most simple terns possible, the reality of what we are facing.

PEACE.

GLOBAL WARMING IS REAL

the earth is a bloody lucky planet

THE EARTH’S THIN ATMOSPHERE IS A GREENHOUSE. Without it, the earth surface would be submitted to the extremes of spacial temperatures. Various gases contribute to this important greenhouse effect that protect us and other life in the biosphere. Some gases are more efficient at influencing the temperature of the atmosphere than others. Some of these gases are METHANE, CO2, OZONE AND WATER VAPOUR.

Atmosphere + CO2 = global warming
Scientific studies of evidence, from the beginning of living earth, point to complex greenhouse relationships in the earth’s atmosphere. One of these relationships is that carbon dioxide is a powerful “greenhouse” gas, and is part of the “carbon equation”.

120 million years till about 150 years ago
Since the dawn of humanity (say 1 million years ago), we have lived with fire, burning carbon (mostly wood) as much as we liked. Humans really could do that, as we were mostly using the “surface carbon”. This process included a “natural recycling” in seas and vegetation sinks. We did not really understand the process, but we used it.

entombed carbon past
About 150 years ago, humans discovered the hidden caches of “entombed carbon past” (coal, oil, gas) that had been buried by various earthly processes, over aeons.  For millions of years, the surface of the earth existed without this “carbon cache” as part of the “carbon equation”.

science shows warming
Specific studies show that in times past, when this extra carbon was part of the “carbon equation”, temperatures were much higher and, in most cases, there was NO POLAR ICE.

humans are responsible
Using the “cheap” efficient energy fuel (coal, oil, gas), humans added the resultant CO2 and other greenhouse by-products to the “carbon equation” that had been the same for millions of years till 150 years ago — without realising “the effects”. Some scientists since the late 1890s have studied the process of adding extra CO2 to the “carbon equation”. They predicted warming. It’s happening.

It’s not a curse
Global Warming is not a curse, nor is it Armageddon.

It is part of the changing relationships between the atmosphere components that — at various moments in the history of this planet, from the time it gelled into a ball of fire with a crust — have created various conditions for the surface... We can’t be complacent. With the world population of carbon-consumers growing, we are contributing beyond what we can imagine to a rapid change of conditions on this planet... The carbon equation is beyond the rise of just a few degrees...

Why deniers deny?
90 per cent of what we do, especially in the “developed” countries is based on the EXTRA CARBON ECONOMY: transport, plastics,
steel-making, energy supply — all rely on digging up and on the burning of the extra carbon.
Most deniers deny because they:
* Are ignorant of the problem.
* Have vested interests in the extra-carbon economy.
* Do not believe in the earth’s natural changes.
* Are politically motivated.

In a speech in the European parliament last month, Nick Griffin, leader of the ultra-right British National party, referred to the scientists and politicians who are urging international controls to curb the effects of climate change as "cranks". Griffin, who is now one of the MEPs representing the European Union at Copenhagen, went on to state that "an Orwellian consensus" had been reached, "based not on scientific agreement, but on bullying censorship and fraudulent statistics".

What Griffin claims is almost exactly the opposite of the truth. While there is overwhelming scientific evidence that climate change is happening and that we are actively influencing it for the worse, there is no scientific agreement to the contrary. The bullying censorship he refers to has taken place in the lab break-ins and computer hacking used to acquire selective evidence, which is then taken out of context to support the deniers' argument.

In short, Griffin and his followers are vilifying their opponents by tarnishing them with what is in effect their own desire to distort the truth in order to support their own political agenda.

The supporters of climate change are now also tagged as the "new Reds". In the same speech, Griffin said: "The anti-western intellectual cranks of the left suffered a collective breakdown when communism collapsed. Climate change is their new theology... But the heretics will have a voice in Copenhagen and the truth will out. Climate change is being used to impose an anti-human utopia as deadly as anything conceived by Stalin or Mao."

This is the rhetoric of the Cold War. The "anti-western intellectual cranks" need to be eradicated and the purity of the western state preserved. Not surprisingly, this accords with Griffin's hard-line anti-immigration policy. The threat to self-preservation is seen to be coming from the "intellectuals" who want, in the minds of Griffin and others, to establish a totalitarian state that has complete control over the individual.

------------------------

We all can live in hope or fear... Some of us know.

Global warming is real.

In fact, science has erred too much on the side of caution, despite the deniers making a song and dance about data collecting.

I would not be surprise if within the next 2000 years, we have the "one in 120 million years floods"... That is to say that the sea level is likely to rise beyond what we even dreamed off in our worst nightmare... Before we get there, there will be various steps and increments, but our planet went through this process before. The only difference now is that we, humans, are here to witness the change after having created it and may suffer from it — while doing nothing to stop it... or far too late... see pamphlet at top...

Scientists have discovered a link between the ongoing drought in the south western corner of Australia and increased snowfall in parts of Antarctica.

Dr Tas van Ommen of the Australian Antarctic Division (AAD) says ice core samples taken from Law Dome in East Antarctica show an unusual and consistent increase in snowfall since the late 1960s.

Reporting in Nature Geoscience van Ommen says, "after examining 750 years worth of samples, the increase is well above the normal sort of variability one expects."

The work was part of efforts to better understand Antarctica's climate history.

van Ommen and AAD colleague Dr Vin Morgan found the cause was a pattern of atmospheric circulation that brings warm, moist air from the Tasman Sea near New Zealand to East Antarctica.

He says "further research found this same pattern was part of a larger flow recirculating dry, cool air from the Antarctic to south western Australia."

And a check of Western Australian climate records showed a very strong correlation.

"The more it snowed at Law Dome, the more intense the drought became in the south west of Western Australia."

-----------------

This data falls bang on Gus' own interpretation of climate change and the old fashioned fridges (I was an expert on kero-fridges once... see my reference to the non-defrosting fridges everywhere). Meanwhile:

-----------------

A colony of sea lions endemic to the Galapagos Islands have moved 1,500km away, a Peru-based organisation which monitors the aquatic mammals has said.

The Organisation for Research and Conservation of Aquatic Animals says the sea lions have swum to northern Peru because of rising temperatures.

They says the temperature rise was caused by climate change.

Experts say it is the first time that Galapagos sea lions have set up a colony outside the islands.

The monitors say the water temperature in Piura, off the coast of northern Peru, has risen from 17C to 23C over the last 10 years.

The temperature is much closer to the sea temperature around the Galapagos Islands, which averages about 25C.

Now that the conditions of the sea around northern Peru are so similar to the Galapagos, they say, even more sea lions and other new marine species could start arriving.

--------------------

The surface sea temperatures are a neat indication of warming. presently east of Sydney, the strong Eastern Australian current runs at about 24 degrees C, while in the great Barrier reef, the surface temperature is about 29-30 degrees C...

The review, conducted by a panel of six experts, including Sir Muir, will investigate the key allegations that have arisen from a series of emails hacked from the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit. The emails suggested that some climate scientists may have engaged in a concerted effort to withhold scientific data and subvert the peer-review process at the heart of scientific publication.

One member of the Muir review, Philip Campbell, is also editor-in-chief of the journal Nature, where many of the climate studies have been published, including those written by the suspended head of the research unit, Professor Phil Jones, who has also served as an anonymous peer-reviewer for the journal.

Sir Muir said at today’s launch of the review’s terms of reference that he will not shirk from in-depth probing of the content of the emails and this will not be influenced by the fact that the UEA will be meeting the inquiry’s costs. Dr Campbell’s involvement is not a conflict of interest, he insisted.

“We are completely independent and have a free hand to pick our team and we have a free hand to pursue any line of research. Our job is to investigate scientific rigour, honesty, openness and due process,” Sir Muir said.

“We will investigate whether there is evidence of poor scientific practice and data management which could call the Climatic Research Unit’s research into question. The review is about scientific rigour and honesty, freedom of information procedures and data handling,” he said.

----------------------

Gus: I would not be surprised if the inquiry finds that global warming is much faster than the Climatic Research Unit has predicted even with the doubts and the so-called "sloppy" research as expressed in emails. We'll see...

On this site, I have simplified as much as possible the parameters of global transformations especially those of global warming. On this subject, there are many factors that will affect the status of the atmosphere, from gases to microbial processes in the seas, from the sun activity levels to the "Milankovic cycles".

Many of these are part of an "oscillating" equilibrium of sorts, in which there are some extreme events when the cycles converge or oppose each others, with a trend toward a "mid-position" when the cycles are not in step... Thus, these factors will converge and diverge, creating cycles of ice ages and warming with a "certain" regularity. With these factors at hand, It has been calculated by some scientists till the 1940s (including Milankovic?) that the earth was going towards an ice age. And there is no doubt about it. The sun is in a decreasing activity cycle (although the trend could reverse as soon as tomorrow) — difficult to predict. Unless someone has strong objections, I will assume that the Milankovic cycles are presently in a "neutral" (mid-range) position.

Then the carbon equation piggies-back on all the climate influencing factors (only a few were mentioned above). The carbon equation is also influenced by the microbial activity in the seas, in regard to CO2 and methane, but the CO2 and methane can have an influence on the acidity of the sea, itself influencing the microbial activity. All these processes can be called "natural". Changes do happen and, more often than not, when they happen, they may take over 10,000 years or more to change from a cool to a warm status or in reverse. Some climatic changes, studied in the rock stratigraphy, indicate these longish timeframes of change (although very short in geological terms).

The last change 12-10,000 years ago happened more or less over a 2,000 quite short-ish period. A new factor* may have been introduced in this complex equation in which carbon dioxide is generated and absorbed, in which the ozone layer is compromised, in which dimming is stronger due to volcanic activity, etc... By now we know that many factors influence the natural "oscillating" balance of climate, and accentuate or diminish the beneficial status of the greenhouse effect.

But we cannot forget that we, humans, as well as many changes we've made on the surface of the planet, for example have strongly influenced the status of the ozone layer — and having recognised this fact — have remedied the problem to a point... We still have more to do on this issue. We know that ozone depletion in the higher level of the atmosphere influence the status of global heat below. Ozone accumulation at surface levels due to our burning of fossil fuels can influence heat too (the extra ozone at earth level tends to reduce plant growth, thus helping climate change towards warm by reducing the natural absorption of CO2).

But of all present factors controlling the climate status, the adding of EXTRA carbon (fossil fuel) — sequestered till about 150 years ago in carbon sinks that formed 100 of million years ago — has been THE MOST INFLUENTIAL. Extra carbon dioxide and as methane (and other forms such as CFC and CSF) — in the atmosphere becomes our unintended contribution to shifting the oscillating balance towards warm — WHATEVER THE STATUS of the other natural cycles. Should the sun be more "active" or other natural warming factors come in, warming could reach "warp" speed.

YES. We are creating change, at a rate of knots compared to the "natural" oscillating changes.

So far, it has been calculated by proper scientists that we've warmed the planet by about 0.2 degree C per decade till now (present teperatures already about 0.7 above average), by adding CO2 to its atmosphere. At the rate we're doing it, at the rate we expanding our population, at the rate we're increasing our carbon-based comforts, there is a strong possibility we're going to increase the warming by 6 degrees C by 2100, and possibly more. This change is most likely to be unprecedented in climate/geological timeframes. For example, some of the record show increases of 7 degree C over 10,000 years.  The latest change (the last big melt in which an extra factor* was possibly added to natural influences), happened with 6 degrees C rise over a 2,000 year period. Presently, we are most likely creating the same degree of change over 1/20th of the time, by having modified the carbon equation...

We are changing the stresses in the atmosphere by modifying the carbon equation.

All the Kyoto protocol and the Copenhagen farce have been trying to do, is to limit the damage at an increase of 2 degree C by 2100. Unavoidable. To achieve this limit, the calculation on this excess carbon (CO2) needs to be cut by 50 per cent of 1990 emissions, by 2050 — WORLDWIDE. This won't happen and is NOT ENOUGH. Further more, the momentum of change carries over far longer than the point at which the factors, such as a dramatic reduction of CO2 emission cease to influence the change.

And the ice in the whisky effect is also masking the momentum of change. Please note as well that the most likely climate change we're heading towards by releasing ALL the sequestered carbon is the 120 million year event...

May I invite you to peruse this site as a conclusion to this warning tirade...

Skeptic Arguments and What the Science Says

------

* Some scientists have postulated the EXTRA factor influencing the rapidity of climate change during the last big melt was HUMAN ACTIVITY: mostly burning of forests to create open plains, thus stressing some animal species towards extinction as well as speeding up the natural climate change.

from the BBC

...

Our atmosphere's unique chemical formula supplies us with the air we breathe, the water that bathes us and provides a soothing blanket that keeps us protected from the violence of space.

And where there are other atmospheres, there are other wonders.

Travel away from Earth at the speed of light for half an hour and you would enter the frozen realm of the outer Solar System.

Out here are planets that are nothing but atmosphere - unimaginably vast balls of churning gas and ice. These are alien, chaotic worlds with storms large enough to swallow Earth three times over and winds screaming across their surface at nearly the speed of sound.

Yet it is also out here amongst these alien planets that we have discovered a world that holds a striking resemblance to Earth. A moon orbiting Saturn called Titan.

-----------------------

Is there some resonance with what I wrote a few months ago (see top of this line of comment and image at top...) :

The earth is a bloody lucky planet

THE EARTH’S THIN ATMOSPHERE IS A GREENHOUSE. Without it, the earth surface would be submitted to the extremes of spacial temperatures. Various gases contribute to this important greenhouse effect that protect us and other life in the biosphere. Some gases are more efficient at influencing the temperature of the atmosphere than others. Some of these gases are METHANE, CO2, OZONE AND WATER VAPOUR.

Please peruse and wonder... but:

Atmosphere + CO2 = global warming
Scientific studies of evidence, from the beginning of living earth, point to complex greenhouse relationships in the earth’s atmosphere. One of these relationships is that carbon dioxide is a powerful “greenhouse” gas, and is part of the “carbon equation”.

G'day Gus,

I have read your many articles on the extreme changes in our planet's normal and reasonably predictable climate patterns.  I am convinced and I am sure that many silent people are also caring and wondering what they (alone) can do.

It seems that the deniers are using the science against the scientists in the usual Corporation methods - that is demanding that every cyllable be explained even to the most uneducated of the world nations.

I quote one section in your recent post which resonated with me and the motto of the Lung Foundation....

"Our atmosphere's unique chemical formula supplies us with the air we breathe, the water that bathes us and provides a soothing blanket that keeps us protected from the violence of space".

The Motto is - "If you can't breathe, nothing else matters".

Surely that message is simple?

Cheers Ern G.