The point is that ski resorts have had troubles not just this autumn (which was the warmest recorded since there are accurate measures in Europe) but that since more than a decade, the average temperature has been very high and thus, the amount of snow was insufficient.

It is also thought that an increase in the average number of extreme climatological events is a sign of a global climate change.

__________________
Client: In six days, do you hear me, six days, God made the world. And you are not bloody well capable of making me a pair of trousers in three months!
Tailor: But my dear Sir, my dear Sir, look at the world, and look at my trousers.
(Beckett)

Actually, I am not surprised. The Krakatoa eruption of 1883 was said to have spewed more pollutants, co2, carbon monoxide, and ash into the atmosphere as all the combined entire human generated pollution ever generated from the beginning of our existence to the present. Only 1/3 of Krakatau remained. The rest was launched as a volcanic dust veil that created a solar radiation filter, lowered global temperatures that did not return to normal for five years.

Krakatau before 1883:


Krakatau after 1883:


Nature is much, much larger and more powerful than humans will ever be. All of the years of the human species existence hasn't spewed as much heat, water vapor, dust, pollution or toxins as that single Krakatoa eruption.

__________________
United We Stand.

Yes nature is pretty huge.
Humans are pretty tiny.

But humans matter. We have changed whole ecosystems. Not in a planned way, because we did not see the consequences of our acts and also because we could not prevent them.


Its our obligation for the future to find out, what we influence and what not. Dont forget, also small humans can have large impact.Not necessarily but possibly. Size alone is no argument.

Or who caused the Ozon hole? Who?

No one causes ozone depletion. Nature does.

__________________
United We Stand.

Remove the co2 from that list and you might be right. Krakatoa definitely did not emit 28 billion tons of co2, which is what humans emit each year.

Ever asked yourself why CFC's have been banned so rigidly?
Thats stuff that normally is not to be found in the higher areas of atmosphere. Until human emitted them in larger style. Then they fueled a chainreaction, in which the CFC's catalized a massive Ozon decrease. It will take according to estimations around 50 years until the CFC levels are back at being insignificant again.

Nonsense. Natural occurances dominate anything humans could do.

__________________
United We Stand.

Simply not true though. Humans emit 28 billion tons of co2 per year. That's 28 billion tons extra than was being emitted 200 years ago. Taht extra is enough to kick the carbon cycle out of balance. That is enough to be causing co2 to be rising in the atmosphere at 15 billion tons per year

Without man's extra 28 billion tons co2 per year, how could co2 be rising at about 15 billion tons per year?

Humans produce a small amount of all co2 I claimed that it was 3.5% but this is indispute.

__________________
United We Stand.

yes.

I doubt that the OECD would have been raising the issue if it were just a one off. IT is quite clearly a trend that has been continuing over a period of time - and it is not an isolated case. Incidents like this - ie - where local conditions are being affected by global warming - are happening all over the world.

In many instances they are beginning to have serious impacts on local economies, not only those which rely on toursit dollars, but also food production.

The impacts of this are real, and keeping our heads in the sand will mean the future will be MORE difficult, not less.

In dispute by several orders of magnitude??? That's not true. NO DATA SUPPORT THIS.

Stop being obtuse. Please. This is getting stupid.

__________________
He who learns but does not think is lost! He who thinks but does not learn is in great danger. --Confucius

Smooth seas do not make skillful sailors.
--African proverb

Science is a wonderful thing if one does not have to earn one's living at it.
--Albert Einstein

Humans only produce about 5% of the yearly CO2, tops. The other 95% comes from natural phenomenon.

__________________
United We Stand.

But if natural phenomenon are emitting 550 billion tons of co2 per year into the atmosphere (95%), why is co2 in the atmosphere only accumulating at 15 billion tons per year?

How can you add 550 to something but it only increases by 15?

In New Mexico, the season started late. But we have had record snowfalls.

2 weeks ago, we had more snowfall in Albuquerque than ever recorded.

__________________
Anyone ask Hillary what kind of underwear she wears, yet?

Lt. Gov Diane Denish on Bill Richardson "The governor, she said, "pinches my neck. He touches my hip, my thigh, sort of the side of my leg."

I have no overview over numbers. But the CO2 houshold is a dynamic thing. We do not only have sources of CO2 (natural and human), we also have consumers that take CO2 out of the atmosphere.

The difference between both amounts to the increase of CO2 in the atmosphere. As largest consumer of CO2 there is to count the algal life in oceans. They bind huge amounts of this gas. Far smaller but also significant is also the storing of CO2 in trees.