Saturday, November 4, 2017

Government Climate Change Report - 11

It's the law
This series concerns legislation passed by congress and signed into law by Bush I in 1990.

This series began almost half a decade ago (Government Climate Change Report, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10); the latest report engendered by this American law was just released.

So, between the lines below is the Executive Summary of that report:


"Highlights of the U.S. Global Change Research Program
Climate Science Special Report

The climate of the United States is strongly connected to the changing global climate. The statements below highlight past, current, and projected climate changes for the United States and the globe.

Global annually averaged surface air temperature has increased by about 1.8°F (1.0°C) over the last 115 years (1901–2016). This period is now the warmest in the history of modern civilization. The last few years have also seen record-breaking, climate-related weather extremes, and the last three years have been the warmest years on record for the globe. These trends are expected to continue over climate timescales.

This assessment concludes, based on extensive evidence, that it is extremely likely that human activities, especially emissions of greenhouse gases, are the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century. For the warming over the last century, there is no convincing alternative explanation supported by the extent of the observational evidence.

In addition to warming, many other aspects of global climate are changing, primarily in response to human activities. Thousands of studies conducted by researchers around the world have documented changes in surface, atmospheric, and oceanic temperatures; melting glaciers; diminishing snow cover; shrinking sea ice; rising sea levels; ocean acidification; and increasing atmospheric water vapor.

For example, global average sea level has risen by about 7–8 inches since 1900, with almost half(about 3 inches) of that rise occurring since 1993. Human-caused climate change has made a substantial contribution to this rise since 1900, contributing to a rate of rise that is greater than during any preceding century in at least 2,800 years. Global sea level rise has already affected the United States; the incidence of daily tidal flooding is accelerating in more than 25 Atlantic and Gulf Coast cities.

Global average sea levels are expected to continue to rise—by at least several inches in the next 15 years and by 1–4 feet by 2100. A rise of as much as 8 feet by 2100 cannot be ruled out. Sea level rise will be higher than the global average on the East and Gulf Coasts of the United States.

Changes in the characteristics of extreme events are particularly important for human safety, infrastructure, agriculture, water quality and quantity, and natural ecosystems. Heavy rainfall is increasing in intensity and frequency across the United States and globally and is expected to continue to increase. The largest observed changes in the United States have occurred in the Northeast.

Heat waves have become more frequent in the United States since the 1960s, while extreme cold temperatures and cold waves are less frequent. Recent record-setting hot years are projected to be-come common in the near future for the United States, as annual average temperatures continue to rise. Annual average temperature over the contiguous United States has increased by 1.8°F (1.0°C) for the period 1901–2016; over the next few decades (2021–2050), annual average temperatures are expected to rise by about 2.5°F for the United States, relative to the recent past (average from 1976–2005), under all plausible future climate scenarios.

The incidence of large forest fires in the western United States and Alaska has increased since the early 1980s and is projected to further increase in those regions as the climate changes, with profound changes to regional ecosystems.

Annual trends toward earlier spring melt and reduced snow pack are already affecting water re-sources in the western United States and these trends are expected to continue. Under higher scenarios, and assuming no change to current water resources management, chronic, long-duration hydro-logical drought is increasingly possible before the end of this century.

The magnitude of climate change beyond the next few decades will depend primarily on the amount of greenhouse gases (especially carbon dioxide) emitted globally. Without major reductions in emissions, the increase in annual average global temperature relative to preindustrial times could reach 9°F (5°C) or more by the end of this century. With significant reductions in emissions, the increase in annual average global temperature could be limited to 3.6°F (2°C) or less.

The global atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) concentration has now passed 400 parts per million (ppm), a level that last occurred about 3 million years ago, when both global average temperature and sea level were significantly higher than today. Continued growth in CO2 emissions over this century and beyond would lead to an atmospheric concentration not experienced in tens to hundreds of millions of years. There is broad consensus that the further and the faster the Earth system is pushed towards warming, the greater the risk of unanticipated changes and impacts, some of which are potentially large and irreversible.

The observed increase in carbon emissions over the past 15–20 years has been consistent with higher emissions pathways. In 2014 and 2015, emission growth rates slowed as economic growth became less carbon-intensive. Even if this slowing trend continues, however, it is not yet at a rate that would limit global average temperature change to well below 3.6°F (2°C) above preindustrial levels."

(USGCRP, 2017: Climate Science Special Report: Fourth National Climate Assessment, Volume I, emphasis added).



Lyrics to the song in this video can be viewed here.



The previous post in this series is here.

Friday, November 3, 2017

Trapped Heat Is Like Trapped Animals (Somewhat Unpredictable)

Fig. 1 What comes in must equal what goes out (or else)
The peer reviewed paper which came out recently indicated that it was highly unlikely that a 2 degree C increase in average global surface temperature (atmospheric) could be achieved (Less than 2 °C warming by 2100 unlikely).

That is scary because, for one thing, another group wrote that a 2 deg. C increase in global mean average temperature was "highly dangerous" (New Study Says Even 2 Degrees of Warming 'Highly Dangerous').

The way this happens is that the planet's heat budget is unbalanced by greenhouse gases being injected into the atmosphere by a civilization that is recklessly using fossil fuels at an increasing rate; a rate that is keeping more and more of the Sun's heat trapped in the Earth's atmosphere and oceans (Fig. 1 oversimplified & not to scale).

Fig. 2a Ocean temperatures @ 7 depth layers
Fig. 2b Average Conservative Temperature
The bulk of this heat that is trapped here because it cannot flow back out into space, eventually enters the oceans (~93% ends up in the oceans).

The graph at Fig. 2a shows past, present, and future temperature changes in the oceans at seven depth layers.

The graph at Fig. 2b shows only the mean average of those temperature changes.

Notice how the same mean average values look quite different when graphed en masse (Fig. 2a) compared to being graphed alone (Fig. 2b).

That is something to keep in mind when viewing the same values being presented in different configurations that make them look different.

Fig. 3a Absolute Salinity @ 7 depth layers
Fig. 3b Mean average Absolute Salinity
The graphs at Fig. 3a and Fig. 3b present the same graph phenomenon while graphing Absolute Salinity in the same manner as Conservative Temperature is graphed in Fig. 2a and Fig. 2b.

Ocean salinity can be changed in several ways, such as by freshening (fresh melt water from ice sheets, ice shelves, and glaciers entering the ocean), currents, changes in temperature, and upwelling, to name a few.

The way to view the two presentations is to note the high and low shown at the left side of the graph.

For example, the mean average temperature begins at about 5.5 deg. C on both Fig. 2a and Fig. 2b, and stays within the 5.0 - 5.9 degree range as its temperature oscillates up and down by cooling and warming.

Nevertheless, that less than one degree of oscillation looks radical on Fig. 2b while looking quite tame on graph Fig. 2a.

Fig. 4a Thermal Expansion @ 7 depth layers
Fig. 4b Mean average Thermal Expansion
The same goes for the graphs of Thermal Expansion in graphs at Fig. 4a and Fig. 4b.

All of these graphs cover the years 1880 through 2100.

Actual in situ valid data contained in the WOD database (@ datasets CTD and PFL) only exists for the years 1968 - 2016.

So, the pre-1968 and post-2016 values are calculated using GISS temperature records from 1880 through 2016, then projected out to 2100 using the recent peer reviewed paper mentioned earlier (New Study Says Even 2 Degrees of Warming 'Highly Dangerous').

The scientists who produced the paper estimate a bit less that a 5 degree C temperature increase as the high end temperature likely to exist on Earth by the year 2100.

Fig. 5 GISS temperatures
I use their estimates to project the future ocean temperature by taking ~93 % of those values for computing temperature changes entering the oceans over that span of time (Fig. 5).

The past (pre-1968) is projected in the same manner, combined with PSMSL and WOD in situ measurements as a guide.

You may notice that some of the in situ WOD measurements are more volatile than the other measured values (PSMSL & GISS) during the about half a century of in place measurements we have.

We live in more volatile times now, which makes it difficult to guesstimate both the past (less radical) and the future (more radical), but remember that we are at a 1 deg C GISS anomaly now, and they project it to increase to about a 5 degree anomaly.

That is quite radical too.

The in situ measurements from 1880 - 2016 exist for PSMSL and GISS, meaning the projections are only future computations, but since the WOD measurements are not that robust, pre-1968 and post-2016 must be estimated by being informed by the other measurements.

At the end of the day, it is the trend line that will be the most accurate indicator.

Wednesday, November 1, 2017

Trumpeting While Straining Out A Gnat

It's too late to call this 'the future'
Another lunatic kills a few people with a rented truck while those who see themselves as "the shiny city on the hill" (a dog-whistle code for "the epigovernment") are killing millions every year with their 'financially sacred' pollution:
"For decades, pollution and its harmful effects on people's health, the environment, and the planet have been neglected both by governments and the international development community. Pollution is the largest environmental cause of disease and death in the world today, responsible for an estimated 9 million premature deaths in 2015.1 92% of all pollution-related mortality is seen in low-income and middle-income countries. A new Lancet Commission on pollution and health aims to confront and overturn this urgent predicament."
(The Lancet, cf. Washington Post). To the survivors of the pollution, the members of the Oil-Qaeda wing of the MOMCOM wing of the Epigovernment declare "what does not kill you makes you stronger."

That is taking place as the mass-murder media ("if it bleeds it leads") decreases their coverage of such "statistics" ("One death is a tragedy; one million is a statistic").

Yes, nine million deaths a year reporting decreased by sixty-five percent (Media Matters Report Shows Stunning Lack of Climate Change Coverage on TV Networks in 2016).

The media presstitutes of the epigovernment like to major in the minors, to focus on the minor number of deaths by terrorists, while not reporting on the major number of deaths by government sanctioned pollution:
  • You are 35,079 times more likely to die from heart disease than from a terrorist
  • You are 33,842 times more likely to die from cancer than from a terrorist
  • obesity is 5,882 to 23,528 times more likely to kill you than a terrorist
  • you are 5,882 times more likely to die from medical error than terrorism
  • you’re 4,706 times more likely to drink yourself to death than die from terrorism
  • you are 1,904 times more likely to die from a car accident than from a terrorist
  • your meds are thousands of times more likely to kill you than Al Qaeda
  • you’re 2,059 times more likely to kill yourself than die at the hand of a terrorist
  • you’re 452 times more likely to die from risky sexual behavior than terrorism
  • you’re 353 times more likely to fall to your death ... than die in a terrorist attack
  • you are 271 times more likely to die from a workplace accident than terrorism
  • you are 187 times more likely to starve to death in America than be killed by terrorism
  • you’re about 22 times more likely to die from a brain-eating zombie parasite than a terrorist
  • you were more than 9 times more likely to be killed by a law enforcement officer than by a terrorist
  • [being] “crushed to death by ... [TV] or furniture” [as likely as] being killed by terrorist
  • Americans are 110 times more likely to die from contaminated food than terrorism
  • you are more likely to be killed by a toddler than a terrorist
  • you [are] four times more likely to be struck by lightning than killed by a terrorist
(Terrorism We Can Believe In? - 3). Yep, the errorists covering the terrorists is the essence of McTell News in these circumstances (Blind Willie McTell News, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6).

"Now the rovin’ gambler he was very bored
He was tryin’ to create a next world war
He found a promoter who nearly fell off the floor
He said I never engaged in this kind of thing before
But yes I think it can be very easily done
We’ll just put some bleachers out in the sun
And have it on Highway 61" - Dylan






Monday, October 30, 2017

Dept. of Justice Conspiracy Theories - 2


Over a half a decade ago I pointed out one bad habit of the mass media (Dept. of Justice Conspiracy Theories).

The McTell News (Blind Willie McTell News, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6) has an aversion to "conspiracy theory" (On The Origin of "Conspiracy Theory", 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7).

One reason for that aversion is that some of the media who were CIA agents or assets wanted "conspiracy theory" to be relegated to the realm of evil thoughts (Mocking America, 2, 3, 4).

Instead, the McTell News like to make things up, like "collusion," their doublespeak word for the proper word "conspiracy."

Thus, they have. for months and months now, echoed daily the word "collusion" (which cannot be found in the criminal laws of the United States).

They have been caught in their own tongue twisting machinations.

The proper word is not "collusion," rather it is "conspiracy," as clearly shown in the criminal laws of The United States of America:
"If two or more persons conspire either to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both."
(18 USC § 371, emphasis added, cf DOJ on conspiracy theory). This is a general conspiracy statute ("If two or more persons conspire ... to commit any offense against the United States ... in any manner or for any purpose").

II. Trump Campaign Criminal Conspirators

Today, a Trump Campaign manager and his deputy were indicted on twelve felony counts (Federal grand jury indictment against Manafort, Gates).

The first two of the twelve counts in the indictment were for CONSPIRACY  (not "collusion").

Count One was the crime of CONSPIRACY AGAINST THE UNITED STATES, a felony (18 USC § 371).

When McTell News reads the indictment will they supplant the word conspiracy with their made up idea-word collusion?

McTell News should give up their bad habit.

III. Guilty

Another Trump advisor has also been indicted and pled guilty:
A professor with close ties to the Russian government told an adviser to Donald J. Trump’s presidential campaign in April 2016 that Moscow had “dirt” on Hillary Clinton in the form of “thousands of emails,” according to court documents unsealed Monday.

The adviser, George Papadopoulos, has pleaded guilty to lying to the F.B.I. about that conversation. The plea represents the most explicit evidence connecting the Trump campaign to the Russian government’s meddling in last year’s election.

“They have dirt on her,” the professor told him, according to the documents. “They have thousands of emails.”
(Trump Campaign Adviser Met With Russian to Discuss ‘Dirt’ on Clinton). Today on Morning Joe, the following was stated: "Seventy-Five percent of the Republicans polled said it was ok that Russia interfered with the 2016 presidential election."

IV. Collusion vs. Conspiracy

The difference between "collusion" and "conspiracy" is that "collusion" is not a criminal law concept found in the text of American law:
"Let's agree, for now, that "collusion" is a political word, a media word, a polite word countless hacks have settled on because its use allows everyone to cover this catastrophe without having to actually accuse the president and his tribunes of something that sounds like a crime. "No one here engaged in a conspiracy" sounds an awful lot like: "I swear I never touched her, officer," while the phrase "There is no collusion here" sounds an awful lot like a phrase from a science book that the Secretary of Education soon will be asking school officials around the country to burn." - Esquire Magazine
...
"The word collusion, in a legal context, also has a financial connotation.  Its main use is in bankruptcy, divorce, or other cases concerning money.  Trump Jr.’s interaction with Russian lawyer Veselnitskaya was first concerned with political information, and later adoption.  The political information may have been of value, but it would have been of political value, not monetary value.  The consequences of collusion usually do not have a jail sentence, but rather, a fine may be assessed against the violating parties.  Despite headlines questioning the meeting and its legal impact, the Trump campaign’s actions likely do not constitute collusion.

While the meeting may not constitute collusion, it may constitute conspiracy.  Conspiracy is defined as 'an agreement between two or more parties to commit, through their joint efforts, a crime or an innocent act that becomes unlawful due to the concerted efforts of the parties.' ” 
- Campbell Law Observer
...
"A criminal conspiracy exists when two or more people agree to commit almost any unlawful act, then take some action toward its completion. The action taken need not itself be a crime, but it must indicate that those involved in the conspiracy knew of the plan and intended to break the law. One person may be charged with and convicted of both conspiracy and the underlying crime based on the same circumstances.

For example, Andy, Dan, and Alice plan a bank robbery. They 1) visit the bank first to assess security, 2) pool their money and buy a gun together, and 3) write a demand letter. All three can be charged with conspiracy to commit robbery, regardless of whether the robbery itself is actually attempted or completed." - Findlaw
(emphasis added). Just ask yourself the question "why did congress use the word 'conspiracy' rather than the word 'collusion' in the federal criminal law?"

The mass media is helping criminal conspirators (e.g. confusing future jurors) by misusing the concept of "collusion," which is a word that is not found in the text of criminal law.

In order to water down and in effect replace the text of the valid criminal law word "conspiracy," they have painted themselves into a dishonest corner as they do when they do not mention climate change, and historically did not mention Jim Crow laws as they should have (Blind Willie McTell News).

V. Conclusion

As Expected
Fox mass media news, and other McTell News outlets, can now, (along with the Whut? House), tell the truth and say "see, we told you there was no collusion for which there will be any criminal prosecution."

The previous post in this series is here.