It seems that other climate skeptics haven't dedicated much attention to this particular recent mania but I was intrigued and disgusted, so here is my reaction.
National Geographic and most other science news outlets have informed us that there is a lot of mercury underneath the thawing Arctic permafrost and when it thaws, all of us will get poisoned to one extent or another. Will we?
The popular articles build on an article in Geophysical Research Letters, Permafrost Stores a Globally Significant Amount of Mercury by Paul Schuster (USGS Boulder) and a dozen of co-authors. What does the paper say?
The first words of the abstract say: Changing climate in northern regions is causing...
Well, one can see pretty clearly where the authors are coming from and where they're going. They're supposed to talk about natural mercury but the first two words of their abstracts are "changing climate". This paper is obviously a real-world example of the articles about squirrels, by squirrel experts who want to get lots of funding so they write articles about poor squirrels who may suffer because of global warming.
I think it's clear that they're this corrupt and if I were a judge and people were waiting for my signature under the death penalty for these "scientists", it would probably be a formality.
OK, how much mercury is there? The permafrost regions contain 1.6 million tons of mercury (they use "gigagrams" to sound really fancy) and one-half of it is frozen in the permafrost itself. The relative error margin of the "1.6 million tons" figure is 6%, the relative error margin of "one-half" is a whopping 60%. Fine, so some fraction comparable to 1/2 of the permafrost-region mercury is frozen in the permafrost itself. What a shock.
1.6 million tons is negligible relatively to the mass of Earth or the atmosphere, of course, and it's high for such a toxic substance...
nothing to worry about. less affecting than 380->400 ppm co2 the green cuck goyim so worry about.
Tyler Garcia
>reddit spacing Back.
Tyler Williams
We are all going to die unless we give money to the people fighting global warming.
Joshua Murphy
Just linking the article is enough, no need to copy+paste random sentences from it.
Gabriel Flores
We need to blindly support more UN green climate funds which just funnel money between banks and in sketchy loans
Tyler Taylor
>blogspot.ca L0Lno fgt pls
Aaron Campbell
OP your posts are pathetic
Tyler Kelly
fear $ells
Juan Reyes
>the amount of mercury contained in permafrost is very small compared to earth's mass so it's completely harmless to humans!!!
Landon Cook
>fgt Why the homophobia?
John Phillips
>Well, one can see pretty clearly where the authors are coming from and where they're going. A paper about the impacts of changing permafrost brings up the largest influence on permafrost levels? Holy shit, stop the presses!
>1.6 million tons is negligible relatively to the mass of Earth This is so stupid I don't know where to begin.
Kayden Baker
>This is so stupid I don't know where to begin. What do you mean?
Andrew Lopez
pretty sure they're not worried about mercury in the air OP
Jeremiah Reed
Trying to determine whether an amount of a toxic material is dangerous by comparing its mass to the mass of the Earth makes no sense whatsoever.
Eli Butler
Hey op, why don't you do us all a favor and ingest a couple drops of dimethyl mercury. A couple of drops won't kill you; that's negligible compared to your body mass!
Justin Peterson
The amount in total for the mercury in the permafrost of the earth can be compared con the mass of the earth besides the mercury can come from comet impacts.
The Earth has been an almost completely covered by ice then been almost completely ice free. We are presently in an inter-glacial period of an ice age.
What "climate" should we have?
Zachary Perez
Mercury is not a problem in the air on its own. It becomes a problem when it falls back in the rain. It reacts and becomes methylmercury, and builds up in larger fish. This stuff is extremely lipophilic, so once it gets into your body good fucking luck to you.
Joshua Jones
the climate that is currently optimal for human civilization
Elijah Anderson
>the climate that is currently optimal for human civilization
Well, since we are in an unusually long mild inter-glacial period, we had better start pumping MASSIVE amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere if we want to hold off the coming glaciers.
Asher Richardson
>gigagrams This is bait, right?
Brody Lee
if our current rate of CO2 production continues we'll never get to an interglacial.
Jacob Perez
>if our current rate of CO2 production continues we'll never get to an interglacial.
NO ONE thinks mankind will continue pumping CO2 into the atmosphere at the rate we have been. It makes no economic sense to continue with a fossil fuel based economy. At the present rate of progress both solar and wind will be far CHEAPER electrical generators than any fossil fuel. Electric cars will be cheaper to produce and run then Internal combustion cars.
This climate change hysteria is very reminiscent of the "The Great Horse Manure Crisis of 1894":
>NO ONE thinks mankind will continue pumping CO2 into the atmosphere at the rate we have been. Most projections are for CO2 emissions to continue to rise.
>It makes no economic sense to continue with a fossil fuel based economy. That's incredibly optimistic.
>This climate change hysteria is very reminiscent of the "The Great Horse Manure Crisis of 1894" Calling it "hysteria" is ridiculous. Climate change is a serious problem, and hoping it will just go away on it's own is not reasonable. It would be nice if a cheap & easy fix was found tomorrow, but we don't have the luxury of assuming it will.
Camden Butler
>Climate change is a serious problem
No .. it is not.. AT ALL!
There is no "correct" climate and we ARE heading out of a fossil fuel based economy. 30 years from now most electricity will be generated from nuclear, solar, and wind AND most engines used will be electric.
Any extra CO2 in the atmosphere from mankind's temporary time being a fossil fuel based civilization will be slowly absorbed by nature... if we get super paranoid about CO2 we can actively pull it out of the atmosphere or just add some iron to the oceans and let nature pull the CO2 out.
Clmate change IS a stupid hysteria
Matthew Watson
>No... it is not AT ALL! Actually it is...Whole cities are going underwater. Billions of dollars in damages and displacements of families will be the result of this thing you claim is not a problem. If you want to see an example of what the future holds for many cities look no further than Venice Italy...
Jaxon Reed
How do we know this is not 100% NORMAL climate change. We are due for glacial period and sometime they come very rapidly. Pumping all this CO2 into the atmosphere could DELAY the next glacial period.
Plus, as I stated, we ARE ending the fossil fuel era of man, 30 more years top. Nuclear, wind, solar are starting to dominate.
We could EASILY take a few percentage of the Gulf Stream (flows constantly) and easily power all of America forever.
Fossil fuel WAS a good choice for power UNTIL renewable power generation was improved. Once you build a solar plant the fuel is free forever, same with wind and ocean current.
It WAS good that scientist noticed the high CO2 output of man, but it is a temporary problem in our technological evolution.
Cameron Adams
Meh, it is somewhat surprising that the greenies are not yammering about the imminent reversal of the magnetic poles. We are about 580,000 years overdue. But, I guess there is no way to make a fortune off that. At least not as lucrative as selling carbon credits. All these greenies would be more believable if they did not fly to the global meetings in their private jets in order to discuss how penalize everyone else that is not "them".
Jace Thomas
dimethyl mercury =/= inorganic mercury, which is what is trapped in the permafrost. Ingesting inorganic mercury is relatively harmless, as it doesn't get passed into your bloodstream nearly as much as it does through inhalation.
Joseph Miller
>Whole cities are going underwater.
Name one.
Special effects in disaster movies do not count, they are not real.
Christopher Campbell
>human civilization This is a spook.
Wyatt Roberts
wtf man y u do this
William Roberts
>How do we know this is not 100% NORMAL climate change. Because we can measure that. The spectrum out outgoing radiation clearly shows that increasing atmospheric CO2 is driving the recent warming. The changing isotope balance of atmospheric carbon shows it comes from human emissions, and not some other source.
>We are due for glacial period and sometime they come very rapidly. They don't come rapidly on a human scale. The rates of change due to human activity is hundreds of times larger than the slow shift of glacial periods.
>Plus, as I stated, we ARE ending the fossil fuel era of man, 30 more years top. Nuclear, wind, solar are starting to dominate. That's optimistic as hell. At least until CO2 emissions peak before asserting that the danger's over.
