4 of the biggest threats facing the Delaware River, according to experts

1970, Boston Globe "Scientists predict a new ice age by 21st century." The Washington Post, for its part, published a Columbia University scientist's claim that the world could be "as little as 50 or 60 years away from a disastrous new ice age."


Time Magazine "another ice age" is imminent. "Telltale signs are everywhere — from the unexpected persistence and thickness of pack ice in the waters around Iceland to the southward migration of a warmth-loving creature like the armadillo from the Midwest,"

1974. The Guardian similarly warns "Space satellites show new Ice Age coming fast."

1978 New York Times "Cooling trend in the Northern Hemisphere." from an "international team of specialists"

1980s, the UN claims that if global warming were not checked by 2000, rising sea levels would wash entire countries away.


Associated Press headline 1989 "Rising seas could obliterate nations: U.N. officials." Entire nations would be eliminated if the world failed to reverse warming by 2000.


October 2004, Michael Mann’s famed Hockey stick model is disproven by a team of Canadian scientists, Stephen McIntyre and Ross McKitrick. Seems they uncover a fundamental mathematical flaw in the computer program that was used to produce the hockey stick. Mann purported to use a standard method known as principal component analysis, or PCA. Not only does the program not do conventional PCA, but it handles data normalization in a way that can only be described as mistaken. Now comes the real shocker. This improper normalization procedure tends to emphasize any data that do have the hockey stick shape, and to suppresses all data that do not. Mann stands by his work

In 2008, ABC releases an ominous video about what the world would look like in 2015. As the video warns about rising sea levels, a graphic showed significant portions of New York City engulfed by water. As an NY Giants fan I can assure you, they still there.

Early 2000 Al Gore himself famously predicts that Arctic ice could be gone within seven years. Sea levels could rise twenty feet, claimed Gore in his 2006 documentary, An Inconvenient Truth. He purchases an ocean front home in 2010

2012 Rajendra Pachauri, head of a United Nations Climate Panel, pleads that without drastic action before 2012, it would be too late to save the planet. In the same year, Peter Wadhams, professor of ocean physics at the University of Cambridge, predicts “global disaster” from the demise of Arctic sea ice in four years.


2009, then-British Prime Minister Gordon Brown predicts that the world has only 50 days to save the planet from global warming. But here we are almost 11 years later, the earth seems fine to me.

2019 Rep. Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., warns that Miami would be gone in a "few years" because of climate change and the world would end in 12.

And last but not least, with the 97% of Climate Scientists in agreement (research how that number is derived if you want to be really educated) the best expert that can be produced for UN panel discussions on climate change is a Swedish sophomore High School student, 16 year old Greta Thunberg.

More Kool Aide please.
 
YOU'RE RIGHT. WE SHOULD JUST SIT ON OUR HANDS AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS.
 
Mother Earth only has a few hundred million to a billion years left. Earth like every other planet will one day be devoured by its own sun and blow up. It's what happens to planets. So all the theory on global warming is not rocket science, it's nature doing what it will do and we will not change it or provide Mother Earth with one extra day. However, to make money off this a disaster has to be conjured up. Those who don't drink from the grail need to be painted out as idiots.

If anybody thinks they can change the natural progression of a planet by reducing car cylinders from 6 to 4 or turning their thermostats down to 65 then I have some carbon credits to sell to you. The desire to save the planet is noble and honorable it's just not overly intelligent.
 
Tigereye, you and I have very similar viewpoints on the matter. You articulated said viewpoint better than I could have. Well put.
 
The reason the "impending ice age" stuff of the 70's was a farce is because computing powers back then were vastly inferior. Anyone trying to make predictions based off the limited data and limited model capabilities back then was bound to fail. Sure, they could be wrong again now, but technology has advanced enough to put a lot more faith in todays predictions.

If people use threat of a warming climate as a way to generate interest in protecting cold water resources, even if it doesn't come to pass in the end, us trout anglers still benefit from those efforts.
 
https://www.foxnews.com/science/sea-level-rise-threaten-480-million-people-study


Right on que. Note the paragraph about melting ice in Antarctica.
 
https://insideclimatenews.org/news/31052016/why-antarctica-sea-ice-level-growing-while-arctic-glaciers-melts-climate-change-global-warming

Yet in this article it's growing.

Now we can talk about settled science
 
Mike wrote:
Let’s not call plastics pollution an “emerging” contaminant or issue for the Delaware. The islands in the tidal sections have been pig pens of plastic debris since I was first exposed to them in the early 1980’s. Going to one other end of the drainage, Auburn Dam, on the Schuylkill R in Schuylkill Co, had and has the same problem. Rural or urban, the problem is ubiquitous.

I think what is emerging (though not stated well in the article) is the effect plastics are having on the food chain in oceans. Garbage has been in our steams in this country since the colonial period.
 
How did I miss this thread? I'm with you tigereye.... preach brother, preach
 
Here's an article on effects of climate change etc. on trout and some things that can be done. Some may want to disregard it though because it was put out by a radical leftist communist group-

https://www.tu.org/science/conservation-research/climate-change/

In my view anyone who thinks that reducing our carbon footprint is a bad thing is being foolish.
 
I would agree with everything in the article; however, it is all premised on the planet warming.

I don't agree with that premise.

 
the planet warming is not a premise. its a fact. The cause is the only thing up for discussion. even those arguing against man having any contribution to it agree on that. you can argue all the theory you want but temps are temps. they are data.
 
Plastics are now found in our own blood. Apparently the stuff has made its way through our entire system. Years ago I was disgusted to see plastic bags hanging from trees all along waterways around Philadelphia. Now go to any stream near even small towns and you will see them hanging. Air and water pollution is man made and taking steps to do things to reduce them are good. Carry on with your (ridiculous in my view)argument that climate change is some kind of hoax but how can you argue that air pollution from fossil fuels is good? What could possibly be the harm in moving toward a cleaner environment.
 
Plastic pollution is bad. Air pollution is bad.. it comes in many forms. PM (particulate matter) VOCs, CO, SOx, NOx,, HAps, and others..


CO2 is expelled every time you and every other animal on this planet breathes.

Is our breathing a source of pollution?
 
I'm always curious to hear what the negative effects of trying to negate climate change are. Basically, you've got people who want to do things to help the planet, and then you've got people arguing against it because they read somewhere that climate change is a hoax.

Even if it's a hoax, why on earth would you want to stand in the way of people trying to do good? Seems like despondency pushing inaction. Reminds me of the robot on hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy.

Why bother picking up that trash? Someone else will just litter again. Can you imagine if the whole planet thought that way?
 
silverfox: I agree!
 
Tigereye wrote:
Plastic pollution is bad. Air pollution is bad.. it comes in many forms. PM (particulate matter) VOCs, CO, SOx, NOx,, HAps, and others..


CO2 is expelled every time you and every other animal on this planet breathes.

Is our breathing a source of pollution?


What's your stance on gravity?
 
Back
Top