Following the science

[Rich80105]

From:
https://scitechdaily.com/once-in-a-2000-year-event-study-explains-unprecedented-antarctic-ice-loss-equivalent-to-10x-the-size-of-the-uk/

"In 2023, the Antarctic sea ice shrank to historically low levels,
with winter ice coverage falling more than 2 million square kilometers
below normal—roughly equivalent to ten times the size of the UK. This
significant decrease was particularly striking given the steady
increase in sea ice that had been observed up until 2015, making the
abrupt drop even more unexpected.

Using a large climate dataset called CMIP6, British Antarctic Survey
researchers investigated this unprecedented sea ice loss. They
analyzed data from 18 different climate models to understand the
probability of such a significant reduction in sea ice and its
connection to climate change.

Lead author Rachel Diamond explained that while 2023’s extreme low sea
ice was made more likely by climate change, it was still considered
very rare according to the models.

She says: “This is the first time this large set of climate models has
been used to find out how unlikely 2023’s low sea ice actually was. We
only have forty-five years of satellite measurements of sea ice, which
makes it extremely difficult to evaluate changes in sea ice extent.
This is where climate models come into their own.

According to the models, the record-breaking minimum sea ice extent
would be a one-in-a-2000-year event without climate change. This tells
us that the event was very extreme – anything less than one-in-100 is
considered exceptionally unlikely.”

Caroline Holmes, a co-author on the study, said: “Strong climate
change – i.e. the temperature changes we’re already seeing, and those
expected if emissions continue to rise rapidly — in the models makes
it four times more likely that we see such a big decline in sea ice
extent. This suggests that 2023’s extreme low was made more likely by
climate change.”

Long-term Consequences and Future Projections
The researchers also used the models to look at how well sea ice is
likely to recover. By looking at similar events in the models, the
authors found that after such extreme sea ice loss, not all of the sea
ice around Antarctica returns – even after twenty years. This adds
model evidence to existing observational evidence that the last few
years’ low sea ice could signal a lasting regime shift in the Southern
Ocean."
__________________________

Rising sea temperatures will have an impact on weather in New Zealand,
sadly our current government is ignoring both the likely impact of
climate change on New Zealand directly, but also our commitments to
reduce emissions under international treaties to prepare for and try
to reduce the impact of climate change. They don't look further than
the interests of political donors . . .

[Crash]

Post by Rich80105
https://scitechdaily.com/once-in-a-2000-year-event-study-explains-unprecedented-antarctic-ice-loss-equivalent-to-10x-the-size-of-the-uk/
"In 2023, the Antarctic sea ice shrank to historically low levels,
with winter ice coverage falling more than 2 million square kilometers
below normal—roughly equivalent to ten times the size of the UK. This
significant decrease was particularly striking given the steady
increase in sea ice that had been observed up until 2015, making the
abrupt drop even more unexpected.
Using a large climate dataset called CMIP6, British Antarctic Survey
researchers investigated this unprecedented sea ice loss. They
analyzed data from 18 different climate models to understand the
probability of such a significant reduction in sea ice and its
connection to climate change.
Lead author Rachel Diamond explained that while 2023’s extreme low sea
ice was made more likely by climate change, it was still considered
very rare according to the models.
She says: “This is the first time this large set of climate models has
been used to find out how unlikely 2023’s low sea ice actually was. We
only have forty-five years of satellite measurements of sea ice, which
makes it extremely difficult to evaluate changes in sea ice extent.
This is where climate models come into their own.
According to the models, the record-breaking minimum sea ice extent
would be a one-in-a-2000-year event without climate change. This tells
us that the event was very extreme – anything less than one-in-100 is
considered exceptionally unlikely.”
Caroline Holmes, a co-author on the study, said: “Strong climate
change – i.e. the temperature changes we’re already seeing, and those
expected if emissions continue to rise rapidly — in the models makes
it four times more likely that we see such a big decline in sea ice
extent. This suggests that 2023’s extreme low was made more likely by
climate change.”
Long-term Consequences and Future Projections
The researchers also used the models to look at how well sea ice is
likely to recover. By looking at similar events in the models, the
authors found that after such extreme sea ice loss, not all of the sea
ice around Antarctica returns – even after twenty years. This adds
model evidence to existing observational evidence that the last few
years’ low sea ice could signal a lasting regime shift in the Southern
Ocean."
__________________________
Rising sea temperatures will have an impact on weather in New Zealand,

Yes that seems inevitable.

Post by Rich80105
sadly our current government is ignoring both the likely impact of
climate change on New Zealand directly,

Probably because there is nothing NZ ( and every other Southern
Hemisphere country combined) can do about it. Our contribution to
this problem is nearly zero. Climate change in Antarctica and
everywhere else in the word is affected by Northern Hemisphere
countries almost entirely.

Post by Rich80105
but also our commitments to
reduce emissions under international treaties to prepare for and try
to reduce the impact of climate change.

We should not have agreed to anything. Our contribution is so
miniscule it is hardly measurable.

Post by Rich80105
They don't look further than
the interests of political donors . . .

More worthless political rhetoric Rich. Repetition simply exposes how
shallow your arguments are. Better for you to get Russia, China and
India on board.

[Rich80105]

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105
https://scitechdaily.com/once-in-a-2000-year-event-study-explains-unprecedented-antarctic-ice-loss-equivalent-to-10x-the-size-of-the-uk/
"In 2023, the Antarctic sea ice shrank to historically low levels,
with winter ice coverage falling more than 2 million square kilometers
below normal—roughly equivalent to ten times the size of the UK. This
significant decrease was particularly striking given the steady
increase in sea ice that had been observed up until 2015, making the
abrupt drop even more unexpected.
Using a large climate dataset called CMIP6, British Antarctic Survey
researchers investigated this unprecedented sea ice loss. They
analyzed data from 18 different climate models to understand the
probability of such a significant reduction in sea ice and its
connection to climate change.
Lead author Rachel Diamond explained that while 2023’s extreme low sea
ice was made more likely by climate change, it was still considered
very rare according to the models.
She says: “This is the first time this large set of climate models has
been used to find out how unlikely 2023’s low sea ice actually was. We
only have forty-five years of satellite measurements of sea ice, which
makes it extremely difficult to evaluate changes in sea ice extent.
This is where climate models come into their own.
According to the models, the record-breaking minimum sea ice extent
would be a one-in-a-2000-year event without climate change. This tells
us that the event was very extreme – anything less than one-in-100 is
considered exceptionally unlikely.”
Caroline Holmes, a co-author on the study, said: “Strong climate
change – i.e. the temperature changes we’re already seeing, and those
expected if emissions continue to rise rapidly — in the models makes
it four times more likely that we see such a big decline in sea ice
extent. This suggests that 2023’s extreme low was made more likely by
climate change.”
Long-term Consequences and Future Projections
The researchers also used the models to look at how well sea ice is
likely to recover. By looking at similar events in the models, the
authors found that after such extreme sea ice loss, not all of the sea
ice around Antarctica returns – even after twenty years. This adds
model evidence to existing observational evidence that the last few
years’ low sea ice could signal a lasting regime shift in the Southern
Ocean."
__________________________
Rising sea temperatures will have an impact on weather in New Zealand,

Yes that seems inevitable.

Post by Rich80105
sadly our current government is ignoring both the likely impact of
climate change on New Zealand directly,

Probably because there is nothing NZ ( and every other Southern
Hemisphere country combined) can do about it. Our contribution to
this problem is nearly zero. Climate change in Antarctica and
everywhere else in the word is affected by Northern Hemisphere
countries almost entirely.

Post by Rich80105
but also our commitments to
reduce emissions under international treaties to prepare for and try
to reduce the impact of climate change.

We should not have agreed to anything. Our contribution is so
miniscule it is hardly measurable.

if it is roughly the same proportion of the world population as NZ is,
that may still be quite a bit of money . . .

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105
They don't look further than
the interests of political donors . . .

More worthless political rhetoric Rich. Repetition simply exposes how
shallow your arguments are. Better for you to get Russia, China and
India on board.

China is probably a lot closer than Russia or India, but giving so
much to political donors is meaning that the cost of not reducing our
emissions is more expensive that it needs to be.

[Tony]

Post by Rich80105

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105
https://scitechdaily.com/once-in-a-2000-year-event-study-explains-unprecedented-antarctic-ice-loss-equivalent-to-10x-the-size-of-the-uk/
"In 2023, the Antarctic sea ice shrank to historically low levels,
with winter ice coverage falling more than 2 million square kilometers
below normal—roughly equivalent to ten times the size of the UK. This
significant decrease was particularly striking given the steady
increase in sea ice that had been observed up until 2015, making the
abrupt drop even more unexpected.
Using a large climate dataset called CMIP6, British Antarctic Survey
researchers investigated this unprecedented sea ice loss. They
analyzed data from 18 different climate models to understand the
probability of such a significant reduction in sea ice and its
connection to climate change.
Lead author Rachel Diamond explained that while 2023’s extreme low sea
ice was made more likely by climate change, it was still considered
very rare according to the models.
She says: “This is the first time this large set of climate models has
been used to find out how unlikely 2023’s low sea ice actually was. We
only have forty-five years of satellite measurements of sea ice, which
makes it extremely difficult to evaluate changes in sea ice extent.
This is where climate models come into their own.
According to the models, the record-breaking minimum sea ice extent
would be a one-in-a-2000-year event without climate change. This tells
us that the event was very extreme – anything less than one-in-100 is
considered exceptionally unlikely.”
Caroline Holmes, a co-author on the study, said: “Strong climate
change – i.e. the temperature changes we’re already seeing, and those
expected if emissions continue to rise rapidly — in the models makes
it four times more likely that we see such a big decline in sea ice
extent. This suggests that 2023’s extreme low was made more likely by
climate change.”
Long-term Consequences and Future Projections
The researchers also used the models to look at how well sea ice is
likely to recover. By looking at similar events in the models, the
authors found that after such extreme sea ice loss, not all of the sea
ice around Antarctica returns – even after twenty years. This adds
model evidence to existing observational evidence that the last few
years’ low sea ice could signal a lasting regime shift in the Southern
Ocean."
__________________________
Rising sea temperatures will have an impact on weather in New Zealand,

Yes that seems inevitable.

Post by Rich80105
sadly our current government is ignoring both the likely impact of
climate change on New Zealand directly,

Probably because there is nothing NZ ( and every other Southern
Hemisphere country combined) can do about it. Our contribution to
this problem is nearly zero. Climate change in Antarctica and
everywhere else in the word is affected by Northern Hemisphere
countries almost entirely.

Post by Rich80105
but also our commitments to
reduce emissions under international treaties to prepare for and try
to reduce the impact of climate change.

We should not have agreed to anything. Our contribution is so
miniscule it is hardly measurable.

if it is roughly the same proportion of the world population as NZ is,
that may still be quite a bit of money . . .

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105
They don't look further than
the interests of political donors . . .

More worthless political rhetoric Rich. Repetition simply exposes how
shallow your arguments are. Better for you to get Russia, China and
India on board.

China is probably a lot closer than Russia or India, but giving so
much to political donors is meaning that the cost of not reducing our
emissions is more expensive that it needs to be.

That is so lame.

[Crash]

Post by Rich80105

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105
https://scitechdaily.com/once-in-a-2000-year-event-study-explains-unprecedented-antarctic-ice-loss-equivalent-to-10x-the-size-of-the-uk/
"In 2023, the Antarctic sea ice shrank to historically low levels,
with winter ice coverage falling more than 2 million square kilometers
below normal—roughly equivalent to ten times the size of the UK. This
significant decrease was particularly striking given the steady
increase in sea ice that had been observed up until 2015, making the
abrupt drop even more unexpected.
Using a large climate dataset called CMIP6, British Antarctic Survey
researchers investigated this unprecedented sea ice loss. They
analyzed data from 18 different climate models to understand the
probability of such a significant reduction in sea ice and its
connection to climate change.
Lead author Rachel Diamond explained that while 2023’s extreme low sea
ice was made more likely by climate change, it was still considered
very rare according to the models.
She says: “This is the first time this large set of climate models has
been used to find out how unlikely 2023’s low sea ice actually was. We
only have forty-five years of satellite measurements of sea ice, which
makes it extremely difficult to evaluate changes in sea ice extent.
This is where climate models come into their own.
According to the models, the record-breaking minimum sea ice extent
would be a one-in-a-2000-year event without climate change. This tells
us that the event was very extreme – anything less than one-in-100 is
considered exceptionally unlikely.”
Caroline Holmes, a co-author on the study, said: “Strong climate
change – i.e. the temperature changes we’re already seeing, and those
expected if emissions continue to rise rapidly — in the models makes
it four times more likely that we see such a big decline in sea ice
extent. This suggests that 2023’s extreme low was made more likely by
climate change.”
Long-term Consequences and Future Projections
The researchers also used the models to look at how well sea ice is
likely to recover. By looking at similar events in the models, the
authors found that after such extreme sea ice loss, not all of the sea
ice around Antarctica returns – even after twenty years. This adds
model evidence to existing observational evidence that the last few
years’ low sea ice could signal a lasting regime shift in the Southern
Ocean."
__________________________
Rising sea temperatures will have an impact on weather in New Zealand,

Yes that seems inevitable.

Post by Rich80105
sadly our current government is ignoring both the likely impact of
climate change on New Zealand directly,

Probably because there is nothing NZ ( and every other Southern
Hemisphere country combined) can do about it. Our contribution to
this problem is nearly zero. Climate change in Antarctica and
everywhere else in the word is affected by Northern Hemisphere
countries almost entirely.

Post by Rich80105
but also our commitments to
reduce emissions under international treaties to prepare for and try
to reduce the impact of climate change.

We should not have agreed to anything. Our contribution is so
miniscule it is hardly measurable.

if it is roughly the same proportion of the world population as NZ is,
that may still be quite a bit of money . . .

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105
They don't look further than
the interests of political donors . . .

More worthless political rhetoric Rich. Repetition simply exposes how
shallow your arguments are. Better for you to get Russia, China and
India on board.

China is probably a lot closer than Russia or India, but giving so
much to political donors is meaning that the cost of not reducing our
emissions is more expensive that it needs to be.

So you only response is worthless and baseless rhetoric?

[Rich80105]

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105
https://scitechdaily.com/once-in-a-2000-year-event-study-explains-unprecedented-antarctic-ice-loss-equivalent-to-10x-the-size-of-the-uk/
"In 2023, the Antarctic sea ice shrank to historically low levels,
with winter ice coverage falling more than 2 million square kilometers
below normal—roughly equivalent to ten times the size of the UK. This
significant decrease was particularly striking given the steady
increase in sea ice that had been observed up until 2015, making the
abrupt drop even more unexpected.
Using a large climate dataset called CMIP6, British Antarctic Survey
researchers investigated this unprecedented sea ice loss. They
analyzed data from 18 different climate models to understand the
probability of such a significant reduction in sea ice and its
connection to climate change.
Lead author Rachel Diamond explained that while 2023’s extreme low sea
ice was made more likely by climate change, it was still considered
very rare according to the models.
She says: “This is the first time this large set of climate models has
been used to find out how unlikely 2023’s low sea ice actually was. We
only have forty-five years of satellite measurements of sea ice, which
makes it extremely difficult to evaluate changes in sea ice extent.
This is where climate models come into their own.
According to the models, the record-breaking minimum sea ice extent
would be a one-in-a-2000-year event without climate change. This tells
us that the event was very extreme – anything less than one-in-100 is
considered exceptionally unlikely.”
Caroline Holmes, a co-author on the study, said: “Strong climate
change – i.e. the temperature changes we’re already seeing, and those
expected if emissions continue to rise rapidly — in the models makes
it four times more likely that we see such a big decline in sea ice
extent. This suggests that 2023’s extreme low was made more likely by
climate change.”
Long-term Consequences and Future Projections
The researchers also used the models to look at how well sea ice is
likely to recover. By looking at similar events in the models, the
authors found that after such extreme sea ice loss, not all of the sea
ice around Antarctica returns – even after twenty years. This adds
model evidence to existing observational evidence that the last few
years’ low sea ice could signal a lasting regime shift in the Southern
Ocean."
__________________________
Rising sea temperatures will have an impact on weather in New Zealand,

Yes that seems inevitable.

Post by Rich80105
sadly our current government is ignoring both the likely impact of
climate change on New Zealand directly,

Probably because there is nothing NZ ( and every other Southern
Hemisphere country combined) can do about it. Our contribution to
this problem is nearly zero. Climate change in Antarctica and
everywhere else in the word is affected by Northern Hemisphere
countries almost entirely.

Post by Rich80105
but also our commitments to
reduce emissions under international treaties to prepare for and try
to reduce the impact of climate change.

We should not have agreed to anything. Our contribution is so
miniscule it is hardly measurable.

if it is roughly the same proportion of the world population as NZ is,
that may still be quite a bit of money . . .

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105
They don't look further than
the interests of political donors . . .

More worthless political rhetoric Rich. Repetition simply exposes how
shallow your arguments are. Better for you to get Russia, China and
India on board.

China is probably a lot closer than Russia or India, but giving so
much to political donors is meaning that the cost of not reducing our
emissions is more expensive that it needs to be.

So you only response is worthless and baseless rhetoric?

Perhaps you missed this response which Tony deleted - apparently he
does not realise that most people save previous posts in a thread for
some time:
__________
I agree, Tony, that seems at times to be all this government has. See:

https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/12/subsidising-ecocide.html

Would we be affected if some countries declined to allow our goods to
enter their country, Tony? Is that what you are looking for?

Naturally under this government we are already missing targets:
https://www.climatechangenews.com/2024/11/19/coalition-against-fossil-fuel-subsidies-expands-but-misses-initial-targets/

Are Shane Jones and Winston Peters not talking to each other?
"AsIwouldsaytoyouthatdoesappeartobethecase"
___________

The link of particular interest from that initial reference is:
https://www.climatechangenews.com/2024/11/19/coalition-against-fossil-fuel-subsidies-expands-but-misses-initial-targets/
- it does appear that in looking into government assistance to those
looking for fossil fuels Shane Jones had not spoken to Winston Peters
who would probably have been aware of the commendable stance taken
against subsidies for fossil fuels . . . If NZ is really phasing out
fossil fuel subsidies it would be very strange to introduce a new
subsidy, don't you think?

[Tony]

Post by Rich80105

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105
https://scitechdaily.com/once-in-a-2000-year-event-study-explains-unprecedented-antarctic-ice-loss-equivalent-to-10x-the-size-of-the-uk/
"In 2023, the Antarctic sea ice shrank to historically low levels,
with winter ice coverage falling more than 2 million square kilometers
below normal—roughly equivalent to ten times the size of the UK. This
significant decrease was particularly striking given the steady
increase in sea ice that had been observed up until 2015, making the
abrupt drop even more unexpected.
Using a large climate dataset called CMIP6, British Antarctic Survey
researchers investigated this unprecedented sea ice loss. They
analyzed data from 18 different climate models to understand the
probability of such a significant reduction in sea ice and its
connection to climate change.
Lead author Rachel Diamond explained that while 2023’s extreme low sea
ice was made more likely by climate change, it was still considered
very rare according to the models.
She says: “This is the first time this large set of climate models has
been used to find out how unlikely 2023’s low sea ice actually was. We
only have forty-five years of satellite measurements of sea ice, which
makes it extremely difficult to evaluate changes in sea ice extent.
This is where climate models come into their own.
According to the models, the record-breaking minimum sea ice extent
would be a one-in-a-2000-year event without climate change. This tells
us that the event was very extreme – anything less than one-in-100 is
considered exceptionally unlikely.”
Caroline Holmes, a co-author on the study, said: “Strong climate
change – i.e. the temperature changes we’re already seeing, and those
expected if emissions continue to rise rapidly — in the models makes
it four times more likely that we see such a big decline in sea ice
extent. This suggests that 2023’s extreme low was made more likely by
climate change.”
Long-term Consequences and Future Projections
The researchers also used the models to look at how well sea ice is
likely to recover. By looking at similar events in the models, the
authors found that after such extreme sea ice loss, not all of the sea
ice around Antarctica returns – even after twenty years. This adds
model evidence to existing observational evidence that the last few
years’ low sea ice could signal a lasting regime shift in the Southern
Ocean."
__________________________
Rising sea temperatures will have an impact on weather in New Zealand,

Yes that seems inevitable.

Post by Rich80105
sadly our current government is ignoring both the likely impact of
climate change on New Zealand directly,

Probably because there is nothing NZ ( and every other Southern
Hemisphere country combined) can do about it. Our contribution to
this problem is nearly zero. Climate change in Antarctica and
everywhere else in the word is affected by Northern Hemisphere
countries almost entirely.

Post by Rich80105
but also our commitments to
reduce emissions under international treaties to prepare for and try
to reduce the impact of climate change.

We should not have agreed to anything. Our contribution is so
miniscule it is hardly measurable.

if it is roughly the same proportion of the world population as NZ is,
that may still be quite a bit of money . . .

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105
They don't look further than
the interests of political donors . . .

More worthless political rhetoric Rich. Repetition simply exposes how
shallow your arguments are. Better for you to get Russia, China and
India on board.

China is probably a lot closer than Russia or India, but giving so
much to political donors is meaning that the cost of not reducing our
emissions is more expensive that it needs to be.

So you only response is worthless and baseless rhetoric?

Perhaps you missed this response which Tony deleted - apparently he
does not realise that most people save previous posts in a thread for

I am well aware of that. My purpose is entirely different when I delete your
nonsense. A purpose you have never devined and never will, because such insight
is well beyond your meagre intellect.

Post by Rich80105
__________
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/12/subsidising-ecocide.html
Would we be affected if some countries declined to allow our goods to
enter their country, Tony? Is that what you are looking for?
https://www.climatechangenews.com/2024/11/19/coalition-against-fossil-fuel-subsidies-expands-but-misses-initial-targets/
Are Shane Jones and Winston Peters not talking to each other?
"AsIwouldsaytoyouthatdoesappeartobethecase"
___________
https://www.climatechangenews.com/2024/11/19/coalition-against-fossil-fuel-subsidies-expands-but-misses-initial-targets/
- it does appear that in looking into government assistance to those
looking for fossil fuels Shane Jones had not spoken to Winston Peters
who would probably have been aware of the commendable stance taken
against subsidies for fossil fuels . . . If NZ is really phasing out
fossil fuel subsidies it would be very strange to introduce a new
subsidy, don't you think?

What nonsense you drivel.

[Rich80105]

On Tue, 3 Dec 2024 03:29:58 -0000 (UTC), Tony

Post by Tony

Post by Rich80105

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105
https://scitechdaily.com/once-in-a-2000-year-event-study-explains-unprecedented-antarctic-ice-loss-equivalent-to-10x-the-size-of-the-uk/
"In 2023, the Antarctic sea ice shrank to historically low levels,
with winter ice coverage falling more than 2 million square kilometers
below normal—roughly equivalent to ten times the size of the UK. This
significant decrease was particularly striking given the steady
increase in sea ice that had been observed up until 2015, making the
abrupt drop even more unexpected.
Using a large climate dataset called CMIP6, British Antarctic Survey
researchers investigated this unprecedented sea ice loss. They
analyzed data from 18 different climate models to understand the
probability of such a significant reduction in sea ice and its
connection to climate change.
Lead author Rachel Diamond explained that while 2023’s extreme low sea
ice was made more likely by climate change, it was still considered
very rare according to the models.
She says: “This is the first time this large set of climate models has
been used to find out how unlikely 2023’s low sea ice actually was. We
only have forty-five years of satellite measurements of sea ice, which
makes it extremely difficult to evaluate changes in sea ice extent.
This is where climate models come into their own.
According to the models, the record-breaking minimum sea ice extent
would be a one-in-a-2000-year event without climate change. This tells
us that the event was very extreme – anything less than one-in-100 is
considered exceptionally unlikely.”
Caroline Holmes, a co-author on the study, said: “Strong climate
change – i.e. the temperature changes we’re already seeing, and those
expected if emissions continue to rise rapidly — in the models makes
it four times more likely that we see such a big decline in sea ice
extent. This suggests that 2023’s extreme low was made more likely by
climate change.”
Long-term Consequences and Future Projections
The researchers also used the models to look at how well sea ice is
likely to recover. By looking at similar events in the models, the
authors found that after such extreme sea ice loss, not all of the sea
ice around Antarctica returns – even after twenty years. This adds
model evidence to existing observational evidence that the last few
years’ low sea ice could signal a lasting regime shift in the Southern
Ocean."
__________________________
Rising sea temperatures will have an impact on weather in New Zealand,

Yes that seems inevitable.

Post by Rich80105
sadly our current government is ignoring both the likely impact of
climate change on New Zealand directly,

Probably because there is nothing NZ ( and every other Southern
Hemisphere country combined) can do about it. Our contribution to
this problem is nearly zero. Climate change in Antarctica and
everywhere else in the word is affected by Northern Hemisphere
countries almost entirely.

Post by Rich80105
but also our commitments to
reduce emissions under international treaties to prepare for and try
to reduce the impact of climate change.

We should not have agreed to anything. Our contribution is so
miniscule it is hardly measurable.

if it is roughly the same proportion of the world population as NZ is,
that may still be quite a bit of money . . .

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105
They don't look further than
the interests of political donors . . .

More worthless political rhetoric Rich. Repetition simply exposes how
shallow your arguments are. Better for you to get Russia, China and
India on board.

China is probably a lot closer than Russia or India, but giving so
much to political donors is meaning that the cost of not reducing our
emissions is more expensive that it needs to be.

So you only response is worthless and baseless rhetoric?

Perhaps you missed this response which Tony deleted - apparently he
does not realise that most people save previous posts in a thread for

I am well aware of that. My purpose is entirely different when I delete your
nonsense. A purpose you have never devined and never will, because such insight
is well beyond your meagre intellect.

I understand that it is your coping mechanism for questions you cannot
answer or that you do not understand and feel embarrassed.

Post by Tony

Post by Rich80105
__________
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/12/subsidising-ecocide.html
Would we be affected if some countries declined to allow our goods to
enter their country, Tony? Is that what you are looking for?
https://www.climatechangenews.com/2024/11/19/coalition-against-fossil-fuel-subsidies-expands-but-misses-initial-targets/
Are Shane Jones and Winston Peters not talking to each other?
"AsIwouldsaytoyouthatdoesappeartobethecase"
___________
https://www.climatechangenews.com/2024/11/19/coalition-against-fossil-fuel-subsidies-expands-but-misses-initial-targets/
- it does appear that in looking into government assistance to those
looking for fossil fuels Shane Jones had not spoken to Winston Peters
who would probably have been aware of the commendable stance taken
against subsidies for fossil fuels . . . If NZ is really phasing out
fossil fuel subsidies it would be very strange to introduce a new
subsidy, don't you think?

What nonsense you drivel.

A quick google search would solve a lot of your problems, Tony.
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/top/535373/oil-and-gas-lobby-asks-government-to-underwrite-fossil-fuel-exploration-minister-considering-options

[Tony]

Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 3 Dec 2024 03:29:58 -0000 (UTC), Tony

Post by Tony

Post by Rich80105

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105
https://scitechdaily.com/once-in-a-2000-year-event-study-explains-unprecedented-antarctic-ice-loss-equivalent-to-10x-the-size-of-the-uk/
"In 2023, the Antarctic sea ice shrank to historically low levels,
with winter ice coverage falling more than 2 million square kilometers
below normal—roughly equivalent to ten times the size of the UK. This
significant decrease was particularly striking given the steady
increase in sea ice that had been observed up until 2015, making the
abrupt drop even more unexpected.
Using a large climate dataset called CMIP6, British Antarctic Survey
researchers investigated this unprecedented sea ice loss. They
analyzed data from 18 different climate models to understand the
probability of such a significant reduction in sea ice and its
connection to climate change.
Lead author Rachel Diamond explained that while 2023’s extreme low sea
ice was made more likely by climate change, it was still considered
very rare according to the models.
She says: “This is the first time this large set of climate models has
been used to find out how unlikely 2023’s low sea ice actually was. We
only have forty-five years of satellite measurements of sea ice, which
makes it extremely difficult to evaluate changes in sea ice extent.
This is where climate models come into their own.
According to the models, the record-breaking minimum sea ice extent
would be a one-in-a-2000-year event without climate change. This tells
us that the event was very extreme – anything less than one-in-100 is
considered exceptionally unlikely.”
Caroline Holmes, a co-author on the study, said: “Strong climate
change – i.e. the temperature changes we’re already seeing, and those
expected if emissions continue to rise rapidly — in the models makes
it four times more likely that we see such a big decline in sea ice
extent. This suggests that 2023’s extreme low was made more likely by
climate change.”
Long-term Consequences and Future Projections
The researchers also used the models to look at how well sea ice is
likely to recover. By looking at similar events in the models, the
authors found that after such extreme sea ice loss, not all of the sea
ice around Antarctica returns – even after twenty years. This adds
model evidence to existing observational evidence that the last few
years’ low sea ice could signal a lasting regime shift in the Southern
Ocean."
__________________________
Rising sea temperatures will have an impact on weather in New Zealand,

Yes that seems inevitable.

Post by Rich80105
sadly our current government is ignoring both the likely impact of
climate change on New Zealand directly,

Probably because there is nothing NZ ( and every other Southern
Hemisphere country combined) can do about it. Our contribution to
this problem is nearly zero. Climate change in Antarctica and
everywhere else in the word is affected by Northern Hemisphere
countries almost entirely.

Post by Rich80105
but also our commitments to
reduce emissions under international treaties to prepare for and try
to reduce the impact of climate change.

We should not have agreed to anything. Our contribution is so
miniscule it is hardly measurable.

if it is roughly the same proportion of the world population as NZ is,
that may still be quite a bit of money . . .

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105
They don't look further than
the interests of political donors . . .

More worthless political rhetoric Rich. Repetition simply exposes how
shallow your arguments are. Better for you to get Russia, China and
India on board.

China is probably a lot closer than Russia or India, but giving so
much to political donors is meaning that the cost of not reducing our
emissions is more expensive that it needs to be.

So you only response is worthless and baseless rhetoric?

Perhaps you missed this response which Tony deleted - apparently he
does not realise that most people save previous posts in a thread for

I am well aware of that. My purpose is entirely different when I delete your
nonsense. A purpose you have never devined and never will, because such insight
is well beyond your meagre intellect.

I understand that it is your coping mechanism for questions you cannot
answer or that you do not understand and feel embarrassed.

Q.E.D.
As I said, you do not even begin to understand anything more subtle than a jack
hammer.
What a shame you have wasted your life and brought so much misery to the world.

Post by Rich80105

Post by Tony

Post by Rich80105
__________
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/12/subsidising-ecocide.html
Would we be affected if some countries declined to allow our goods to
enter their country, Tony? Is that what you are looking for?
https://www.climatechangenews.com/2024/11/19/coalition-against-fossil-fuel-subsidies-expands-but-misses-initial-targets/
Are Shane Jones and Winston Peters not talking to each other?
"AsIwouldsaytoyouthatdoesappeartobethecase"
___________
https://www.climatechangenews.com/2024/11/19/coalition-against-fossil-fuel-subsidies-expands-but-misses-initial-targets/
- it does appear that in looking into government assistance to those
looking for fossil fuels Shane Jones had not spoken to Winston Peters
who would probably have been aware of the commendable stance taken
against subsidies for fossil fuels . . . If NZ is really phasing out
fossil fuel subsidies it would be very strange to introduce a new
subsidy, don't you think?

What nonsense you drivel.

A quick google search would solve a lot of your problems, Tony.
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/top/535373/oil-and-gas-lobby-asks-government-to-underwrite-fossil-fuel-exploration-minister-considering-options

There is no binding agreement and all your childish lies will not change that.
End of story little boy.

[Crash]

On Tue, 3 Dec 2024 06:37:28 -0000 (UTC), Tony

Post by Tony

Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 3 Dec 2024 03:29:58 -0000 (UTC), Tony

Post by Tony

Post by Rich80105

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105
https://scitechdaily.com/once-in-a-2000-year-event-study-explains-unprecedented-antarctic-ice-loss-equivalent-to-10x-the-size-of-the-uk/
"In 2023, the Antarctic sea ice shrank to historically low levels,
with winter ice coverage falling more than 2 million square kilometers
below normal—roughly equivalent to ten times the size of the UK. This
significant decrease was particularly striking given the steady
increase in sea ice that had been observed up until 2015, making the
abrupt drop even more unexpected.
Using a large climate dataset called CMIP6, British Antarctic Survey
researchers investigated this unprecedented sea ice loss. They
analyzed data from 18 different climate models to understand the
probability of such a significant reduction in sea ice and its
connection to climate change.
Lead author Rachel Diamond explained that while 2023’s extreme low sea
ice was made more likely by climate change, it was still considered
very rare according to the models.
She says: “This is the first time this large set of climate models has
been used to find out how unlikely 2023’s low sea ice actually was. We
only have forty-five years of satellite measurements of sea ice, which
makes it extremely difficult to evaluate changes in sea ice extent.
This is where climate models come into their own.
According to the models, the record-breaking minimum sea ice extent
would be a one-in-a-2000-year event without climate change. This tells
us that the event was very extreme – anything less than one-in-100 is
considered exceptionally unlikely.”
Caroline Holmes, a co-author on the study, said: “Strong climate
change – i.e. the temperature changes we’re already seeing, and those
expected if emissions continue to rise rapidly — in the models makes
it four times more likely that we see such a big decline in sea ice
extent. This suggests that 2023’s extreme low was made more likely by
climate change.”
Long-term Consequences and Future Projections
The researchers also used the models to look at how well sea ice is
likely to recover. By looking at similar events in the models, the
authors found that after such extreme sea ice loss, not all of the sea
ice around Antarctica returns – even after twenty years. This adds
model evidence to existing observational evidence that the last few
years’ low sea ice could signal a lasting regime shift in the Southern
Ocean."
__________________________
Rising sea temperatures will have an impact on weather in New Zealand,

Yes that seems inevitable.

Post by Rich80105
sadly our current government is ignoring both the likely impact of
climate change on New Zealand directly,

Probably because there is nothing NZ ( and every other Southern
Hemisphere country combined) can do about it. Our contribution to
this problem is nearly zero. Climate change in Antarctica and
everywhere else in the word is affected by Northern Hemisphere
countries almost entirely.

Post by Rich80105
but also our commitments to
reduce emissions under international treaties to prepare for and try
to reduce the impact of climate change.

We should not have agreed to anything. Our contribution is so
miniscule it is hardly measurable.

if it is roughly the same proportion of the world population as NZ is,
that may still be quite a bit of money . . .

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105
They don't look further than
the interests of political donors . . .

More worthless political rhetoric Rich. Repetition simply exposes how
shallow your arguments are. Better for you to get Russia, China and
India on board.

China is probably a lot closer than Russia or India, but giving so
much to political donors is meaning that the cost of not reducing our
emissions is more expensive that it needs to be.

So you only response is worthless and baseless rhetoric?

Perhaps you missed this response which Tony deleted - apparently he
does not realise that most people save previous posts in a thread for

I am well aware of that. My purpose is entirely different when I delete your
nonsense. A purpose you have never devined and never will, because such insight
is well beyond your meagre intellect.

I understand that it is your coping mechanism for questions you cannot
answer or that you do not understand and feel embarrassed.

Q.E.D.
As I said, you do not even begin to understand anything more subtle than a jack
hammer.
What a shame you have wasted your life and brought so much misery to the world.

Post by Rich80105

Post by Tony

Post by Rich80105
__________
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/12/subsidising-ecocide.html
Would we be affected if some countries declined to allow our goods to
enter their country, Tony? Is that what you are looking for?
https://www.climatechangenews.com/2024/11/19/coalition-against-fossil-fuel-subsidies-expands-but-misses-initial-targets/
Are Shane Jones and Winston Peters not talking to each other?
"AsIwouldsaytoyouthatdoesappeartobethecase"
___________
https://www.climatechangenews.com/2024/11/19/coalition-against-fossil-fuel-subsidies-expands-but-misses-initial-targets/
- it does appear that in looking into government assistance to those
looking for fossil fuels Shane Jones had not spoken to Winston Peters
who would probably have been aware of the commendable stance taken
against subsidies for fossil fuels . . . If NZ is really phasing out
fossil fuel subsidies it would be very strange to introduce a new
subsidy, don't you think?

What nonsense you drivel.

A quick google search would solve a lot of your problems, Tony.
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/top/535373/oil-and-gas-lobby-asks-government-to-underwrite-fossil-fuel-exploration-minister-considering-options

There is no binding agreement and all your childish lies will not change that.
End of story little boy.

That's about it Tony. When Rich latches on to anti-government
rhetoric, there is no logic or evidence that will dislodge it.

[Rich80105]

Post by Crash
On Tue, 3 Dec 2024 06:37:28 -0000 (UTC), Tony

Post by Tony

Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 3 Dec 2024 03:29:58 -0000 (UTC), Tony

Post by Tony

Post by Rich80105

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105
https://scitechdaily.com/once-in-a-2000-year-event-study-explains-unprecedented-antarctic-ice-loss-equivalent-to-10x-the-size-of-the-uk/
"In 2023, the Antarctic sea ice shrank to historically low levels,
with winter ice coverage falling more than 2 million square kilometers
below normal—roughly equivalent to ten times the size of the UK. This
significant decrease was particularly striking given the steady
increase in sea ice that had been observed up until 2015, making the
abrupt drop even more unexpected.
Using a large climate dataset called CMIP6, British Antarctic Survey
researchers investigated this unprecedented sea ice loss. They
analyzed data from 18 different climate models to understand the
probability of such a significant reduction in sea ice and its
connection to climate change.
Lead author Rachel Diamond explained that while 2023’s extreme low sea
ice was made more likely by climate change, it was still considered
very rare according to the models.
She says: “This is the first time this large set of climate models has
been used to find out how unlikely 2023’s low sea ice actually was. We
only have forty-five years of satellite measurements of sea ice, which
makes it extremely difficult to evaluate changes in sea ice extent.
This is where climate models come into their own.
According to the models, the record-breaking minimum sea ice extent
would be a one-in-a-2000-year event without climate change. This tells
us that the event was very extreme – anything less than one-in-100 is
considered exceptionally unlikely.”
Caroline Holmes, a co-author on the study, said: “Strong climate
change – i.e. the temperature changes we’re already seeing, and those
expected if emissions continue to rise rapidly — in the models makes
it four times more likely that we see such a big decline in sea ice
extent. This suggests that 2023’s extreme low was made more likely by
climate change.”
Long-term Consequences and Future Projections
The researchers also used the models to look at how well sea ice is
likely to recover. By looking at similar events in the models, the
authors found that after such extreme sea ice loss, not all of the sea
ice around Antarctica returns – even after twenty years. This adds
model evidence to existing observational evidence that the last few
years’ low sea ice could signal a lasting regime shift in the Southern
Ocean."
__________________________
Rising sea temperatures will have an impact on weather in New Zealand,

Yes that seems inevitable.

Post by Rich80105
sadly our current government is ignoring both the likely impact of
climate change on New Zealand directly,

Probably because there is nothing NZ ( and every other Southern
Hemisphere country combined) can do about it. Our contribution to
this problem is nearly zero. Climate change in Antarctica and
everywhere else in the word is affected by Northern Hemisphere
countries almost entirely.

Post by Rich80105
but also our commitments to
reduce emissions under international treaties to prepare for and try
to reduce the impact of climate change.

We should not have agreed to anything. Our contribution is so
miniscule it is hardly measurable.

if it is roughly the same proportion of the world population as NZ is,
that may still be quite a bit of money . . .

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105
They don't look further than
the interests of political donors . . .

More worthless political rhetoric Rich. Repetition simply exposes how
shallow your arguments are. Better for you to get Russia, China and
India on board.

China is probably a lot closer than Russia or India, but giving so
much to political donors is meaning that the cost of not reducing our
emissions is more expensive that it needs to be.

So you only response is worthless and baseless rhetoric?

Perhaps you missed this response which Tony deleted - apparently he
does not realise that most people save previous posts in a thread for

I am well aware of that. My purpose is entirely different when I delete your
nonsense. A purpose you have never devined and never will, because such insight
is well beyond your meagre intellect.

I understand that it is your coping mechanism for questions you cannot
answer or that you do not understand and feel embarrassed.

Q.E.D.
As I said, you do not even begin to understand anything more subtle than a jack
hammer.
What a shame you have wasted your life and brought so much misery to the world.

Post by Rich80105

Post by Tony

Post by Rich80105
__________
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/12/subsidising-ecocide.html
Would we be affected if some countries declined to allow our goods to
enter their country, Tony? Is that what you are looking for?
https://www.climatechangenews.com/2024/11/19/coalition-against-fossil-fuel-subsidies-expands-but-misses-initial-targets/
Are Shane Jones and Winston Peters not talking to each other?
"AsIwouldsaytoyouthatdoesappeartobethecase"
___________
https://www.climatechangenews.com/2024/11/19/coalition-against-fossil-fuel-subsidies-expands-but-misses-initial-targets/
- it does appear that in looking into government assistance to those
looking for fossil fuels Shane Jones had not spoken to Winston Peters
who would probably have been aware of the commendable stance taken
against subsidies for fossil fuels . . . If NZ is really phasing out
fossil fuel subsidies it would be very strange to introduce a new
subsidy, don't you think?

What nonsense you drivel.

A quick google search would solve a lot of your problems, Tony.
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/top/535373/oil-and-gas-lobby-asks-government-to-underwrite-fossil-fuel-exploration-minister-considering-options

There is no binding agreement and all your childish lies will not change that.
End of story little boy.

That's about it Tony. When Rich latches on to anti-government
rhetoric, there is no logic or evidence that will dislodge it.

There is little surprise that the gas lobby is asking for subsidies -
what would be surprising is if the government ignored international
agreements, and Shane Jones seems to be doing just that.

[Tony]

Post by Rich80105

Post by Crash
On Tue, 3 Dec 2024 06:37:28 -0000 (UTC), Tony

Post by Tony

Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 3 Dec 2024 03:29:58 -0000 (UTC), Tony

Post by Tony

Post by Rich80105

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105
https://scitechdaily.com/once-in-a-2000-year-event-study-explains-unprecedented-antarctic-ice-loss-equivalent-to-10x-the-size-of-the-uk/
"In 2023, the Antarctic sea ice shrank to historically low levels,
with winter ice coverage falling more than 2 million square kilometers
below normal—roughly equivalent to ten times the size of the UK. This
significant decrease was particularly striking given the steady
increase in sea ice that had been observed up until 2015, making the
abrupt drop even more unexpected.
Using a large climate dataset called CMIP6, British Antarctic Survey
researchers investigated this unprecedented sea ice loss. They
analyzed data from 18 different climate models to understand the
probability of such a significant reduction in sea ice and its
connection to climate change.
Lead author Rachel Diamond explained that while 2023’s extreme low sea
ice was made more likely by climate change, it was still considered
very rare according to the models.
She says: “This is the first time this large set of climate models has
been used to find out how unlikely 2023’s low sea ice actually was. We
only have forty-five years of satellite measurements of sea ice, which
makes it extremely difficult to evaluate changes in sea ice extent.
This is where climate models come into their own.
According to the models, the record-breaking minimum sea ice extent
would be a one-in-a-2000-year event without climate change. This tells
us that the event was very extreme – anything less than one-in-100 is
considered exceptionally unlikely.”
Caroline Holmes, a co-author on the study, said: “Strong climate
change – i.e. the temperature changes we’re already seeing, and those
expected if emissions continue to rise rapidly — in the models makes
it four times more likely that we see such a big decline in sea ice
extent. This suggests that 2023’s extreme low was made more likely by
climate change.”
Long-term Consequences and Future Projections
The researchers also used the models to look at how well sea ice is
likely to recover. By looking at similar events in the models, the
authors found that after such extreme sea ice loss, not all of the sea
ice around Antarctica returns – even after twenty years. This adds
model evidence to existing observational evidence that the last few
years’ low sea ice could signal a lasting regime shift in the Southern
Ocean."
__________________________
Rising sea temperatures will have an impact on weather in New Zealand,

Yes that seems inevitable.

Post by Rich80105
sadly our current government is ignoring both the likely impact of
climate change on New Zealand directly,

Probably because there is nothing NZ ( and every other Southern
Hemisphere country combined) can do about it. Our contribution to
this problem is nearly zero. Climate change in Antarctica and
everywhere else in the word is affected by Northern Hemisphere
countries almost entirely.

Post by Rich80105
but also our commitments to
reduce emissions under international treaties to prepare for and try
to reduce the impact of climate change.

We should not have agreed to anything. Our contribution is so
miniscule it is hardly measurable.

if it is roughly the same proportion of the world population as NZ is,
that may still be quite a bit of money . . .

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105
They don't look further than
the interests of political donors . . .

More worthless political rhetoric Rich. Repetition simply exposes how
shallow your arguments are. Better for you to get Russia, China and
India on board.

China is probably a lot closer than Russia or India, but giving so
much to political donors is meaning that the cost of not reducing our
emissions is more expensive that it needs to be.

So you only response is worthless and baseless rhetoric?

Perhaps you missed this response which Tony deleted - apparently he
does not realise that most people save previous posts in a thread for

I am well aware of that. My purpose is entirely different when I delete your
nonsense. A purpose you have never devined and never will, because such insight
is well beyond your meagre intellect.

I understand that it is your coping mechanism for questions you cannot
answer or that you do not understand and feel embarrassed.

Q.E.D.
As I said, you do not even begin to understand anything more subtle than a jack
hammer.
What a shame you have wasted your life and brought so much misery to the world.

Post by Rich80105

Post by Tony

Post by Rich80105
__________
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/12/subsidising-ecocide.html
Would we be affected if some countries declined to allow our goods to
enter their country, Tony? Is that what you are looking for?
https://www.climatechangenews.com/2024/11/19/coalition-against-fossil-fuel-subsidies-expands-but-misses-initial-targets/
Are Shane Jones and Winston Peters not talking to each other?
"AsIwouldsaytoyouthatdoesappeartobethecase"
___________
https://www.climatechangenews.com/2024/11/19/coalition-against-fossil-fuel-subsidies-expands-but-misses-initial-targets/
- it does appear that in looking into government assistance to those
looking for fossil fuels Shane Jones had not spoken to Winston Peters
who would probably have been aware of the commendable stance taken
against subsidies for fossil fuels . . . If NZ is really phasing out
fossil fuel subsidies it would be very strange to introduce a new
subsidy, don't you think?

What nonsense you drivel.

A quick google search would solve a lot of your problems, Tony.
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/top/535373/oil-and-gas-lobby-asks-government-to-underwrite-fossil-fuel-exploration-minister-considering-options

There is no binding agreement and all your childish lies will not change that.
End of story little boy.

That's about it Tony. When Rich latches on to anti-government
rhetoric, there is no logic or evidence that will dislodge it.

There is little surprise that the gas lobby is asking for subsidies -
what would be surprising is if the government ignored international
agreements, and Shane Jones seems to be doing just that.

There are no binding international agreements that anybody is ignoring. Stop
your lies.

[Rich80105]

On Tue, 3 Dec 2024 19:20:35 -0000 (UTC), Tony

Post by Tony

Post by Rich80105

Post by Crash
On Tue, 3 Dec 2024 06:37:28 -0000 (UTC), Tony

Post by Tony

Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 3 Dec 2024 03:29:58 -0000 (UTC), Tony

Post by Tony

Post by Rich80105

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105
https://scitechdaily.com/once-in-a-2000-year-event-study-explains-unprecedented-antarctic-ice-loss-equivalent-to-10x-the-size-of-the-uk/
"In 2023, the Antarctic sea ice shrank to historically low levels,
with winter ice coverage falling more than 2 million square kilometers
below normal—roughly equivalent to ten times the size of the UK. This
significant decrease was particularly striking given the steady
increase in sea ice that had been observed up until 2015, making the
abrupt drop even more unexpected.
Using a large climate dataset called CMIP6, British Antarctic Survey
researchers investigated this unprecedented sea ice loss. They
analyzed data from 18 different climate models to understand the
probability of such a significant reduction in sea ice and its
connection to climate change.
Lead author Rachel Diamond explained that while 2023’s extreme low sea
ice was made more likely by climate change, it was still considered
very rare according to the models.
She says: “This is the first time this large set of climate models has
been used to find out how unlikely 2023’s low sea ice actually was. We
only have forty-five years of satellite measurements of sea ice, which
makes it extremely difficult to evaluate changes in sea ice extent.
This is where climate models come into their own.
According to the models, the record-breaking minimum sea ice extent
would be a one-in-a-2000-year event without climate change. This tells
us that the event was very extreme – anything less than one-in-100 is
considered exceptionally unlikely.”
Caroline Holmes, a co-author on the study, said: “Strong climate
change – i.e. the temperature changes we’re already seeing, and those
expected if emissions continue to rise rapidly — in the models makes
it four times more likely that we see such a big decline in sea ice
extent. This suggests that 2023’s extreme low was made more likely by
climate change.”
Long-term Consequences and Future Projections
The researchers also used the models to look at how well sea ice is
likely to recover. By looking at similar events in the models, the
authors found that after such extreme sea ice loss, not all of the sea
ice around Antarctica returns – even after twenty years. This adds
model evidence to existing observational evidence that the last few
years’ low sea ice could signal a lasting regime shift in the Southern
Ocean."
__________________________
Rising sea temperatures will have an impact on weather in New Zealand,

Yes that seems inevitable.

Post by Rich80105
sadly our current government is ignoring both the likely impact of
climate change on New Zealand directly,

Probably because there is nothing NZ ( and every other Southern
Hemisphere country combined) can do about it. Our contribution to
this problem is nearly zero. Climate change in Antarctica and
everywhere else in the word is affected by Northern Hemisphere
countries almost entirely.

Post by Rich80105
but also our commitments to
reduce emissions under international treaties to prepare for and try
to reduce the impact of climate change.

We should not have agreed to anything. Our contribution is so
miniscule it is hardly measurable.

if it is roughly the same proportion of the world population as NZ is,
that may still be quite a bit of money . . .

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105
They don't look further than
the interests of political donors . . .

More worthless political rhetoric Rich. Repetition simply exposes how
shallow your arguments are. Better for you to get Russia, China and
India on board.

China is probably a lot closer than Russia or India, but giving so
much to political donors is meaning that the cost of not reducing our
emissions is more expensive that it needs to be.

So you only response is worthless and baseless rhetoric?

Perhaps you missed this response which Tony deleted - apparently he
does not realise that most people save previous posts in a thread for

I am well aware of that. My purpose is entirely different when I delete your
nonsense. A purpose you have never devined and never will, because such insight
is well beyond your meagre intellect.

I understand that it is your coping mechanism for questions you cannot
answer or that you do not understand and feel embarrassed.

Q.E.D.
As I said, you do not even begin to understand anything more subtle than a jack
hammer.
What a shame you have wasted your life and brought so much misery to the world.

Post by Rich80105

Post by Tony

Post by Rich80105
__________
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/12/subsidising-ecocide.html
Would we be affected if some countries declined to allow our goods to
enter their country, Tony? Is that what you are looking for?
https://www.climatechangenews.com/2024/11/19/coalition-against-fossil-fuel-subsidies-expands-but-misses-initial-targets/
Are Shane Jones and Winston Peters not talking to each other?
"AsIwouldsaytoyouthatdoesappeartobethecase"
___________
https://www.climatechangenews.com/2024/11/19/coalition-against-fossil-fuel-subsidies-expands-but-misses-initial-targets/
- it does appear that in looking into government assistance to those
looking for fossil fuels Shane Jones had not spoken to Winston Peters
who would probably have been aware of the commendable stance taken
against subsidies for fossil fuels . . . If NZ is really phasing out
fossil fuel subsidies it would be very strange to introduce a new
subsidy, don't you think?

What nonsense you drivel.

A quick google search would solve a lot of your problems, Tony.
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/top/535373/oil-and-gas-lobby-asks-government-to-underwrite-fossil-fuel-exploration-minister-considering-options

There is no binding agreement and all your childish lies will not change that.
End of story little boy.

That's about it Tony. When Rich latches on to anti-government
rhetoric, there is no logic or evidence that will dislodge it.

There is little surprise that the gas lobby is asking for subsidies -
what would be surprising is if the government ignored international
agreements, and Shane Jones seems to be doing just that.

There are no binding international agreements that anybody is ignoring. Stop
your lies.

Well let us hope that they are not being ignored, but it does seem
strange that the government has just signed up to an agreement not to
subsidise fossil fuels and Shane Jones is talking about doing just
that. What makes you think Shane Jones is not ignoring the agreement -
are you claiming that he is unaware of an international agreement that
presumably the Foreign Minister - Wilson Peters, would have been aware
of? Are you saying this is just an innocent case of the one hand not
knowing what the other was doing?

[Tony]

Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 3 Dec 2024 19:20:35 -0000 (UTC), Tony

Post by Tony

Post by Rich80105

Post by Crash
On Tue, 3 Dec 2024 06:37:28 -0000 (UTC), Tony

Post by Tony

Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 3 Dec 2024 03:29:58 -0000 (UTC), Tony

Post by Tony

Post by Rich80105

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105
https://scitechdaily.com/once-in-a-2000-year-event-study-explains-unprecedented-antarctic-ice-loss-equivalent-to-10x-the-size-of-the-uk/
"In 2023, the Antarctic sea ice shrank to historically low levels,
with winter ice coverage falling more than 2 million square kilometers
below normal—roughly equivalent to ten times the size of the UK. This
significant decrease was particularly striking given the steady
increase in sea ice that had been observed up until 2015, making the
abrupt drop even more unexpected.
Using a large climate dataset called CMIP6, British Antarctic Survey
researchers investigated this unprecedented sea ice loss. They
analyzed data from 18 different climate models to understand the
probability of such a significant reduction in sea ice and its
connection to climate change.
Lead author Rachel Diamond explained that while 2023’s extreme low sea
ice was made more likely by climate change, it was still considered
very rare according to the models.
She says: “This is the first time this large set of climate models has
been used to find out how unlikely 2023’s low sea ice actually was. We
only have forty-five years of satellite measurements of sea ice, which
makes it extremely difficult to evaluate changes in sea ice extent.
This is where climate models come into their own.
According to the models, the record-breaking minimum sea ice extent
would be a one-in-a-2000-year event without climate change. This tells
us that the event was very extreme – anything less than one-in-100 is
considered exceptionally unlikely.”
Caroline Holmes, a co-author on the study, said: “Strong climate
change – i.e. the temperature changes we’re already seeing, and those
expected if emissions continue to rise rapidly — in the models makes
it four times more likely that we see such a big decline in sea ice
extent. This suggests that 2023’s extreme low was made more likely by
climate change.”
Long-term Consequences and Future Projections
The researchers also used the models to look at how well sea ice is
likely to recover. By looking at similar events in the models, the
authors found that after such extreme sea ice loss, not all of the sea
ice around Antarctica returns – even after twenty years. This adds
model evidence to existing observational evidence that the last few
years’ low sea ice could signal a lasting regime shift in the Southern
Ocean."
__________________________
Rising sea temperatures will have an impact on weather in New Zealand,

Yes that seems inevitable.

Post by Rich80105
sadly our current government is ignoring both the likely impact of
climate change on New Zealand directly,

Probably because there is nothing NZ ( and every other Southern
Hemisphere country combined) can do about it. Our contribution to
this problem is nearly zero. Climate change in Antarctica and
everywhere else in the word is affected by Northern Hemisphere
countries almost entirely.

Post by Rich80105
but also our commitments to
reduce emissions under international treaties to prepare for and try
to reduce the impact of climate change.

We should not have agreed to anything. Our contribution is so
miniscule it is hardly measurable.

if it is roughly the same proportion of the world population as NZ is,
that may still be quite a bit of money . . .

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105
They don't look further than
the interests of political donors . . .

More worthless political rhetoric Rich. Repetition simply exposes how
shallow your arguments are. Better for you to get Russia, China and
India on board.

China is probably a lot closer than Russia or India, but giving so
much to political donors is meaning that the cost of not reducing our
emissions is more expensive that it needs to be.

So you only response is worthless and baseless rhetoric?

Perhaps you missed this response which Tony deleted - apparently he
does not realise that most people save previous posts in a thread for

I am well aware of that. My purpose is entirely different when I delete your
nonsense. A purpose you have never devined and never will, because such insight
is well beyond your meagre intellect.

I understand that it is your coping mechanism for questions you cannot
answer or that you do not understand and feel embarrassed.

Q.E.D.
As I said, you do not even begin to understand anything more subtle than a jack
hammer.
What a shame you have wasted your life and brought so much misery to the world.

Post by Rich80105

Post by Tony

Post by Rich80105
__________
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/12/subsidising-ecocide.html
Would we be affected if some countries declined to allow our goods to
enter their country, Tony? Is that what you are looking for?
https://www.climatechangenews.com/2024/11/19/coalition-against-fossil-fuel-subsidies-expands-but-misses-initial-targets/
Are Shane Jones and Winston Peters not talking to each other?
"AsIwouldsaytoyouthatdoesappeartobethecase"
___________
https://www.climatechangenews.com/2024/11/19/coalition-against-fossil-fuel-subsidies-expands-but-misses-initial-targets/
- it does appear that in looking into government assistance to those
looking for fossil fuels Shane Jones had not spoken to Winston Peters
who would probably have been aware of the commendable stance taken
against subsidies for fossil fuels . . . If NZ is really phasing out
fossil fuel subsidies it would be very strange to introduce a new
subsidy, don't you think?

What nonsense you drivel.

A quick google search would solve a lot of your problems, Tony.
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/top/535373/oil-and-gas-lobby-asks-government-to-underwrite-fossil-fuel-exploration-minister-considering-options

There is no binding agreement and all your childish lies will not change that.
End of story little boy.

That's about it Tony. When Rich latches on to anti-government
rhetoric, there is no logic or evidence that will dislodge it.

There is little surprise that the gas lobby is asking for subsidies -
what would be surprising is if the government ignored international
agreements, and Shane Jones seems to be doing just that.

There are no binding international agreements that anybody is ignoring. Stop
your lies.

Well let us hope that they are not being ignored, but it does seem
strange that the government has just signed up to an agreement not to
subsidise fossil fuels and Shane Jones is talking about doing just
that. What makes you think Shane Jones is not ignoring the agreement -
are you claiming that he is unaware of an international agreement that
presumably the Foreign Minister - Wilson Peters, would have been aware
of? Are you saying this is just an innocent case of the one hand not
knowing what the other was doing?

You make your case and I will answer but so far you have only made vague
accusations based on fairy tales or lies.. You have totally failed to show any
agreements have been broken or that any are being questioned.
You are a pathetic liar.

[Rich80105]

On Tue, 3 Dec 2024 06:37:28 -0000 (UTC), Tony

Post by Tony

Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 3 Dec 2024 03:29:58 -0000 (UTC), Tony

Post by Tony

Post by Rich80105

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105
https://scitechdaily.com/once-in-a-2000-year-event-study-explains-unprecedented-antarctic-ice-loss-equivalent-to-10x-the-size-of-the-uk/
"In 2023, the Antarctic sea ice shrank to historically low levels,
with winter ice coverage falling more than 2 million square kilometers
below normal—roughly equivalent to ten times the size of the UK. This
significant decrease was particularly striking given the steady
increase in sea ice that had been observed up until 2015, making the
abrupt drop even more unexpected.
Using a large climate dataset called CMIP6, British Antarctic Survey
researchers investigated this unprecedented sea ice loss. They
analyzed data from 18 different climate models to understand the
probability of such a significant reduction in sea ice and its
connection to climate change.
Lead author Rachel Diamond explained that while 2023’s extreme low sea
ice was made more likely by climate change, it was still considered
very rare according to the models.
She says: “This is the first time this large set of climate models has
been used to find out how unlikely 2023’s low sea ice actually was. We
only have forty-five years of satellite measurements of sea ice, which
makes it extremely difficult to evaluate changes in sea ice extent.
This is where climate models come into their own.
According to the models, the record-breaking minimum sea ice extent
would be a one-in-a-2000-year event without climate change. This tells
us that the event was very extreme – anything less than one-in-100 is
considered exceptionally unlikely.”
Caroline Holmes, a co-author on the study, said: “Strong climate
change – i.e. the temperature changes we’re already seeing, and those
expected if emissions continue to rise rapidly — in the models makes
it four times more likely that we see such a big decline in sea ice
extent. This suggests that 2023’s extreme low was made more likely by
climate change.”
Long-term Consequences and Future Projections
The researchers also used the models to look at how well sea ice is
likely to recover. By looking at similar events in the models, the
authors found that after such extreme sea ice loss, not all of the sea
ice around Antarctica returns – even after twenty years. This adds
model evidence to existing observational evidence that the last few
years’ low sea ice could signal a lasting regime shift in the Southern
Ocean."
__________________________
Rising sea temperatures will have an impact on weather in New Zealand,

Yes that seems inevitable.

Post by Rich80105
sadly our current government is ignoring both the likely impact of
climate change on New Zealand directly,

Probably because there is nothing NZ ( and every other Southern
Hemisphere country combined) can do about it. Our contribution to
this problem is nearly zero. Climate change in Antarctica and
everywhere else in the word is affected by Northern Hemisphere
countries almost entirely.

Post by Rich80105
but also our commitments to
reduce emissions under international treaties to prepare for and try
to reduce the impact of climate change.

We should not have agreed to anything. Our contribution is so
miniscule it is hardly measurable.

if it is roughly the same proportion of the world population as NZ is,
that may still be quite a bit of money . . .

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105
They don't look further than
the interests of political donors . . .

More worthless political rhetoric Rich. Repetition simply exposes how
shallow your arguments are. Better for you to get Russia, China and
India on board.

China is probably a lot closer than Russia or India, but giving so
much to political donors is meaning that the cost of not reducing our
emissions is more expensive that it needs to be.

So you only response is worthless and baseless rhetoric?

Perhaps you missed this response which Tony deleted - apparently he
does not realise that most people save previous posts in a thread for

I am well aware of that. My purpose is entirely different when I delete your
nonsense. A purpose you have never devined and never will, because such insight
is well beyond your meagre intellect.

I understand that it is your coping mechanism for questions you cannot
answer or that you do not understand and feel embarrassed.

Q.E.D.
As I said, you do not even begin to understand anything more subtle than a jack
hammer.
What a shame you have wasted your life and brought so much misery to the world.

Post by Rich80105

Post by Tony

Post by Rich80105
__________
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/12/subsidising-ecocide.html
Would we be affected if some countries declined to allow our goods to
enter their country, Tony? Is that what you are looking for?
https://www.climatechangenews.com/2024/11/19/coalition-against-fossil-fuel-subsidies-expands-but-misses-initial-targets/
Are Shane Jones and Winston Peters not talking to each other?
"AsIwouldsaytoyouthatdoesappeartobethecase"
___________
https://www.climatechangenews.com/2024/11/19/coalition-against-fossil-fuel-subsidies-expands-but-misses-initial-targets/
- it does appear that in looking into government assistance to those
looking for fossil fuels Shane Jones had not spoken to Winston Peters
who would probably have been aware of the commendable stance taken
against subsidies for fossil fuels . . . If NZ is really phasing out
fossil fuel subsidies it would be very strange to introduce a new
subsidy, don't you think?

What nonsense you drivel.

A quick google search would solve a lot of your problems, Tony.
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/top/535373/oil-and-gas-lobby-asks-government-to-underwrite-fossil-fuel-exploration-minister-considering-options

There is no binding agreement and all your childish lies will not change that.
End of story little boy.

Trade agreements can be like that too, Tony - your childish lies
cannot change the reality that reneging on agreements can be similar
to breaking a contract - it may be detrimental to the interests of New
Zealand. Sad that New Zealand has come to almost expect such sophistry
under the current government - they put themselves and their political
backers before the sanctity of contract . . .

[Tony]

Post by Crash
On Tue, 3 Dec 2024 06:37:28 -0000 (UTC), Tony

Post by Tony

Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 3 Dec 2024 03:29:58 -0000 (UTC), Tony

Post by Tony

Post by Rich80105

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105
https://scitechdaily.com/once-in-a-2000-year-event-study-explains-unprecedented-antarctic-ice-loss-equivalent-to-10x-the-size-of-the-uk/
"In 2023, the Antarctic sea ice shrank to historically low levels,
with winter ice coverage falling more than 2 million square kilometers
below normal—roughly equivalent to ten times the size of the UK. This
significant decrease was particularly striking given the steady
increase in sea ice that had been observed up until 2015, making the
abrupt drop even more unexpected.
Using a large climate dataset called CMIP6, British Antarctic Survey
researchers investigated this unprecedented sea ice loss. They
analyzed data from 18 different climate models to understand the
probability of such a significant reduction in sea ice and its
connection to climate change.
Lead author Rachel Diamond explained that while 2023’s extreme low sea
ice was made more likely by climate change, it was still considered
very rare according to the models.
She says: “This is the first time this large set of climate models has
been used to find out how unlikely 2023’s low sea ice actually was. We
only have forty-five years of satellite measurements of sea ice, which
makes it extremely difficult to evaluate changes in sea ice extent.
This is where climate models come into their own.
According to the models, the record-breaking minimum sea ice extent
would be a one-in-a-2000-year event without climate change. This tells
us that the event was very extreme – anything less than one-in-100 is
considered exceptionally unlikely.”
Caroline Holmes, a co-author on the study, said: “Strong climate
change – i.e. the temperature changes we’re already seeing, and those
expected if emissions continue to rise rapidly — in the models makes
it four times more likely that we see such a big decline in sea ice
extent. This suggests that 2023’s extreme low was made more likely by
climate change.”
Long-term Consequences and Future Projections
The researchers also used the models to look at how well sea ice is
likely to recover. By looking at similar events in the models, the
authors found that after such extreme sea ice loss, not all of the sea
ice around Antarctica returns – even after twenty years. This adds
model evidence to existing observational evidence that the last few
years’ low sea ice could signal a lasting regime shift in the Southern
Ocean."
__________________________
Rising sea temperatures will have an impact on weather in New Zealand,

Yes that seems inevitable.

Post by Rich80105
sadly our current government is ignoring both the likely impact of
climate change on New Zealand directly,

Probably because there is nothing NZ ( and every other Southern
Hemisphere country combined) can do about it. Our contribution to
this problem is nearly zero. Climate change in Antarctica and
everywhere else in the word is affected by Northern Hemisphere
countries almost entirely.

Post by Rich80105
but also our commitments to
reduce emissions under international treaties to prepare for and try
to reduce the impact of climate change.

We should not have agreed to anything. Our contribution is so
miniscule it is hardly measurable.

if it is roughly the same proportion of the world population as NZ is,
that may still be quite a bit of money . . .

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105
They don't look further than
the interests of political donors . . .

More worthless political rhetoric Rich. Repetition simply exposes how
shallow your arguments are. Better for you to get Russia, China and
India on board.

China is probably a lot closer than Russia or India, but giving so
much to political donors is meaning that the cost of not reducing our
emissions is more expensive that it needs to be.

So you only response is worthless and baseless rhetoric?

Perhaps you missed this response which Tony deleted - apparently he
does not realise that most people save previous posts in a thread for

I am well aware of that. My purpose is entirely different when I delete your
nonsense. A purpose you have never devined and never will, because such insight
is well beyond your meagre intellect.

I understand that it is your coping mechanism for questions you cannot
answer or that you do not understand and feel embarrassed.

Q.E.D.
As I said, you do not even begin to understand anything more subtle than a jack
hammer.
What a shame you have wasted your life and brought so much misery to the world.

Post by Rich80105

Post by Tony

Post by Rich80105
__________
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/12/subsidising-ecocide.html
Would we be affected if some countries declined to allow our goods to
enter their country, Tony? Is that what you are looking for?
https://www.climatechangenews.com/2024/11/19/coalition-against-fossil-fuel-subsidies-expands-but-misses-initial-targets/
Are Shane Jones and Winston Peters not talking to each other?
"AsIwouldsaytoyouthatdoesappeartobethecase"
___________
https://www.climatechangenews.com/2024/11/19/coalition-against-fossil-fuel-subsidies-expands-but-misses-initial-targets/
- it does appear that in looking into government assistance to those
looking for fossil fuels Shane Jones had not spoken to Winston Peters
who would probably have been aware of the commendable stance taken
against subsidies for fossil fuels . . . If NZ is really phasing out
fossil fuel subsidies it would be very strange to introduce a new
subsidy, don't you think?

What nonsense you drivel.

A quick google search would solve a lot of your problems, Tony.
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/top/535373/oil-and-gas-lobby-asks-government-to-underwrite-fossil-fuel-exploration-minister-considering-options

There is no binding agreement and all your childish lies will not change that.
End of story little boy.

Trade agreements can be like that too, Tony - your childish lies
cannot change the reality that reneging on agreements can be similar
to breaking a contract - it may be detrimental to the interests of New
Zealand. Sad that New Zealand has come to almost expect such sophistry
under the current government - they put themselves and their political
backers before the sanctity of contract . . .

There is no binding agreement and all your childish lies will not change that.
I have not lied here, you have lied multiple times. If an agreement is not
binding it can be modified, I have said nothing more than that, You are a
disgusting little boy. Too late for you to grow up.
End of story you grubby little boy.

[Rich80105]

On Tue, 3 Dec 2024 19:19:28 -0000 (UTC), Tony

Post by Tony

Post by Crash
On Tue, 3 Dec 2024 06:37:28 -0000 (UTC), Tony

Post by Tony

Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 3 Dec 2024 03:29:58 -0000 (UTC), Tony

Post by Tony

Post by Rich80105

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105
https://scitechdaily.com/once-in-a-2000-year-event-study-explains-unprecedented-antarctic-ice-loss-equivalent-to-10x-the-size-of-the-uk/
"In 2023, the Antarctic sea ice shrank to historically low levels,
with winter ice coverage falling more than 2 million square kilometers
below normal—roughly equivalent to ten times the size of the UK. This
significant decrease was particularly striking given the steady
increase in sea ice that had been observed up until 2015, making the
abrupt drop even more unexpected.
Using a large climate dataset called CMIP6, British Antarctic Survey
researchers investigated this unprecedented sea ice loss. They
analyzed data from 18 different climate models to understand the
probability of such a significant reduction in sea ice and its
connection to climate change.
Lead author Rachel Diamond explained that while 2023’s extreme low sea
ice was made more likely by climate change, it was still considered
very rare according to the models.
She says: “This is the first time this large set of climate models has
been used to find out how unlikely 2023’s low sea ice actually was. We
only have forty-five years of satellite measurements of sea ice, which
makes it extremely difficult to evaluate changes in sea ice extent.
This is where climate models come into their own.
According to the models, the record-breaking minimum sea ice extent
would be a one-in-a-2000-year event without climate change. This tells
us that the event was very extreme – anything less than one-in-100 is
considered exceptionally unlikely.”
Caroline Holmes, a co-author on the study, said: “Strong climate
change – i.e. the temperature changes we’re already seeing, and those
expected if emissions continue to rise rapidly — in the models makes
it four times more likely that we see such a big decline in sea ice
extent. This suggests that 2023’s extreme low was made more likely by
climate change.”
Long-term Consequences and Future Projections
The researchers also used the models to look at how well sea ice is
likely to recover. By looking at similar events in the models, the
authors found that after such extreme sea ice loss, not all of the sea
ice around Antarctica returns – even after twenty years. This adds
model evidence to existing observational evidence that the last few
years’ low sea ice could signal a lasting regime shift in the Southern
Ocean."
__________________________
Rising sea temperatures will have an impact on weather in New Zealand,

Yes that seems inevitable.

Post by Rich80105
sadly our current government is ignoring both the likely impact of
climate change on New Zealand directly,

Probably because there is nothing NZ ( and every other Southern
Hemisphere country combined) can do about it. Our contribution to
this problem is nearly zero. Climate change in Antarctica and
everywhere else in the word is affected by Northern Hemisphere
countries almost entirely.

Post by Rich80105
but also our commitments to
reduce emissions under international treaties to prepare for and try
to reduce the impact of climate change.

We should not have agreed to anything. Our contribution is so
miniscule it is hardly measurable.

if it is roughly the same proportion of the world population as NZ is,
that may still be quite a bit of money . . .

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105
They don't look further than
the interests of political donors . . .

More worthless political rhetoric Rich. Repetition simply exposes how
shallow your arguments are. Better for you to get Russia, China and
India on board.

China is probably a lot closer than Russia or India, but giving so
much to political donors is meaning that the cost of not reducing our
emissions is more expensive that it needs to be.

So you only response is worthless and baseless rhetoric?

Perhaps you missed this response which Tony deleted - apparently he
does not realise that most people save previous posts in a thread for

I am well aware of that. My purpose is entirely different when I delete your
nonsense. A purpose you have never devined and never will, because such insight
is well beyond your meagre intellect.

I understand that it is your coping mechanism for questions you cannot
answer or that you do not understand and feel embarrassed.

Q.E.D.
As I said, you do not even begin to understand anything more subtle than a jack
hammer.
What a shame you have wasted your life and brought so much misery to the world.

Post by Rich80105

Post by Tony

Post by Rich80105
__________
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/12/subsidising-ecocide.html
Would we be affected if some countries declined to allow our goods to
enter their country, Tony? Is that what you are looking for?
https://www.climatechangenews.com/2024/11/19/coalition-against-fossil-fuel-subsidies-expands-but-misses-initial-targets/
Are Shane Jones and Winston Peters not talking to each other?
"AsIwouldsaytoyouthatdoesappeartobethecase"
___________
https://www.climatechangenews.com/2024/11/19/coalition-against-fossil-fuel-subsidies-expands-but-misses-initial-targets/
- it does appear that in looking into government assistance to those
looking for fossil fuels Shane Jones had not spoken to Winston Peters
who would probably have been aware of the commendable stance taken
against subsidies for fossil fuels . . . If NZ is really phasing out
fossil fuel subsidies it would be very strange to introduce a new
subsidy, don't you think?

What nonsense you drivel.

A quick google search would solve a lot of your problems, Tony.
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/top/535373/oil-and-gas-lobby-asks-government-to-underwrite-fossil-fuel-exploration-minister-considering-options

There is no binding agreement and all your childish lies will not change that.
End of story little boy.

Trade agreements can be like that too, Tony - your childish lies
cannot change the reality that reneging on agreements can be similar
to breaking a contract - it may be detrimental to the interests of New
Zealand. Sad that New Zealand has come to almost expect such sophistry
under the current government - they put themselves and their political
backers before the sanctity of contract . . .

There is no binding agreement and all your childish lies will not change that.
I have not lied here, you have lied multiple times. If an agreement is not
binding it can be modified, I have said nothing more than that, You are a
disgusting little boy. Too late for you to grow up.
End of story you grubby little boy.

Now you are starting to understand - the current government did change
an agreement by agreeing not to subsidise fossil fuels - and that may
well change agreements relating to trade - it is good that you appear
to understand that just as the agreement about fossil fuels was
changed, so too can agreements about trade between New Zealand and
other countries. Well done in agreeing with me!

[Tony]

Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 3 Dec 2024 19:19:28 -0000 (UTC), Tony

Post by Tony

Post by Crash
On Tue, 3 Dec 2024 06:37:28 -0000 (UTC), Tony

Post by Tony

Post by Rich80105
On Tue, 3 Dec 2024 03:29:58 -0000 (UTC), Tony

Post by Tony

Post by Rich80105

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105
https://scitechdaily.com/once-in-a-2000-year-event-study-explains-unprecedented-antarctic-ice-loss-equivalent-to-10x-the-size-of-the-uk/
"In 2023, the Antarctic sea ice shrank to historically low levels,
with winter ice coverage falling more than 2 million square kilometers
below normal—roughly equivalent to ten times the size of the UK. This
significant decrease was particularly striking given the steady
increase in sea ice that had been observed up until 2015, making the
abrupt drop even more unexpected.
Using a large climate dataset called CMIP6, British Antarctic Survey
researchers investigated this unprecedented sea ice loss. They
analyzed data from 18 different climate models to understand the
probability of such a significant reduction in sea ice and its
connection to climate change.
Lead author Rachel Diamond explained that while 2023’s extreme low sea
ice was made more likely by climate change, it was still considered
very rare according to the models.
She says: “This is the first time this large set of climate models has
been used to find out how unlikely 2023’s low sea ice actually was. We
only have forty-five years of satellite measurements of sea ice, which
makes it extremely difficult to evaluate changes in sea ice extent.
This is where climate models come into their own.
According to the models, the record-breaking minimum sea ice extent
would be a one-in-a-2000-year event without climate change. This tells
us that the event was very extreme – anything less than one-in-100 is
considered exceptionally unlikely.”
Caroline Holmes, a co-author on the study, said: “Strong climate
change – i.e. the temperature changes we’re already seeing, and those
expected if emissions continue to rise rapidly — in the models makes
it four times more likely that we see such a big decline in sea ice
extent. This suggests that 2023’s extreme low was made more likely by
climate change.”
Long-term Consequences and Future Projections
The researchers also used the models to look at how well sea ice is
likely to recover. By looking at similar events in the models, the
authors found that after such extreme sea ice loss, not all of the sea
ice around Antarctica returns – even after twenty years. This adds
model evidence to existing observational evidence that the last few
years’ low sea ice could signal a lasting regime shift in the Southern
Ocean."
__________________________
Rising sea temperatures will have an impact on weather in New Zealand,

Yes that seems inevitable.

Post by Rich80105
sadly our current government is ignoring both the likely impact of
climate change on New Zealand directly,

Probably because there is nothing NZ ( and every other Southern
Hemisphere country combined) can do about it. Our contribution to
this problem is nearly zero. Climate change in Antarctica and
everywhere else in the word is affected by Northern Hemisphere
countries almost entirely.

Post by Rich80105
but also our commitments to
reduce emissions under international treaties to prepare for and try
to reduce the impact of climate change.

We should not have agreed to anything. Our contribution is so
miniscule it is hardly measurable.

if it is roughly the same proportion of the world population as NZ is,
that may still be quite a bit of money . . .

Post by Crash

Post by Rich80105
They don't look further than
the interests of political donors . . .

More worthless political rhetoric Rich. Repetition simply exposes how
shallow your arguments are. Better for you to get Russia, China and
India on board.

China is probably a lot closer than Russia or India, but giving so
much to political donors is meaning that the cost of not reducing our
emissions is more expensive that it needs to be.

So you only response is worthless and baseless rhetoric?

Perhaps you missed this response which Tony deleted - apparently he
does not realise that most people save previous posts in a thread for

I am well aware of that. My purpose is entirely different when I delete your
nonsense. A purpose you have never devined and never will, because such insight
is well beyond your meagre intellect.

I understand that it is your coping mechanism for questions you cannot
answer or that you do not understand and feel embarrassed.

Q.E.D.
As I said, you do not even begin to understand anything more subtle than a jack
hammer.
What a shame you have wasted your life and brought so much misery to the world.

Post by Rich80105

Post by Tony

Post by Rich80105
__________
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/12/subsidising-ecocide.html
Would we be affected if some countries declined to allow our goods to
enter their country, Tony? Is that what you are looking for?
https://www.climatechangenews.com/2024/11/19/coalition-against-fossil-fuel-subsidies-expands-but-misses-initial-targets/
Are Shane Jones and Winston Peters not talking to each other?
"AsIwouldsaytoyouthatdoesappeartobethecase"
___________
https://www.climatechangenews.com/2024/11/19/coalition-against-fossil-fuel-subsidies-expands-but-misses-initial-targets/
- it does appear that in looking into government assistance to those
looking for fossil fuels Shane Jones had not spoken to Winston Peters
who would probably have been aware of the commendable stance taken
against subsidies for fossil fuels . . . If NZ is really phasing out
fossil fuel subsidies it would be very strange to introduce a new
subsidy, don't you think?

What nonsense you drivel.

A quick google search would solve a lot of your problems, Tony.
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/top/535373/oil-and-gas-lobby-asks-government-to-underwrite-fossil-fuel-exploration-minister-considering-options

There is no binding agreement and all your childish lies will not change that.
End of story little boy.

Trade agreements can be like that too, Tony - your childish lies
cannot change the reality that reneging on agreements can be similar
to breaking a contract - it may be detrimental to the interests of New
Zealand. Sad that New Zealand has come to almost expect such sophistry
under the current government - they put themselves and their political
backers before the sanctity of contract . . .

There is no binding agreement and all your childish lies will not change that.
I have not lied here, you have lied multiple times. If an agreement is not
binding it can be modified, I have said nothing more than that, You are a
disgusting little boy. Too late for you to grow up.
End of story you grubby little boy.

Now you are starting to understand - the current government did change
an agreement by agreeing not to subsidise fossil fuels - and that may
well change agreements relating to trade - it is good that you appear
to understand that just as the agreement about fossil fuels was
changed, so too can agreements about trade between New Zealand and
other countries. Well done in agreeing with me!

Don't be such a baby, no such agreement is possible because I cannot agree with
liars.
Nobody in this government has attempted to change any non-negotiable contracts
or agreements.
Your spinning is pathetic and amateur.
You are a waste of air and bandwidth.

[BR]

Post by Rich80105
Trade agreements can be like that too, Tony - your childish lies
cannot change the reality that reneging on agreements can be similar
to breaking a contract - it may be detrimental to the interests of New
Zealand. Sad that New Zealand has come to almost expect such sophistry
under the current government - they put themselves and their political
backers before the sanctity of contract . . .

One thing is for certain. Sanctity of contract (assuming that such a
thing even exists in this case) is nowhere near as important as
protecting the sanctity of fuel supplies, which an issue of national
security.

In the first instance you linked to a website that promotes some
nebulous claim about melting polar ice, and now you've ended up
arguing that NZ should appease the UN climate zealots because of some
agreement that a previous government had signed.

So why didn't you continue to make your own case for why you believe
in "man made climate change" instead of getting into the weeds about
sanctity of contract?

Bill.

[Tony]

Post by BR

Post by Rich80105
Trade agreements can be like that too, Tony - your childish lies
cannot change the reality that reneging on agreements can be similar
to breaking a contract - it may be detrimental to the interests of New
Zealand. Sad that New Zealand has come to almost expect such sophistry
under the current government - they put themselves and their political
backers before the sanctity of contract . . .

One thing is for certain. Sanctity of contract (assuming that such a
thing even exists in this case) is nowhere near as important as
protecting the sanctity of fuel supplies, which an issue of national
security.
In the first instance you linked to a website that promotes some
nebulous claim about melting polar ice, and now you've ended up
arguing that NZ should appease the UN climate zealots because of some
agreement that a previous government had signed.
So why didn't you continue to make your own case for why you believe
in "man made climate change" instead of getting into the weeds about
sanctity of contract?
Bill.

Because he cannot. It is impossible for him.

[Tony]

Post by Rich80105
https://scitechdaily.com/once-in-a-2000-year-event-study-explains-unprecedented-antarctic-ice-loss-equivalent-to-10x-the-size-of-the-uk/
"In 2023, the Antarctic sea ice shrank to historically low levels,
with winter ice coverage falling more than 2 million square kilometers
below normal—roughly equivalent to ten times the size of the UK. This
significant decrease was particularly striking given the steady
increase in sea ice that had been observed up until 2015, making the
abrupt drop even more unexpected.
Using a large climate dataset called CMIP6, British Antarctic Survey
researchers investigated this unprecedented sea ice loss. They
analyzed data from 18 different climate models to understand the
probability of such a significant reduction in sea ice and its
connection to climate change.
Lead author Rachel Diamond explained that while 2023’s extreme low sea
ice was made more likely by climate change, it was still considered
very rare according to the models.
She says: “This is the first time this large set of climate models has
been used to find out how unlikely 2023’s low sea ice actually was. We
only have forty-five years of satellite measurements of sea ice, which
makes it extremely difficult to evaluate changes in sea ice extent.
This is where climate models come into their own.
According to the models, the record-breaking minimum sea ice extent
would be a one-in-a-2000-year event without climate change. This tells
us that the event was very extreme – anything less than one-in-100 is
considered exceptionally unlikely.”
Caroline Holmes, a co-author on the study, said: “Strong climate
change – i.e. the temperature changes we’re already seeing, and those
expected if emissions continue to rise rapidly — in the models makes
it four times more likely that we see such a big decline in sea ice
extent. This suggests that 2023’s extreme low was made more likely by
climate change.”
Long-term Consequences and Future Projections
The researchers also used the models to look at how well sea ice is
likely to recover. By looking at similar events in the models, the
authors found that after such extreme sea ice loss, not all of the sea
ice around Antarctica returns – even after twenty years. This adds
model evidence to existing observational evidence that the last few
years’ low sea ice could signal a lasting regime shift in the Southern
Ocean."
__________________________
Rising sea temperatures will have an impact on weather in New Zealand,
sadly our current government is ignoring both the likely impact of
climate change on New Zealand directly, but also our commitments to
reduce emissions under international treaties to prepare for and try
to reduce the impact of climate change. They don't look further than
the interests of political donors . . .

Until you posted your summary the science was indeed being followed, Then,
however, it went to shit with a totally unscientific political diatribe based
on nothing of value.
There is nothing to be done by New Zealand and this government is no more to
blame than the last 10 governments (or more). Sheesh what a waste of bandwidth
Rich.

[Rich80105]

On Mon, 2 Dec 2024 02:52:53 -0000 (UTC), Tony

Post by Tony

Post by Rich80105
https://scitechdaily.com/once-in-a-2000-year-event-study-explains-unprecedented-antarctic-ice-loss-equivalent-to-10x-the-size-of-the-uk/
"In 2023, the Antarctic sea ice shrank to historically low levels,
with winter ice coverage falling more than 2 million square kilometers
below normal—roughly equivalent to ten times the size of the UK. This
significant decrease was particularly striking given the steady
increase in sea ice that had been observed up until 2015, making the
abrupt drop even more unexpected.
Using a large climate dataset called CMIP6, British Antarctic Survey
researchers investigated this unprecedented sea ice loss. They
analyzed data from 18 different climate models to understand the
probability of such a significant reduction in sea ice and its
connection to climate change.
Lead author Rachel Diamond explained that while 2023’s extreme low sea
ice was made more likely by climate change, it was still considered
very rare according to the models.
She says: “This is the first time this large set of climate models has
been used to find out how unlikely 2023’s low sea ice actually was. We
only have forty-five years of satellite measurements of sea ice, which
makes it extremely difficult to evaluate changes in sea ice extent.
This is where climate models come into their own.
According to the models, the record-breaking minimum sea ice extent
would be a one-in-a-2000-year event without climate change. This tells
us that the event was very extreme – anything less than one-in-100 is
considered exceptionally unlikely.”
Caroline Holmes, a co-author on the study, said: “Strong climate
change – i.e. the temperature changes we’re already seeing, and those
expected if emissions continue to rise rapidly — in the models makes
it four times more likely that we see such a big decline in sea ice
extent. This suggests that 2023’s extreme low was made more likely by
climate change.”
Long-term Consequences and Future Projections
The researchers also used the models to look at how well sea ice is
likely to recover. By looking at similar events in the models, the
authors found that after such extreme sea ice loss, not all of the sea
ice around Antarctica returns – even after twenty years. This adds
model evidence to existing observational evidence that the last few
years’ low sea ice could signal a lasting regime shift in the Southern
Ocean."
__________________________
Rising sea temperatures will have an impact on weather in New Zealand,
sadly our current government is ignoring both the likely impact of
climate change on New Zealand directly, but also our commitments to
reduce emissions under international treaties to prepare for and try
to reduce the impact of climate change. They don't look further than
the interests of political donors . . .

Until you posted your summary the science was indeed being followed, Then,
however, it went to shit with a totally unscientific political diatribe based
on nothing of value.
There is nothing to be done by New Zealand and this government is no more to
blame than the last 10 governments (or more). Sheesh what a waste of bandwidth
Rich.

New Zealand could at least try to meet the emission reduction targets
that we agreed to, so of course there is something we could do - the
money to donors is just making that even harder.

[Tony]

Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 2 Dec 2024 02:52:53 -0000 (UTC), Tony

Post by Tony

Post by Rich80105
https://scitechdaily.com/once-in-a-2000-year-event-study-explains-unprecedented-antarctic-ice-loss-equivalent-to-10x-the-size-of-the-uk/
"In 2023, the Antarctic sea ice shrank to historically low levels,
with winter ice coverage falling more than 2 million square kilometers
below normal—roughly equivalent to ten times the size of the UK. This
significant decrease was particularly striking given the steady
increase in sea ice that had been observed up until 2015, making the
abrupt drop even more unexpected.
Using a large climate dataset called CMIP6, British Antarctic Survey
researchers investigated this unprecedented sea ice loss. They
analyzed data from 18 different climate models to understand the
probability of such a significant reduction in sea ice and its
connection to climate change.
Lead author Rachel Diamond explained that while 2023’s extreme low sea
ice was made more likely by climate change, it was still considered
very rare according to the models.
She says: “This is the first time this large set of climate models has
been used to find out how unlikely 2023’s low sea ice actually was. We
only have forty-five years of satellite measurements of sea ice, which
makes it extremely difficult to evaluate changes in sea ice extent.
This is where climate models come into their own.
According to the models, the record-breaking minimum sea ice extent
would be a one-in-a-2000-year event without climate change. This tells
us that the event was very extreme – anything less than one-in-100 is
considered exceptionally unlikely.”
Caroline Holmes, a co-author on the study, said: “Strong climate
change – i.e. the temperature changes we’re already seeing, and those
expected if emissions continue to rise rapidly — in the models makes
it four times more likely that we see such a big decline in sea ice
extent. This suggests that 2023’s extreme low was made more likely by
climate change.”
Long-term Consequences and Future Projections
The researchers also used the models to look at how well sea ice is
likely to recover. By looking at similar events in the models, the
authors found that after such extreme sea ice loss, not all of the sea
ice around Antarctica returns – even after twenty years. This adds
model evidence to existing observational evidence that the last few
years’ low sea ice could signal a lasting regime shift in the Southern
Ocean."
__________________________
Rising sea temperatures will have an impact on weather in New Zealand,
sadly our current government is ignoring both the likely impact of
climate change on New Zealand directly, but also our commitments to
reduce emissions under international treaties to prepare for and try
to reduce the impact of climate change. They don't look further than
the interests of political donors . . .

Until you posted your summary the science was indeed being followed, Then,
however, it went to shit with a totally unscientific political diatribe based
on nothing of value.
There is nothing to be done by New Zealand and this government is no more to
blame than the last 10 governments (or more). Sheesh what a waste of bandwidth
Rich.

New Zealand could at least try to meet the emission reduction targets
that we agreed to, so of course there is something we could do - the
money to donors is just making that even harder.

Absolute nonsense. There is nothing to do because we don't need to. There is no
issue with the so called donors.

[Mutley]

Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 2 Dec 2024 02:52:53 -0000 (UTC), Tony

Post by Tony

Post by Rich80105
https://scitechdaily.com/once-in-a-2000-year-event-study-explains-unprecedented-antarctic-ice-loss-equivalent-to-10x-the-size-of-the-uk/
"In 2023, the Antarctic sea ice shrank to historically low levels,
with winter ice coverage falling more than 2 million square kilometers
below normal—roughly equivalent to ten times the size of the UK. This
significant decrease was particularly striking given the steady
increase in sea ice that had been observed up until 2015, making the
abrupt drop even more unexpected.
Using a large climate dataset called CMIP6, British Antarctic Survey
researchers investigated this unprecedented sea ice loss. They
analyzed data from 18 different climate models to understand the
probability of such a significant reduction in sea ice and its
connection to climate change.
Lead author Rachel Diamond explained that while 2023’s extreme low sea
ice was made more likely by climate change, it was still considered
very rare according to the models.
She says: “This is the first time this large set of climate models has
been used to find out how unlikely 2023’s low sea ice actually was. We
only have forty-five years of satellite measurements of sea ice, which
makes it extremely difficult to evaluate changes in sea ice extent.
This is where climate models come into their own.
According to the models, the record-breaking minimum sea ice extent
would be a one-in-a-2000-year event without climate change. This tells
us that the event was very extreme – anything less than one-in-100 is
considered exceptionally unlikely.”
Caroline Holmes, a co-author on the study, said: “Strong climate
change – i.e. the temperature changes we’re already seeing, and those
expected if emissions continue to rise rapidly — in the models makes
it four times more likely that we see such a big decline in sea ice
extent. This suggests that 2023’s extreme low was made more likely by
climate change.”
Long-term Consequences and Future Projections
The researchers also used the models to look at how well sea ice is
likely to recover. By looking at similar events in the models, the
authors found that after such extreme sea ice loss, not all of the sea
ice around Antarctica returns – even after twenty years. This adds
model evidence to existing observational evidence that the last few
years’ low sea ice could signal a lasting regime shift in the Southern
Ocean."
__________________________
Rising sea temperatures will have an impact on weather in New Zealand,
sadly our current government is ignoring both the likely impact of
climate change on New Zealand directly, but also our commitments to
reduce emissions under international treaties to prepare for and try
to reduce the impact of climate change. They don't look further than
the interests of political donors . . .

Until you posted your summary the science was indeed being followed, Then,
however, it went to shit with a totally unscientific political diatribe based
on nothing of value.
There is nothing to be done by New Zealand and this government is no more to
blame than the last 10 governments (or more). Sheesh what a waste of bandwidth
Rich.

New Zealand could at least try to meet the emission reduction targets
that we agreed to, so of course there is something we could do - the
money to donors is just making that even harder.

What's the point?? Half of one percent contribution to global
pollution. Just a big left tax grab which your lot is great at
.

[Rich80105]

Post by Mutley

Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 2 Dec 2024 02:52:53 -0000 (UTC), Tony

Post by Tony

Post by Rich80105
https://scitechdaily.com/once-in-a-2000-year-event-study-explains-unprecedented-antarctic-ice-loss-equivalent-to-10x-the-size-of-the-uk/
"In 2023, the Antarctic sea ice shrank to historically low levels,
with winter ice coverage falling more than 2 million square kilometers
below normal—roughly equivalent to ten times the size of the UK. This
significant decrease was particularly striking given the steady
increase in sea ice that had been observed up until 2015, making the
abrupt drop even more unexpected.
Using a large climate dataset called CMIP6, British Antarctic Survey
researchers investigated this unprecedented sea ice loss. They
analyzed data from 18 different climate models to understand the
probability of such a significant reduction in sea ice and its
connection to climate change.
Lead author Rachel Diamond explained that while 2023’s extreme low sea
ice was made more likely by climate change, it was still considered
very rare according to the models.
She says: “This is the first time this large set of climate models has
been used to find out how unlikely 2023’s low sea ice actually was. We
only have forty-five years of satellite measurements of sea ice, which
makes it extremely difficult to evaluate changes in sea ice extent.
This is where climate models come into their own.
According to the models, the record-breaking minimum sea ice extent
would be a one-in-a-2000-year event without climate change. This tells
us that the event was very extreme – anything less than one-in-100 is
considered exceptionally unlikely.”
Caroline Holmes, a co-author on the study, said: “Strong climate
change – i.e. the temperature changes we’re already seeing, and those
expected if emissions continue to rise rapidly — in the models makes
it four times more likely that we see such a big decline in sea ice
extent. This suggests that 2023’s extreme low was made more likely by
climate change.”
Long-term Consequences and Future Projections
The researchers also used the models to look at how well sea ice is
likely to recover. By looking at similar events in the models, the
authors found that after such extreme sea ice loss, not all of the sea
ice around Antarctica returns – even after twenty years. This adds
model evidence to existing observational evidence that the last few
years’ low sea ice could signal a lasting regime shift in the Southern
Ocean."
__________________________
Rising sea temperatures will have an impact on weather in New Zealand,
sadly our current government is ignoring both the likely impact of
climate change on New Zealand directly, but also our commitments to
reduce emissions under international treaties to prepare for and try
to reduce the impact of climate change. They don't look further than
the interests of political donors . . .

Until you posted your summary the science was indeed being followed, Then,
however, it went to shit with a totally unscientific political diatribe based
on nothing of value.
There is nothing to be done by New Zealand and this government is no more to
blame than the last 10 governments (or more). Sheesh what a waste of bandwidth
Rich.

New Zealand could at least try to meet the emission reduction targets
that we agreed to, so of course there is something we could do - the
money to donors is just making that even harder.

What's the point?? Half of one percent contribution to global
pollution. Just a big left tax grab which your lot is great at
.

It is called meeting obligations under international agreements - or
if you prefer, 'sanctity of contract'. Commitments have been made
under an international agreement - should we meet those obligations?
One previous Prime Minister thought it a good idea to push the slogan
"Clean, Green, 100% Pure" - for which he copped some flack on UK
Television for the obvious hypocrisy, but we have made some progress
since. The penalties for breaking an international agreement are
unclear, but potentially much more serious than just financial
penalties, and with Trump about to start a second term as President of
the USA, meeting international commitments may be even more important
to retain friends . . .

[Tony]

Post by Rich80105

Post by Mutley

Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 2 Dec 2024 02:52:53 -0000 (UTC), Tony

Post by Tony

Post by Rich80105
https://scitechdaily.com/once-in-a-2000-year-event-study-explains-unprecedented-antarctic-ice-loss-equivalent-to-10x-the-size-of-the-uk/
"In 2023, the Antarctic sea ice shrank to historically low levels,
with winter ice coverage falling more than 2 million square kilometers
below normal—roughly equivalent to ten times the size of the UK. This
significant decrease was particularly striking given the steady
increase in sea ice that had been observed up until 2015, making the
abrupt drop even more unexpected.
Using a large climate dataset called CMIP6, British Antarctic Survey
researchers investigated this unprecedented sea ice loss. They
analyzed data from 18 different climate models to understand the
probability of such a significant reduction in sea ice and its
connection to climate change.
Lead author Rachel Diamond explained that while 2023’s extreme low sea
ice was made more likely by climate change, it was still considered
very rare according to the models.
She says: “This is the first time this large set of climate models has
been used to find out how unlikely 2023’s low sea ice actually was. We
only have forty-five years of satellite measurements of sea ice, which
makes it extremely difficult to evaluate changes in sea ice extent.
This is where climate models come into their own.
According to the models, the record-breaking minimum sea ice extent
would be a one-in-a-2000-year event without climate change. This tells
us that the event was very extreme – anything less than one-in-100 is
considered exceptionally unlikely.”
Caroline Holmes, a co-author on the study, said: “Strong climate
change – i.e. the temperature changes we’re already seeing, and those
expected if emissions continue to rise rapidly — in the models makes
it four times more likely that we see such a big decline in sea ice
extent. This suggests that 2023’s extreme low was made more likely by
climate change.”
Long-term Consequences and Future Projections
The researchers also used the models to look at how well sea ice is
likely to recover. By looking at similar events in the models, the
authors found that after such extreme sea ice loss, not all of the sea
ice around Antarctica returns – even after twenty years. This adds
model evidence to existing observational evidence that the last few
years’ low sea ice could signal a lasting regime shift in the Southern
Ocean."
__________________________
Rising sea temperatures will have an impact on weather in New Zealand,
sadly our current government is ignoring both the likely impact of
climate change on New Zealand directly, but also our commitments to
reduce emissions under international treaties to prepare for and try
to reduce the impact of climate change. They don't look further than
the interests of political donors . . .

Until you posted your summary the science was indeed being followed, Then,
however, it went to shit with a totally unscientific political diatribe based
on nothing of value.
There is nothing to be done by New Zealand and this government is no more to
blame than the last 10 governments (or more). Sheesh what a waste of bandwidth
Rich.

New Zealand could at least try to meet the emission reduction targets
that we agreed to, so of course there is something we could do - the
money to donors is just making that even harder.

What's the point?? Half of one percent contribution to global
pollution. Just a big left tax grab which your lot is great at
.

It is called meeting obligations under international agreements - or
if you prefer, 'sanctity of contract'. Commitments have been made
under an international agreement - should we meet those obligations?

They are non-binding which means they are in fact optional. Simple really, just
like you.

Post by Rich80105
One previous Prime Minister thought it a good idea to push the slogan
"Clean, Green, 100% Pure" - for which he copped some flack on UK
Television for the obvious hypocrisy, but we have made some progress
since. The penalties for breaking an international agreement are
unclear

Non-binding means no penalties of any sort.

Post by Rich80105
, but potentially much more serious than just financial
penalties

You keep saying that but without any explanation.

Post by Rich80105
, and with Trump about to start a second term as President of
the USA, meeting international commitments may be even more important
to retain friends . . .

What silly rhetoric.

[Rich80105]

On Mon, 2 Dec 2024 21:58:15 -0000 (UTC), Tony

Post by Tony

Post by Rich80105

Post by Mutley

Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 2 Dec 2024 02:52:53 -0000 (UTC), Tony

Post by Tony

Post by Rich80105
https://scitechdaily.com/once-in-a-2000-year-event-study-explains-unprecedented-antarctic-ice-loss-equivalent-to-10x-the-size-of-the-uk/
"In 2023, the Antarctic sea ice shrank to historically low levels,
with winter ice coverage falling more than 2 million square kilometers
below normal—roughly equivalent to ten times the size of the UK. This
significant decrease was particularly striking given the steady
increase in sea ice that had been observed up until 2015, making the
abrupt drop even more unexpected.
Using a large climate dataset called CMIP6, British Antarctic Survey
researchers investigated this unprecedented sea ice loss. They
analyzed data from 18 different climate models to understand the
probability of such a significant reduction in sea ice and its
connection to climate change.
Lead author Rachel Diamond explained that while 2023’s extreme low sea
ice was made more likely by climate change, it was still considered
very rare according to the models.
She says: “This is the first time this large set of climate models has
been used to find out how unlikely 2023’s low sea ice actually was. We
only have forty-five years of satellite measurements of sea ice, which
makes it extremely difficult to evaluate changes in sea ice extent.
This is where climate models come into their own.
According to the models, the record-breaking minimum sea ice extent
would be a one-in-a-2000-year event without climate change. This tells
us that the event was very extreme – anything less than one-in-100 is
considered exceptionally unlikely.”
Caroline Holmes, a co-author on the study, said: “Strong climate
change – i.e. the temperature changes we’re already seeing, and those
expected if emissions continue to rise rapidly — in the models makes
it four times more likely that we see such a big decline in sea ice
extent. This suggests that 2023’s extreme low was made more likely by
climate change.”
Long-term Consequences and Future Projections
The researchers also used the models to look at how well sea ice is
likely to recover. By looking at similar events in the models, the
authors found that after such extreme sea ice loss, not all of the sea
ice around Antarctica returns – even after twenty years. This adds
model evidence to existing observational evidence that the last few
years’ low sea ice could signal a lasting regime shift in the Southern
Ocean."
__________________________
Rising sea temperatures will have an impact on weather in New Zealand,
sadly our current government is ignoring both the likely impact of
climate change on New Zealand directly, but also our commitments to
reduce emissions under international treaties to prepare for and try
to reduce the impact of climate change. They don't look further than
the interests of political donors . . .

Until you posted your summary the science was indeed being followed, Then,
however, it went to shit with a totally unscientific political diatribe based
on nothing of value.
There is nothing to be done by New Zealand and this government is no more to
blame than the last 10 governments (or more). Sheesh what a waste of bandwidth
Rich.

New Zealand could at least try to meet the emission reduction targets
that we agreed to, so of course there is something we could do - the
money to donors is just making that even harder.

What's the point?? Half of one percent contribution to global
pollution. Just a big left tax grab which your lot is great at
.

It is called meeting obligations under international agreements - or
if you prefer, 'sanctity of contract'. Commitments have been made
under an international agreement - should we meet those obligations?

They are non-binding which means they are in fact optional. Simple really, just
like you.

Post by Rich80105
One previous Prime Minister thought it a good idea to push the slogan
"Clean, Green, 100% Pure" - for which he copped some flack on UK
Television for the obvious hypocrisy, but we have made some progress
since. The penalties for breaking an international agreement are
unclear

Non-binding means no penalties of any sort.

Post by Rich80105
, but potentially much more serious than just financial
penalties

You keep saying that but without any explanation.

Post by Rich80105
, and with Trump about to start a second term as President of
the USA, meeting international commitments may be even more important
to retain friends . . .

What silly rhetoric.

I agree, Tony, that seems at times to be all this government has. See:

https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/12/subsidising-ecocide.html

Would we be affected if some countries declined to allow our goods to
enter their country, Tony? Is that what you are looking for?

Naturally under this government we are already missing targets:
https://www.climatechangenews.com/2024/11/19/coalition-against-fossil-fuel-subsidies-expands-but-misses-initial-targets/

Are Shane Jones and Winston Peters not talking to each other?
"AsIwouldsaytoyouthatdoesappeartobethecase"

[Tony]

Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 2 Dec 2024 21:58:15 -0000 (UTC), Tony

Post by Tony

Post by Rich80105

Post by Mutley

Post by Rich80105
On Mon, 2 Dec 2024 02:52:53 -0000 (UTC), Tony

Post by Tony

Post by Rich80105
https://scitechdaily.com/once-in-a-2000-year-event-study-explains-unprecedented-antarctic-ice-loss-equivalent-to-10x-the-size-of-the-uk/
"In 2023, the Antarctic sea ice shrank to historically low levels,
with winter ice coverage falling more than 2 million square kilometers
below normal—roughly equivalent to ten times the size of the UK. This
significant decrease was particularly striking given the steady
increase in sea ice that had been observed up until 2015, making the
abrupt drop even more unexpected.
Using a large climate dataset called CMIP6, British Antarctic Survey
researchers investigated this unprecedented sea ice loss. They
analyzed data from 18 different climate models to understand the
probability of such a significant reduction in sea ice and its
connection to climate change.
Lead author Rachel Diamond explained that while 2023’s extreme low sea
ice was made more likely by climate change, it was still considered
very rare according to the models.
She says: “This is the first time this large set of climate models has
been used to find out how unlikely 2023’s low sea ice actually was. We
only have forty-five years of satellite measurements of sea ice, which
makes it extremely difficult to evaluate changes in sea ice extent.
This is where climate models come into their own.
According to the models, the record-breaking minimum sea ice extent
would be a one-in-a-2000-year event without climate change. This tells
us that the event was very extreme – anything less than one-in-100 is
considered exceptionally unlikely.”
Caroline Holmes, a co-author on the study, said: “Strong climate
change – i.e. the temperature changes we’re already seeing, and those
expected if emissions continue to rise rapidly — in the models makes
it four times more likely that we see such a big decline in sea ice
extent. This suggests that 2023’s extreme low was made more likely by
climate change.”
Long-term Consequences and Future Projections
The researchers also used the models to look at how well sea ice is
likely to recover. By looking at similar events in the models, the
authors found that after such extreme sea ice loss, not all of the sea
ice around Antarctica returns – even after twenty years. This adds
model evidence to existing observational evidence that the last few
years’ low sea ice could signal a lasting regime shift in the Southern
Ocean."
__________________________
Rising sea temperatures will have an impact on weather in New Zealand,
sadly our current government is ignoring both the likely impact of
climate change on New Zealand directly, but also our commitments to
reduce emissions under international treaties to prepare for and try
to reduce the impact of climate change. They don't look further than
the interests of political donors . . .

Until you posted your summary the science was indeed being followed, Then,
however, it went to shit with a totally unscientific political diatribe based
on nothing of value.
There is nothing to be done by New Zealand and this government is no more to
blame than the last 10 governments (or more). Sheesh what a waste of bandwidth
Rich.

New Zealand could at least try to meet the emission reduction targets
that we agreed to, so of course there is something we could do - the
money to donors is just making that even harder.

What's the point?? Half of one percent contribution to global
pollution. Just a big left tax grab which your lot is great at
.

It is called meeting obligations under international agreements - or
if you prefer, 'sanctity of contract'. Commitments have been made
under an international agreement - should we meet those obligations?

They are non-binding which means they are in fact optional. Simple really, just
like you.

Post by Rich80105
One previous Prime Minister thought it a good idea to push the slogan
"Clean, Green, 100% Pure" - for which he copped some flack on UK
Television for the obvious hypocrisy, but we have made some progress
since. The penalties for breaking an international agreement are
unclear

Non-binding means no penalties of any sort.

Post by Rich80105
, but potentially much more serious than just financial
penalties

You keep saying that but without any explanation.

Post by Rich80105
, and with Trump about to start a second term as President of
the USA, meeting international commitments may be even more important
to retain friends . . .

What silly rhetoric.

Childish sarcasm removed.

[BR]

Post by Rich80105
https://scitechdaily.com/once-in-a-2000-year-event-study-explains-unprecedented-antarctic-ice-loss-equivalent-to-10x-the-size-of-the-uk/
"In 2023, the Antarctic sea ice shrank to historically low levels,
with winter ice coverage falling more than 2 million square kilometers
below normal—roughly equivalent to ten times the size of the UK. This
significant decrease was particularly striking given the steady
increase in sea ice that had been observed up until 2015, making the
abrupt drop even more unexpected.

Unexpected?

If all the climate predictions are accurate and the science is settled
shouldn't it have been expected (if any of it is true of course)? It
all sounds either very misleading or shamelessly false.

"The New York Times coined a new term for SciTech Daily Review,
calling it a porthole site, as opposed to a traditional portal site.
This was because view is concentrated into a specific area of
interest, and NY Times proclaimed that this approach represented a
major new Internet trend. Not bad recognition for a site that at that
time had only been online for three days! In 1999, the Independent
said we were the best science news site currently."

High praise indeed from the New York Times and the Independent.
Arguably two of the most vehement climate propagandists and left wing
newspapers on Earth.

In any case, the climate's gonna do what the climate's gonna do, and
there isn't damn thing you, me, the Labour party or any other
government or organisation can do about that.

Bill.

[Willy Nilly]

Post by Rich80105
"In 2023, the Antarctic sea ice shrank to historically low levels,

"Historically" means since 1979, a 45-year period. Woweee.

Post by Rich80105
researchers investigated this unprecedented sea ice loss.

"Unprecedented", ha ha.

Post by Rich80105
This is where climate models come into their own.

"Models" give out what you put in, i.e., GIGO. It's all garbage.