A+ A A-

On Mr. Ewing's attempt to distract us from the big climate change picture

To The Daily Sun,

This is Part 1 of my rebuttal of Don Ewing's recent Climate Change Denial from the Groupthink Clique of Climastrology.

Anthropogenic CO2 emissions began to dramatically rise in 1950, as did the airborne fraction of CO2 that remained after carbon sinks absorbed about 55 percent. Since 1959 we have been able to directly measure atmospheric CO2 while we used ice cores to determine atmospheric CO2 in the past. Humanity's industrial emissions can be estimated from international energy statistics going back to 1850.

All the data points to a monumental jump in both CO2 emissions and airborne CO2 since 1950. There was only a minor rise in CO2 from 1850 to 1950 and then it jumped at a steep angle at the same time industry emissions into the atmosphere exponentially increased.[1] The chart from Petrolog's annual emissions of carbon dioxide from the combustion of fossil fuels and production of cement, 1850-2006 is an even more compelling rebuke of Don's claim.[2]

The real explosion of fossil fuel emissions began after World War II with the economy of the 1950s as you can see by both charts referenced.

For a sobering look at just how unprecedented a jump in atmospheric CO2 we see, see this chart of atmospheric CO2 as measured by the ice cores at Mauna Loa, Taylor Dome and Law Dome over the last 10,000 years.[3] Mr. Ewing mentions that atmospheric carbon was at 275 ppm around 250 years ago, but did he also mention that it was at 265 ppm 10,000 years ago or 280 ppm in 900CE? Or 275 in 1500CE?

So with natural fluctuations, atmospheric CO2 remained steady for the last 10,000 years until 1950 when humans began to pump greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, raising a 9,550-year-long 275 ppm average high to 400 ppm in just 50 years.

The other main contribution to atmospheric CO2 is deforestation when plants die. We did that, too. And it gets worse for Mr Ewing's 250 year attempt to distract us from the big picture. The Vostok ice cores measure back 420,000 years.[4]

The atmospheric CO2 in the last 400,000 years hit high points at 400,000 ya (years ago) at 285 ppm, 330,000 ya at 300 ppm, 240,000 ya at 280 ppm, and 125,000 ya at 290 ppm. After the usual dip to around 200 ppm mid-cycle, it took between 25,000 and 75,000 years to peak again. Slowly, so species were able to adapt. But something different his happening this time. There was a sudden and unprecedented spike after reaching the 400,000 year average high that can best be explained by fossil fuel emissions and deforestation.

In the 120 years of 1830 to 1950, CO2 increased by a total of 30 ppm, a paltry rate of 0.25 ppm/yr. In the 50 years of 1950 to 2000 it increased a total of 55 ppm, a rate of 1.1 ppm/yr. In the decade of 2000 to 2010 CO2 increased 25 ppm, a rate of 2.5 ppm/yr, which is 10 times the 1830-1850 rate. Fossil fuel use rose 41 percent between 1990 and 2008 and 29 percent from 2000-2008.[5]

Another Greenhouse gas is in play, too. Vostok ice cores show that methane, a far more powerful greenhouse gas averaged between 400 ppb and 750 ppb for 400,000 years.[6] We are now at 1,750 ppb.[7] . We did that. After 400,000 years of fluctuations of 350 ppb we added a 1,000 ppb in 200 years. Nitrous oxide has almost doubled, too. Bravo.

Don repeats that most of the warming occurred before 1940. Wrong. Globally, of the 14 warmest years on recorded, 13 of them were in the 21st century.[8] In fact, the average global temperatures of 2013 were about 0.9 degrees F above the 1961-1990 average. The 1930s were hot in the USA but its hottest year, 1934, still only placed 52nd in global records. Don says the Earth has warmed 1 degree F from 1850 to 2000. That is misleading because from 1979 to 2009, the Earth warmed a little over 0.9 degree F. This graph shows the temperature record between 1850 and 2005. It warmed 0.3 degree C between 1850 and 1940, mostly between 1910 and 1940 while it warmed 0.85C between 1940 and 2005, mostly between 1980 and 2005.[9][10] All while the sun was cooling. And that graph doesn't even include the years 2006-2014 which contain the hottest years ever recorded.

Mr. Ewing also claims that the CO2 we breathe is "1/8th of the level at the times of our primate ancestors (about 3,000 ppm)". Which Primate ancestors? Homo Habilis? Homo Erectus? Australopithecus Afarensis (Lucy)? Lucy lived 3.2 million years ago, during the Pleocene and the CO2 was 400 ppm which is also our current CO2 content.[9] Now if Don is speaking of the very first primate ancestor he may be talking about the The Paleocene-Eocene thermal maximum (PETM) 55 million years ago which is considered an extinction event. A recent Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences paper stated, "Following a doubling in carbon dioxide levels, the surface of the ocean turned acidic over a period of weeks or months and global temperatures rose by 5 degrees centigrade – all in the space of about 13 years. If our Palaeocene estimates are correct, tropical temperatures at the slightly younger PETM could have reached 38-40 degree C, resulting in widespread equatorial heat-death as recent models and other proxy data have predicted."[12]

Sources disagree on the CO2 ppm 55Myo but the consensus is that this climate would be quite inhospitable to human civilization and is seen as a model of what could happen to us if we continue to heat the place up.[13] I found no scientific source that claimed 3,000 ppm but this article by an actual climatologist is quite interesting about the PETM event [14]. Stay tuned for Part 2 where I will expose the phony right-wing engineered climate gate hoax for starters.

[1]http://www.skepticalscience.com/images/CO2_Emissions_Levels_Knorr.gif
[2]http://petrolog.typepad.com/photos/blog_illustrations/carbon_emissions_by_region_03a.gif
[3]http://www.skepticalscience.com/images/co2_10000_years.gif
[4]http://www.skepticalscience.com/graphics/CO2_history_1024.jpg
[5]http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/11/091117133504.htm
[6]http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/features/200409_methane/core1.gif
[7]http://cdn.theatlantic.com/assets/media/img/posts/2014/09/Table1/080fcbecb.png
[8]http://www.weather.com/science/environment/news/13-14-hottest-years-record-occurred-21st-century-wmo-20140324
[9]http://www.ipcc.ch/graphics/ar4-wg1/jpg/fig-3-1.jpg
[10]http://www.skepticalscience.com/pics/1_solar_output.gif
[11]http://www.skepticalscience.com/pliocene-snapshot.html
[12]http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/10/08/2750191/petm-co2-levels-doubled-55-million-years-ago-global-temperatures-jumped/
[13]http://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-rising-ten-times-faster-than-petm-extinction.html
[14]http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/08/petm-weirdness/

James Veverka
Tilton

Last Updated on Tuesday, 16 June 2015 11:24

Hits: 81

Play the translation game? Tell me the story of the Virgin Mary

To The Daily Sun,
First, in response to Paul Blake's Saturday letter: Mr. Blake, you write a long letter in which you think you have it all figured out. From Hebrew to Greek then to English, translated by Jewish scholar strangers thousands of years ago, and you have brainwashed yourself into this moral corner in which it is impossible to fathom wine being used for anything good in life. What your one-sided, convoluted rant is devoid of is context or reason.

These were people, Mr. Blake. Human beings living in hard times without any of the luxuries we had today. Short lifespans, high infant death rates, war and disease around every corner yet, you find it incredulous that they would have wine at a wedding. All you present for evidence is that some words which may or may not have meant wine or grape juice. You lack a shred of common sense and that's what scares me. People celebrate joyous occasions with wine and alcohol, not grape cool aid. I'm pretty sure that it doesn't corrupt their soul.

Furthermore, if you want to play the translation game, you want to tell me the story of the Virgin Mary and the Immaculate Conception? I bring this up because the word "virgin" was mistranslated from "young woman." And if you dispute that, then chew on this: The verses surrounding Isaiah 7:14 tell how Ahaz, the king of Judah, is told of a sign to be given in demonstration that the prophet's promise of God's protection is a true one. The sign is that an almah will give birth to a son who will still be very young when Judah's enemies will be destroyed. Most Christians identify the almah of this prophecy with the Virgin Mary. In Isaiah 7, the almah is already pregnant, and modern Jewish translators have therefore rendered almah here as "young woman". The Septuagint translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, which was completed in the late second century BCE, translated almah into Greek as parthenos, which generally means "virgin". For example, the Hebrew word "betulah" for "virgin" is translated as "parthenon" in Exodus 22:16 in the Septuagint. But also, the Septuagint also describes Dinah as a parthenos, even after she has been raped and hence technically no longer a virgin. So by this the Virgin Mary was probably just meant to be known as a young woman, I mean she was married. Common sense says that if she was a virgin when married, that was settled on the wedding night.

I'm beginning to sound a bit like you, so I'm done, but my point is you blindly lead your life by this book that has been interpreted by strangers on different continents over and over again. Again, I respect all of my Christian friends' beliefs, but I personally cannot subscribe to a book which I believe is as precise as an Al Jazeera news report without any true feeling or attachment or trust. Moderation of course, but you cannot tell me a frosty beverage after a hard day's work is a sinful act. If your too detached from reality to understand that wine was drank at a wedding though, I'm sure this letter is just an exercise in futility.

Switching gears, I just wanted to say to everyone out there that if you are not paying attention to the Laconia Muskrats you may just be missing out on history. If my research is correct they have never sent a player to the Major Leagues but that just may change soon. Tim Viehoff is a starting pitcher who right now through two games is sporting a 0.00 ERA with a league leading 18 strikeouts. He's 6 feet 4 inches, throws 90 mph and has a 2-0 record early on here. Check out the teams schedule on http://laconiamuskrats.pointstreaksites.com and come one out to support the team, watch a fun game up close and perhaps meet one of the future stars of MLB!

Thomas Lemay
Laconia

Last Updated on Tuesday, 16 June 2015 10:57

Hits: 54

Lawmakers need to protect out state's Renewable Energy Fund

To The Daily Sun,

The House and Senate should preserve the Renewable Energy Fund (REF). It is one of the best things going for New Hampshire. In Plymouth alone, the REF has spurred more than $500,000 of private investment installing residential solar pv panels — and that doesn't include the solar investments made by businesses or the solar thermal and wood pellet heaters installed in Plymouth homes.

I have worked on many different New Hampshire community development efforts over the last 25 years and I have never witnessed a fund that leverages this high level of private investment and is accessed by such a wide diversity of New Hampshire residents and businesses from all walks of life on both sides of the political aisle.

The incentives provided through the Renewable Energy Fund for New Hampshire residents and businesses, get paid back to New Hampshire many times over through the boost it gives to the local economy through a wide range of material purchases, the skilled and unskilled local people these projects put to work and the improved air quality that comes from such things as heating the majority of a household's water with solar thermal evacuated tube collectors instead of propane.

For these reasons, I call on the Legislature and governor to protect New Hampshire's Renewable Energy Fund, a specific to New Hampshire that helping residents and businesses keep their energy spending closer to home.

Sandra Jones, Director

Plymouth Area Renewable Energy Initiative
Plymouth

Last Updated on Tuesday, 16 June 2015 10:48

Hits: 201

Selling contraceptives over the counter will cost poor women

To The Daily Sun,

Does Senator Kelly Ayotte really think women will support her bill to make contraceptives available over the counter? Ayotte's bill would remove such medications from the formularies covered by insurance under Obamacare, currently available at no cost for women. Insurance companies pay less to help avoid unwanted pregnancies than to cover pregnancy-related charges. But business, for some reason, doesn't like this coverage.

Without some thought, it sounds like a good idea — making contraceptives available at the corner drugstore. Yet for most women, especially middle-class and poorer women, it's a terrible idea. Sold over the counter, such meds (essential for women with specific medical conditions, not just those avoiding pregnancy) would cost around $600 each year, a hefty sum for many. But perhaps not for those who Ayotte considers her real constituents; for them $600 just isn't a big deal.

This bill is another example of the senator's poor attitude toward women. Ayotte favors restricting women's rights (e.g., to abortion and equal pay). She votes to defund Planned Parenthood, shred the safety net and repeal Obamacare. She seems cavalier toward other women, especially poor or middle-class women. Why, I wonder?

A rising star in the Republican ranks, Ayotte toes the GOP line. She supports issues favorable to big business and Wall Street, where the money is. Those are generally not issues supportive of most women. Perhaps she cynically thinks "those" women don't vote?

Voters in New Hampshire, especially women, should think twice before re-electing Ayotte next year. We deserve better.

Anne Rogers
Meredith

Last Updated on Tuesday, 16 June 2015 10:45

Hits: 34

Thanks for your generous support of the Laconia MS Walk 2015

To The Daily Sun,

On behalf of the National Multiple Sclerosis Society, Greater New England Chapter, we would like to thank the following local businesses for their generous support of the Laconia MS Walk 2015:

Annie's Cafe & Catering, Laconia; Coca Cola Bottling, Belmont; Domino's Pizza, Laconia; Hannaford Supermarket, Gilford; Laconia Ice Company, Laconia; Laconia Village Bakery, Laconia; Market Basket, Tilton; Michaud Distributors, Laconia; Sal's Pizza, Belmont; Starbuck's, Tilton; The 99, Tilton; and DJ Tim.

These local businesses helped provide food and beverage items and entertainment for all participants in the Laconia MS Walk 2015.

The Laconia MS Walk 2015 hosted more than 100 walkers and raised in excess of $13,000. Thank you to all of you who walked and/or donated to this event.

Funds from this event will support research into the cause and cure of MS. The money raised will also fund community-based education, support and advocacy within Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Vermont. The NMSS Greater New England Chapter responds to the needs of the nearly 19,000 individuals and their families who are confronted every day by the many challenges of living with multiple sclerosis, empowering them with the resources to maintain independence and to live their lives as fully as possible.

Thank you for joining the movement to create a world free of MS. We appreciate all of the help that these local businesses have provided.

Colleen Akerman

Committee Member

Laconia MS Walk 2015

Last Updated on Tuesday, 16 June 2015 10:38

Hits: 68

The Laconia Daily Sun - All Rights Reserved
Privacy Policy
Powered by BENN a division of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette