nosleeptill
Addressing climate change is an abstract concept and for most people, like 80% of the population they can't grasp the abstract, so it all feels like a scam, one big flea circus. "No, no, the fleas are there you just can't see them, just trust me."
Unless someone can invent a way to capture and sequester greenhouse gases from the upper atmosphere to the tune of 50.9 gigatonnes per year I really don't see humanity making any progress, slowing growth isn't helping.
When your government is willing to torture and kill you in order to get their way, and they are willing to do it on foreign soil, it doesn't seem so easy, or safe.
Quoted from the article " researchers now suspect that for every one degree Celsius rise in Earth’s average temperature, permafrost may release the equivalent of four to six years’ worth of coal, oil, and natural gas emissions—double to triple what scientists thought a few years ago. Within a few decades, if we don’t curb fossil fuel use, permafrost could be as big a source of greenhouse gases as China, the world’s largest emitter, is today."
This article from NatGeo is the first modern writing I've seen that has put forth such dire warnings about the permafrost thawing. The warning is not as dire at the papers I read, but nonetheless it something we haven't seen before. I wish I still had those original papers, but they were in fact paper and not electronic, and I don't remember who wrote them or where they were published and I doubt they are cataloged anywhere. I do remember the people who wrote the papers were all older scientists, so I don't think any of them are still around.
Most of their models were based on the fact that oceans, glaciers and eventually the permafrost would get locked into a positive feedback loop using greenhouse gases as the fuel.
They postulated that humans tipped the balance and we keep skewing the balance until the earth and climate hit a tipping point at which time the earth and climate would get locked into a few positive feedback loops, warming oceans, melting glaciers, and thawing permafrost.
Most of the papers felt the thawing of the permafrost was the point of no return. It was the point where human activity was no longer the driving force in climate change. Even though the thawing of the permafrost would start out small it was the indication that we passed a warming event from which reducing human output would no longer alter the warming trend. The increase in temperature and forces required to start large scale permafrost warming could not be stopped simply by slightly reducing human output.
The authors mostly felt that 20-40 years of future climate change was already locked in, and once we passed the permafrost thawing event, even large scale changes in human output would not alter the next 20-40 years and during that time the permafrost itself would start to rapidly accelerate it's thawing, eventually coming to release yearly, as much greenhouse gases as all of humans emit, in effect accelerating the warming.
The underlying basis for their theories was that the release of greenhouse gases caused the planet to warm, which in turn caused oceans to warm, glaciers to melt, and eventually permafrost to thaw, which caused more greenhouse gas emissions, which caused more warming, etc. They felt that once the permafrost started to thaw that the final piece of the puzzle was in place and that the three systems, all fueled by greenhouse gas emissions would self sustain the feedback loop.
The papers believed that while in the beginning the permafrost greenhouse gas output would be small, but it was enough to sustain the feedback loops without human input, the feedback loops would slow but they would sustain. Since it wasn't possible for humans to cut emission by 10 or 20% overnight the best humanity could hope for would be a 1-2% reduction yearly, and even if humans reduced by 1-2% yearly the permafrost would actually make up the difference, thus not changing the trajectory of the warming trend. In the models they used it took almost 5% year over year reduction so that the permafrost thawing couldn't sustain the positive feedback loops.
Positive feedback loops typically don't stop until they exhaust their resources, which in his case is greenhouse gases. What we've learned recently is that the permafrost is releasing significantly more Co2m, significantly more methane which is now thought to be 76 times more impactful than co2 and significantly more nitrous oxide which is now thought to be 300 times more impactful than co2.
When I read those papers they all made way more sense than than the other more generally accepted models. As a systems guy I could never accept the thinking that if we reduced our output that it would stop the warming, I thought it would slow the warming trend, but never made any sense to think that the warming would stop.
At the time the papers were written most climate scientists believed that the permafrost wouldn't thaw for hundreds of years, which is why people stopped getting funded to study the thawing, it's only been recently that scientists started to monitor the permafrost thawing and discovered the amounts of co2, methane and nitrous oxide are much, much higher than anticipated.
The models put forth in the papers I referenced needed 5% human output reduction starting in the early 90's in order to avoid the permafrost from self sustaining the warming trend. Not only did we not reduce our output, but it's soared since the early 90's. Most of the models had the permafrost starting to thaw on a large scale in the mid to late 20's, with things getting really bad by the mid 50's.
If those rejected models are right, and it's starting to look like they are, then we are actually about 10 years ahead of schedule if we base it on permafrost thawing trends.
Unless someone can invent a technology in the next 5 years to pull the excess greenhouse gases from the upper atmosphere and take us back to pre-1825 levels and keep us there going forward, this is a lost game.
It's like standing on top of the Empire State building and watching a balling ball go over the edge, we are at the point where the majority of the ball's mass has gone past the balancing point. We are close enough to recognize that it's happening but too far away to stop it from falling.
China is really a complex house of cards, it looks more foreboding than it actually is in reality.
The second the economy slows the consumers hide, and go back to stuffing cash into their mattresses.
I think Trump is a fool, but in the case of China I think we need a fool. Trump believes he's invincible, so he doesn't get caught up with the "apparent facts" about China and it's economy.
Passing all the laws won't matter, because western companies are just handing their IP to the Chinese government.
I ordered electrical switch plates from a company that specialized in electrical switch plates, it's all they sell. After 5 days the product hadn't shipped, I cancelled the order and place a prime Amazon order and received the wall plates the next day. I paid a slightly higher price from Amazon but I actually got the product.
Make no mistake the Chinese government is actively trying to steal IP, but most of the IP it has was knowingly shared by Western companies desperate to lower costs and get access to the Chinese market.
About 3 years ago I started using a program on iOS called Brainwave, I haven't found anything that works on Android. I use my old 3GS and very small inexpensive in-ear headphones, Philips SHE3590BK usually around $9. They fit completely inside my ears so I can sleep on my side. I use the Deep Sleep option, with the Medium Rain Ambiance, I keep the volume very low for ambiance and brain wave, just enough so I can pick up the lower tones for the brainwave.
When I started using Brainwave I needed to use the Deep Sleep/Wake up option, and I needed the volume a bit louder because it would still take me a long time to fall asleep. Wake Up mode means it's running until it's time to wake up. After using it for about 9 months I was able to switch to the Deep Sleep option and have it run only for 60 minutes. Now I'm down to running it for 15 and 95% of the time I fall asleep in less than 15 minutes, if not I just pull out the 3GS and give it another 15. Once I fall asleep the in-ear headphones block most sounds, like my wife's snoring.
I don't think it's good for my hearing/ears to run the program in Wake Up mode, which is why I switched away from it as soon as I could. I've recommended the program to normal sleepers for the napping option, so far everyone has said it's great, it lets them fall asleep fast the program wakes them up and they feel refreshed.
The program is supposed to be binaural beats, but I'm sure people on this form can explain why it's not, but I don't care. The program disrupts the constant dialog in my head, quietening my brain, allowing the sleep process to kick in. The program has been a god send.
Anyone who knows me could identify me from this post, there aren't a lot of people who have my relationship with sleep. I've met people who have insomnia, and they fall apart during day two of no sleep, it wears them out. Me, I'm just awake, I don't start slowing down because I'm awake for 72 or 96 hours. I worked 5 days straight with no break, everyone else worked in shifts,I was always observed there wasn't a period where I could sneak off and have a nap. It freaked everyone out that I was exactly the same on day 5 as I was on day 1, and they were all beat down because they were doing long hours with reduced sleep.
My insomnia was awful from 14 to 19, I was operating with on average 3 or 4 days of no sleep, a couple of days of 2-3 hours of sleep a day, and back to 3 -4 days of no sleep, wash rinse repeat. I had lots of 6,7,8 days of no sleep and once went 10 days. For me, then, I was just awake, I didn't force anything, I was just not sleepy, and I couldn't force myself to sleep.
During my junior and senor year of college I started smoking pot, and I started sleeping on a regular basis, going to bed about 1-1:30 and getting 6/7 hours of sleep. I'm not really sure if I was happier, or more productive, I was definitely more relaxed, it was probably the pot not the sleep. Of course once I graduated and started getting drug tested I needed to give up smoking pot. I hope soon my state will legalize and maybe I can find a strain that helps.
I did a couple of sleep studies two which lasted 5 days and for one I went sleepless for the study, they said I never once displayed any indication that my body wanted to sleep during those 5 days. They wanted to study me but sitting in a room hooked up to machines for days on end was not my idea of fun, since I didn't sleep they wanted to know what was going on with me during my constant "up" times and they wanted to see if they could understand what triggered my sleep when it did happen.
As I got into my 30's my insomnia became less of an issue, but the delayed sleep issue went back to when I was a baby, my body wanted to sleep from 7am until 9/10am, putting a real kink in my life. While I didn't technically have insomnia, I usually wasn't getting any sleep during the work week, luckily I was wired for not sleeping much so it wasn't a career killer, it was tough on my wife and children, and still is.
As I got into my late 40's my delayed sleep time move to back to about 4am, and my sleeping needs have increased, I now usually get 3-4 hours of sleep a day. So far things have remained the same into my mid 50's.
If I want to I can still go a few day without sleep, I've worked on big projects and it can be wonderful to just knock out 72 hours of work in 3 days. When I get "sleepy" it's more like my body suggesting that it would accommodate sleeping if I so choose, if I ignore the offer the opportunity passes and I'm just awake. From talking to others the feeling of sleep comes over them and they have no choice but to succumb
As a side note I don't take drugs prescription or otherwise, nor do I drink