Page 3 of 35

Re: Court Forces Climate Scientists to release emails

PostPosted: Mon Dec 03, 2018 8:15 pm
Author: Anthea
Yellowstone's beloved wild wolf 'Spitfire' is killed by a trophy hunter after wandering outside the national park

Click image to enlarge:

    The seven-year-old wild wolf was legally killed by a trophy hunter last weekend

    She died the same way her famous mother, the alpha female 832F, did in 2012

    Officials said Spitfire was legally killed less than five miles from Yellowstone

    But it has renewed calls for a buffer zone that is hunting-free around the park
A beloved wild wolf known as 'Spitfire' was killed by a trophy hunter when she wandered outside Yellowstone National Park.

The seven-year-old wolf – known as Lamar Canyon Wolf Pack member 926F to scientists – was shot by a hunter in Montana last weekend.

The wolf, also dubbed the Queen of the Lamar Valley by wolf enthusiasts, died the same way her famous mother, the alpha female wolf 832F, did in 2012.

The leader of the Lamar Canyon pack, 832F was better known as 06 – a reference to the year she was born – and inspired the book American Wolf: A True Story of Survival and Obsession in the West.

A Facebook page for wolf lovers named for the celebrity wolf, The 06 Legacy, paid tribute to her slain daughter, who was also known as Queen of the Lamar Valley, last week.

Karol Miller, who founded the group, wrote: 'It's so difficult to write this. We are passing along the devastating news that our beloved 926F of the Lamar Canyon Pack was killed in the Montana trophy hunt.

'She was the daughter of our namesake 06 and she was known as the Queen of the Lamar Valley.

'926F showed incredible strength, courage and resilience in everything she did. She had a special bond with her daughter Little T and they stayed together all these years.'

The post added: 'We had so much to celebrate when we saw five strong and healthy pups this fall.

'And now it took just one bullet and 926F is gone. Just like her mother 06 and her uncle 754M before her. With current wolf management practices, the tragedy just doesn't end.'

It added: 'The 06 Legacy is committed to protecting wolves and we are going to fight even harder for 06, 926F, 754M and all the other wolves whose lives are taken for granted and are killed for nothing more than sport.

'We leave you tonight with hearts full of sadness. Rest In Peace our beautiful Queen.'

Miller added to the New York Times: 'Everybody's mourning, everybody's thinking about what to do to stop this madness.

'These are the descendants of 06, her legacy. People love those wolves.'

The Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks confirmed to the Times that Spitfire was killed legally less than five miles from Yellowstone's northeast entrance – between Silver Gate and Cooke City.

The state has permitted the hunting of wolves since 2011.

But the killing has renewed calls for a buffer zone around Yellowstone so that wolves that live there cannot be shot if they wander beyond the park's invisible boundary.

Montana lawmakers have passed legislation forbidding the creation of a buffer.

However, there is a hunting limit of two wolves in each of the two districts near Yellowstone's northern boundary.

In a blog post, the Wolf Conservation Center noted that wolf hunting licenses cost $19 for residents and $50 for non-residents in Montana.

'Perhaps Montana should take a closer look at the economics of wolf hunting,' the post said.

'Seems that Yellowstone wolves are worth a lot more alive than dead.'

From 1995 to 1997, 41 wild wolves from Canada and northwestern Montana were released into Yellowstone National Park and quickly grew in number.

Around 528 were estimated to be living in the park in 2015.

By December 2016, park officials said at least 108 were in the park. ... unter.html

Re: Beloved wild wolf Spitfire killed by trophy hunter

PostPosted: Mon Dec 03, 2018 8:21 pm
Author: Anthea
Trophy Hunters disgust me X(

Re: Beloved wild wolf Spitfire killed by trophy hunter

PostPosted: Tue Dec 11, 2018 2:43 am
Author: Anthea
Human activity could cause Earth's climate to revert to ice-free state

Human activity could cause Earth's climate to revert to an ice-free state not seen in 50 million years, study warns

    New study compared climate predictions with data from Earth's past epochs

    It found greenhouse gas emissions are essentially reversing the climate clock

    Researchers say by 2030, Earth's climate could resemble that of mid-Pliocene

    By the year 2150, they say climate could be like that seen 50 million years go
If humankind doesn’t get greenhouse gas emissions under control, we risk pushing Earth’s climate to a state similar to that seen 50 million years ago.

This is according to a new study, which found that human activity is reversing the long-term cooling trend that’s taken place since the Eocene epoch, when the planet was warm and largely free of ice.

In roughly 20 years, the researchers say the climate could revert to something much like that of the mid-Pliocene, a period that existed more than 3 million years ago – and by 2150, we may have set the climate click back 50 million years.

A new study found that human activity is reversing the long-term cooling trend that’s taken place since the Eocene epoch, when the planet was warm and largely free of ice. File photo

According to the worrying new report published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, the human-driven reversal has occurred in a span of just two centuries, making for the fastest changes ever observed.

While human and animal ancestors lived on Earth during the Eocene and the Pliocene, it’s unclear how today’s species will cope with the accelerated changes.

‘If we think about the future in terms of the past, where we are going is uncharted territory for human society,’ says lead author Kevin Burke, who conducted the work while a graduate student at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

‘We are moving toward very dramatic changes over an extremely rapid time frame, reversing a planetary cooling trend in a matter of centuries.’

In the study, the researchers examined data on Earth’s geologic past to see how different eras line up with future climate projections from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fifth Assessment Report.

During the Pliocene, roughly 3 million years ago, temperatures were 3.2-6.5 degrees Fahrenheit (1.8 to 3.6 degrees C) warmer than they are now, the team says.

And during the Eocene, global temperatures were an average of 23.4 degrees F (13 degrees C) warmer than they are today.

If humankind doesn’t get greenhouse gas emissions under control, we risk pushing Earth’s climate back to a state similar to that seen 50 million years ago. Fossil fish from the Eocene epoch are shown

The team also looked at the Last Interglacial (129 to 116 thousand years ago), the mid-Holocene (6,000 years ago), the pre-industrial era (before A.D. 1850), and the early 20th century.

‘We can use the past as a yardstick to understand the future, which is so different from anything we have experienced in our lifetimes,’ says paleoecologist John "Jack" Williams, professor of geography at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

‘People have a hard time projecting what the world will be like five or 10 years from now.

‘This is a tool for predicting that – how we head down those paths, and using deep geologic analogs from Earth’s history to think about changes in time.’

Researchers looked at the future climate scenarios posed predicted by Representative Concentration Pathway 8.5 (RCP8.5) and RCP4.5, which represent the future climate with no mitigation of greenhouse gases, and with moderate reductions, respectively.

They also used the Hadley Centre Coupled Model version 3, the Goddard Institute for Space Studies ModelE2-R, and the Community Climate System Model.


The main problem with climate models is uncertainty.

In particular, something called the 'equilibrium climate sensitivity' measure has been causing scientists a headache.

This is a highly influential measure that describes how much the planet will warm if carbon dioxide doubles and the Earth's climate adjusts to the new state of the atmosphere.

Studies have found a wide range of possibilities for this key measure — somewhere between 1.5 and 4.5°C, with 3°C.

Most scientists try to constrain ECS by looking at historical warming events.

For the last 25 years, the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the ultimate authority on climate science, has settled on a 'likely' range of 1.5°C to 4.5°C (2.7°F to 8.1°F).

Warming less than 1°C is 'extremely unlikely' and more than 6°C is considered 'very unlikely', the panel has concluded.

However, some scientists dispute this figure.

The study found that Earth’s climate could resemble the mid-Pliocene by 2030 (under RCP8.5) or 2040 (under RCP4.5).

If emissions continue, as predicted with the RCP8.5 model, warming would continue until Earth begins to resemble the Eocene, around the year 2100.

By 2150, these conditions would be further cemented around the world.

The team also found new climate conditions not seen in the past could arise, particularly in eastern and southeastern Asia, northern Australia, and the coastal Americas.

With mitigation efforts, the researchers say we could keep the effects to a minimum.

‘The further we move from the Holocene, the greater the potential that we move out of safe operating space,’ Williams says.

In roughly 20 years, the researchers say the climate could revert to something much like that of the mid-Pliocene, a period that existed more than 3 million years ago – and by 2015, we may have set the climate click back 50 million years. File photo

‘In the roughly 20 to 25 years I have been working in the field, we have gone from expecting climate change to happen, to detecting the effects, and now, we are seeing that it’s causing harm.

‘People are dying, property is being damaged, we’re seeing intensified fires and intensified storms that can be attributed to climate change.

‘There is more energy in the climate system, leading to more intense events.’

The researchers say the findings have serisous implications for the future of life on Earth.

‘We’ve seen big things happen in Earth’s history – new species evolved, life persists and species survive. But many species will be lost, and we live on this planet,’ Williams said.

‘These are things to be concerned about, so this work points us to how we can use our history and Earth’s history to understand changes today and how we can best adapt.’ ... years.html

Re: Human activity is destroying Earth's climate

PostPosted: Sat Dec 15, 2018 2:22 pm
Author: Anthea
Seven Billion-Dollar Disasters From 2017
Likely Affected by Climate Change

Human-caused climate change made more than a dozen of 2017's most extreme weather events more likely and more intense, including seven billion-dollar disasters, according to the Explaining Extreme Events of 2017 From a Climate Perspective report, released on Monday. The report added that marine heat waves, like the one in the Tasman Sea off Australia's southeast coast, were "virtually impossible" without the influence of human-caused climate change.

“These attribution studies are telling us that a warming Earth is continuing to send us new and more extreme weather events every year,” said Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society (BAMS) editor-in-chief Jeff Rosenfield at a press conference on Monday at the annual meeting of the American Geophysical Union (AGU) in Washington D.C. "The message of this science is that our civilization is increasingly out of sync with our changing climate. A decade ago, we were focused on continental-scale, months-long extremes. Now researchers are often going after more local risks like heat waves, fire danger, and floods on scales of a few days, for pinpointed areas of extreme impacts. In barely a decade, the research focus has evolved enough to address a wider scope of societal challenges.”

NOAA research meteorologist Martin Hoerling added: "Scientific evidence supports increasing confidence that human activity is driving a variety of extreme events now. These are having large economic impacts across the United States and around the world.”

The new studies reinforce the conclusions of the Fourth National Climate Assessment, which was written by researchers from over a dozen federal agencies. The report was released by the Trump Administration on the day after Thanksgiving, in a probable attempt to keep it from getting widespread notice. The report stated that the "impacts of global climate change are already being felt in the United States and are projected to intensify in the future."

BAMS has now put out seven annual issues analyzing extreme weather events of the prior year. Of the 146 studies presented in the reports, 70 percent found a strong connection between an event and climate change. However, not all extreme weather events have had attribution studies done on them, and the list of events studied has been dictated by what interested the researchers (and what they had the funding to do). has compiled a more exhaustive list of climate attribution studies. They identified 216 studies published between December 1995 and August 2018 that found the fingerprint of human-caused climate change on a significant weather event or climate trend. Of these, 93 were in the United States. The earliest finding of a human-caused fingerprint was for the 1930s—a significant probability that global temperature was increasing due to human-caused climate change.

At least seven of the 29 billion-dollar weather disasters of 2017 catalogued by insurance broker Aon were linked to climate change in the new BAMS report:

Uh-oh, the lawyers may be getting involved

I attended the BAMS press conference on Monday in Washington D.C., and heard an interesting talk by Lindene Patton, an attorney with Earth and Water Law LLC. She told the audience that climate attribution studies are getting sufficiently confident in informing risk to the point where a line may have been crossed where lawyers will get involved. When a disaster strikes, and that disaster was more likely than not to occur due to climate change, we need to ask: did managers and builders who had a duty to protect people and property breach that duty by ignoring the new dangers? She called attention to engineering organizations like ASCE (American Society of Civil Engineers) and AlChE (American Institute of Chemical Engineers), which are now reviewing their standards due to climate change considerations. ... at6-widget

Re: 2017 Disasters Affected by Climate Change

PostPosted: Sat Dec 15, 2018 10:50 pm
Author: Anthea
Climate change: COP24 deal to bring Paris pact to life

Negotiators in Poland have finally secured agreement on a range of measures that will make the Paris climate pact operational in 2020

Last-minute rows over carbon markets threatened to derail the meeting - and delayed it by a day.

Delegates believe the new rules will ensure that countries keep their promises to cut carbon.

The Katowice agreement aims to deliver the Paris goals of limiting global temperature rises to well below 2C.

"Putting together the Paris agreement work programme is a big responsibility," said the chairman of the talks, known as COP24, Michal Kurtyka.

"It has been a long road. We did our best to leave no-one behind."

Rich nations often reduce emissions by paying for carbon-cutting projects in other countries. But these programmes are very difficult to police.

Fraud and double accounting have rendered many of them worthless - they are often dubbed hot air schemes.

The common rulebook envisages flexibility for poorer nations.

Developing countries seek recognition and compensation for the impact of rising temperatures.

The idea of being legally liable for causing climate change has long been rejected by richer nations, who fear huge bills well into the future.

Last weekend, scientists and delegates were shocked when the US, Saudi Arabia, Russia and Kuwait objected to the meeting "welcoming" a recent UN report on keeping global temperature rise to within the 1.5C limit.

The report said the world is now completely off track, heading more towards 3C this century.

Keeping to the preferred goal would need "rapid, far-reaching and unprecedented changes in all aspects of society".

What did the delegates focus on?

Representatives from 196 states took part in the talks. They were trying to sort out some very tricky questions about the rulebook of the Paris agreement.

These are the regulations that will govern the nuts and bolts of how countries cut carbon, provide finance to poorer nations and ensure that everyone is doing what they say they are doing.

It sounds easy but is very technical. Countries often have different definitions and timetables for their carbon cutting actions.

Poorer countries want some "flexibility" in the rules so that they are not overwhelmed with regulations that they don't have the capacity to put into practice.

Is this enough?

Laurence Tubiana, a key architect of the Paris agreement, and now with the European Climate Foundation, said the agreement was a big boost for the Paris pact.

"The key piece was having a good transparency system because it builds trust between countries and because we can measure what is being done and it is precise enough," she told BBC News on the sidelines of this meeting.

"I am happy with that. Nobody can say that's not clear, we don't know what to do, or that it's not true anymore. It's very clear,"

She said that countries like Russia which had refused to ratify the Paris agreement because it wasn't sure about the rules, could no longer use that excuse.

However some observers say the deal is not sufficiently strong to deal with the urgency of the climate problem.

In the words of one delegate, "it's what's possible, but not what's necessary".

What about cutting carbon faster?

There has been a big push for countries to up their ambition, to cut carbon deeper and with greater urgency.

Many delegates want to see a rapid increase in ambition before 2020 to keep the chances of staying under 1.5C alive.

Right now, the plans that countries lodged as part of the Paris agreement don't get anywhere near that, described as "grossly insufficient" by one delegate from a climate vulnerable country.

Business is also looking for a signal from this meeting about the future.

"Companies are ready to invest and banks are ready to finance," said Carlos Salle from Spanish energy conglomerate, Iberdrola.

"So we need that greater ambition in the policy to enable business to move further and faster."

Link to Videos - Charts:

Re: UN climate change conference 2018

PostPosted: Tue Dec 18, 2018 8:59 am
Author: Piling
This agreement is useless. Its objectives are not enough to stop the future disasters, USA refuse to change its politics, France was absent, Germany is bound by its coal productivity, etc.

Re: UN climate change conference 2018

PostPosted: Tue Dec 18, 2018 3:24 pm
Author: Anthea
Most government do NOT care what happens because they are only interested in what they can make and not how their strategies affect the population X(

Re: UN climate change conference 2018

PostPosted: Tue Dec 18, 2018 4:59 pm
Author: Anthea
Strange to think Sheikh Abdulsalam Barzani was more
environmentally friendly 100 years ago than most people are today

Sheikh Abdulsalam’s legacy is still felt in Barzan. An early environmentalist, he banned hunting and the cutting down of trees. The Barzan area remains a wildlife protection zone. He also introduced societal reforms – banning arranged child marriages, doing away with the dowry system, and giving Jews and Christians the freedom to worship and celebrate their religious holidays.

Re: Barzanis more environmentally friendly 100 years ago tha

PostPosted: Tue Dec 18, 2018 5:47 pm
Author: Piling
That's right and in Barzani area hunting is forbidden.

Re: Barzanis more environmentally friendly 100 years ago tha

PostPosted: Wed Dec 26, 2018 4:35 pm
Author: Anthea
Japan whale hunting:
Commercial whaling to restart in July

Japan says it is to restart commercial whaling in July in a move that is likely to draw international criticism

It said it would withdraw from the International Whaling Commission (IWC), the body tasked with whale conservation.

Commercial whaling was banned by the IWC in 1986 after some species were driven almost to extinction.

Officials in Japan, an IWC member since 1951, say eating whales is part of the country's culture.

For many years Japan has hunted whales for what it calls "scientific research" and to sell the meat, a programme widely criticised by conservationists.

Wednesday's announcement had been expected, but conservation groups warn the move will have serious consequences.

It means Japan will be able to freely hunt species currently protected by the IWC, like minke whales.

What did Japan just announce?

Government spokesman Yoshihide Suga said commercial whaling would be restricted to Japanese territorial waters and economic zones.

As a result, Japan will stop hunting in Antarctic waters and the southern hemisphere, a prospect conservation groups had welcomed before it was formally confirmed.

A statement by Japan's government said the IWC was not committed enough to one of its goals, of supporting sustainable commercial whaling.

It accused the IWC of being focused only on the aim of conserving numbers.

A number of coastal communities in Japan have hunted whales for centuries, but consumption in the country surged only after World War Two when whales were the main source of meat. It has plummeted in recent decades.

According to Japan's Asahi newspaper, whale meat makes up only 0.1% of all meat sold in Japan.

What's been the reaction?

n a joint statement, Australia's Foreign Minister Marise Payne and Environment Minister Melissa Price said they were "extremely disappointed" with Japan's decision.

"Australia remains resolutely opposed to all forms of commercial and so-called 'scientific' whaling," the statement added.

Before the formal announcement was made, Nicola Beynon, head of campaigns at Humane Society International in Australia, said Japan would be "operating completely outside the bounds of international law".

She added: "This is the path of a pirate whaling nation, with a troubling disregard for international rule."

Greenpeace Japan urged the government to reconsider, and warned it would risk criticism as the host of the G20 summit in June.

Sam Annesley, Greenpeace Japan's executive director, said: "It's clear that the government is trying to sneak in this announcement at the end of year, away from the spotlight of international media, but the world sees this for what it is.

"The declaration today is out of step with the international community, let alone the protection needed to safeguard the future of our oceans and these majestic creatures."

What is the current whaling ban?

In 1986, IWC members agreed to a moratorium on hunting to allow stocks to recover.

Pro-whaling nations expected the moratorium to be temporary, until consensus could be reached on sustainable catch quotas.

Instead, it became a quasi-permanent ban. Whaling nations, such as Japan, Norway and Iceland, however argue the practice is part of their culture and should continue in a sustainable way.

Today, whale stocks are carefully monitored, and while many species are still endangered, others - like the minke whale that Japan primarily hunts - are not.

In September, Tokyo tried to get the IWC to allow commercial catch quotas but the proposal was rejected.

Can Japan just leave?

It will still be bound by certain international laws, despite leaving the IWC.

The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea binds countries to co-operate on the conservation of whales "through the appropriate international organisations for their conservation, management and study". The text does not say which international organisation that is.

Japan could either try to set up another international body if it manages to get enough other countries to sign up - or join an existing one like the North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission (Nammco) instead.

Like a smaller version of the IWC, Nammco is a grouping of pro-whaling nations - Norway, Iceland, Greenland and the Faroe Islands - born out of frustration with the IWC.

Hasn't Japan been whaling all along?

Yes, Japan has been hunting whales for the past 30 years but under a scientific programme, granted as an exception under the IWC ban.

Critics say the practice is a cover for what actually amounts to commercial whaling.

It means that whales can be taken for scientific studies and the meat can later be sold for consumption.

Japan has caught between about 200 and 1,200 whales each year, saying it is investigating stock levels to see whether the whales are endangered or not.

Why can't the IWC agree?

Japan has repeatedly tried to overturn the moratorium and secure agreement on sustainable catch quotas.

The last attempt to do so came in September at an IWC summit in Brazil.

Japan offered a package of measures, including setting up a Sustainable Whaling Committee and sustainable catch limits "for abundant whale stocks/species".

The proposal was voted down. Since then there has been talk of the country simply leaving the body so it will no longer be bound by its rules.

Re: NEVER buy Japanese items because Japan KILLS WHALES

PostPosted: Thu Dec 27, 2018 10:58 am
Author: Piling
And Chinese men kill rhinoceros and tigers to have strong erection. What's wrong in Far East ? 8-|

Re: NEVER buy Japanese items because Japan KILLS WHALES

PostPosted: Thu Dec 27, 2018 2:23 pm
Author: Anthea
Obviously, Chinese men are Heartless as well as being Brainless and Dickless X(

We cannot block Chinese goods because so many household and other goods come from China

I have always wondered why Chinese goods are so cheap

Surely China cannot be a member of the EU :ymdevil:

Re: NEVER buy Japanese items because Japan KILLS WHALES

PostPosted: Thu Dec 27, 2018 3:01 pm
Author: Anthea
To those who think animals do not have feelings:

Click image to enlarge

Re: NEVER buy Japanese items because Japan KILLS WHALES

PostPosted: Sat Dec 29, 2018 3:57 am
Author: Anthea
Fireworks banned on the
Galapagos to protect wildlife

The authorities in the Galapagos islands have banned the sale and use of fireworks in the archipelago to protect its unique fauna

Fireworks that produce light but no sound have been excluded from the ban.

Conservationists say that animals suffered from elevated heart rates, trembling and anxiety after pyrotechnic events.

Thousands of people visit the islands every year, drawn by its biodiversity and pristine environment.

'Gift to the world'

The Galapagos are located about 1,000km (621 miles) off the coast of mainland Ecuador.

"This is a gift to conservation for Ecuador and the world," the president of the local council, Lorena Tapia, wrote on Twitter.

"Ecosystems as sensitive as that of the Galapagos Islands are affected [by fireworks], especially its fauna, which is unique," she added.

The authorities also said that fireworks caused many injuries every year, particularly among children.

The campaign against fireworks began in 2017. The measure, which takes immediate effect, bans transportation of fireworks to the islands as well as their sale or use.

There is increasing pressure on the Ecuadorean government to do more to protect its sensitive ecosystems.

Single-use plastics have also been banned on the islands, which have a population of 25,000 people.

The indigenous species found on the Galapagos islands, including iguanas and tortoises, played a key role in the development of Charles Darwin's Theory of Evolution.

Re: NEVER buy Japanese items because Japan KILLS WHALES

PostPosted: Fri Jan 11, 2019 2:36 am
Author: Anthea
Please watch this video and see how we are destroying the seas