Mosquitoes found in Iceland for first time

[Smooby]

8-10 inches is the average sea rise since 1900.

That's nothing and will not appear in a landscape view photograph. Plus, it's an average, the ocean rises unevenly across the globe.

I was talking about the cause of climate change, not its prospective effects.

That's like the same length as my magnetic pole

 

[Dirl]

The climate has been changing since the planet had an atmosphere: it will get warmer until it cools down again. It's a cycle and has to do with the Earth's rotation around the Sun.

The media spreads fear because it works for people who have a financial interest in changing our lifestyles—it's only through fear that humans change their ways.

However, even if we all stopped driving cars, closed all factories, stopped eating cows, etc., it wouldn't make any difference, because the planet would follow its natural course.

Sea level rise is minimal; it could only become problematic in a few thousand years.
No worries.

 

[K.I.T.T.]

The climate has been changing since the planet had an atmosphere: it will get warmer until it cools down again. It's a cycle and has to do with the Earth's rotation around the Sun.

The media spreads fear because it works for people who have a financial interest in changing our lifestyles—it's only through fear that humans change their ways.

However, even if we all stopped driving cars, closed all factories, stopped eating cows, etc., it wouldn't make any difference, because the planet would follow its natural course.

Sea level rise is minimal; it could only become problematic in a few thousand years.
No worries.

AMEN

People are oblivious to this shit. They think us burning fossil fuels are like OMG! 😱 like the worst thing this planet has seen. They conveniently overlook the thousands of meteor strikes, volcanic eruptions, solar flares and absolute total freezes that have occurred. This planet is gonna shake us off like it's nothing one day and there won't be a single shred of evidence we were ever here.

You see what I see, Dirl?

 

[Fäthër Cörpsë]

I can dismantle that position but I don't think you are interested. End of story it is, then.

I am interested in what you will present to dismantle the position he described. That studies are being faked to push a political agenda.

 

[Deleted member 42069lol]

I am interested in what you will present to dismantle the position he described. That studies are being faked to push a political agenda.

It's an unfalsifiable position, that's the problem, you can't work with it. I can say the same about his statement "you're lying, it's fake", as we've both learned from sources. I could claim his sources are fake as well.

The second issue has to do with the principle of parsimony: what's more likely, some international order perfectly feigning 100 years+ of data and evidence from thousands of independent sources OR that it's authentic and real? His position adds a massive extra layer of complexity.

The climate change theory has a very large volume of empirical evidence (cross checked hundreds by multiple independent sources). It fits within the broader scientific framework and models we have of this world. To deny it is an extraordinary claim, which requires extraordinary refutation, evidence and rational backing.

 

[K.I.T.T.]

It's an unfalsifiable position, that's the problem, you can't work with it. I can say the same about his statement "you're lying, it's fake", as we've both learned from sources. I could claim his sources are fake as well.

The second issue has to do with the principle or parsimony: what's more likely, some international order perfectly feigning 100 years+ of data and evidence from thousands of independent sources OR that it's authentic and real? His position adds a massive extra layer of complexity.

The climate change theory has a very large volume of empirical evidence (cross checked hundreds by multiple independent sources). It fits within the broader scientific framework and models we have of this world. To deny it is an extraordinary claim, which requires extraordinary refutation, evidence and rational backing.

You're foolish enough to believe there actually exists "data and evidence from thousands of independent sources". It is actually much more likely that a unified global entity in desire of complete control alters, manipulates, falsifies and fabricates "evidence". There's no way available to the individual to examine or scrutinize any of the "evidence". Go ahead and try. Gather one hundred of these experts in a room yourself and ask them to provide you the evidence first hand. It won't happen.

 

[Deleted member 42069lol]

You're foolish enough to believe there actually exists "data and evidence from thousands of independent sources". It is actually much more likely that a unified global entity in desire of complete control alters, manipulates, falsifies and fabricates "evidence". There's no way available to the individual to examine or scrutinize any of the "evidence". Go ahead and try. Gather one hundred of these experts in a room yourself and ask them to provide you the evidence first hand. It won't happen.

That's a grave misunderstanding of Occam's razor + it's self defeating. If you claim there's no way to trust them or verify it yourself, you can't really trust anything from any source then. How do you know which source to trust? (It's a common fallacy among conspiracy theorists, it's called epistemic nihilism)

And I'm not debating you.

 

[K.I.T.T.]

That's a grave misunderstanding of Occam's razor + it's self defeating. If you claim there's no way to trust them or verify it yourself, you can't really trust anything from any source then. How do you know which source to trust? (It's a common fallacy among conspiracy theorists, it's called epistemic nihilism)

And I'm not debating you.

Occam's razor is nothing more than a clever yet deceptive and subtle philosophical idea used to strengthen the arguments of those that wish to convince others they're wrong. It means nothing. Occam's razor is itself a fallacy.

 

[Deleted member 42069lol]

Occam's razor is nothing more than a clever yet deceptive and subtle philosophical idea used to strengthen the arguments of those that wish to convince others they're wrong. It means nothing. Occam's razor is itself a fallacy.

ALL of science depends on it. Do you understand the implications of your statement? You've just claimed science is false and arbitrary. That brings you back to that nihilism.

 

[Teeshine]

I don't believe in that shit. Why? Because the studies are being faked to push a political agenda. End of story.

Tell me why it's not human-caused. (And I'm no woke climate change activist)

Nothing meant directly, Grim. We all agree to sometimes disagree 🍻

 

[K.I.T.T.]

ALL of science depends on it. Do you understand the implications of your statement? You've just claimed science is false and arbitrary. That brings you back to that nihilism.

Science? There is no science. We are all living in a computer simulation being conducted by aliens.

 

[Deleted member 42069lol]

Science? There is no science. We are all living in a computer simulation being conducted by aliens.

Even if we are, it doesn't affect science, it's just as useful.

The simulated universe still has the same patterns, laws and mathematics which science works on. In fact, a simulated universe will be perfectly mathematical, and that'd only make science more useful.

And that idea can't be verified, it's fundamentally the same as saying there's a God (both unverifiable, beyond empiricism and therefore don't affect what science says or how it operates).

 

[K.I.T.T.]

Even if we are, it doesn't affect science, it's just as useful.

The simulated universe still has the same patterns, laws and mathematics which science works on. In fact, a simulated universe will be perfectly mathematical, and that'd only make science more useful.

And that idea can't be verified, it's fundamentally the same as saying there's a God (both unverifiable, beyond empiricism and therefore don't affect what science says or how it operates).

For all we know, our mathematics and physics are completely wrong.

 

[mrln]

That's a grave misunderstanding of Occam's razor + it's self defeating. If you claim there's no way to trust them or verify it yourself, you can't really trust anything from any source then. How do you know which source to trust? (It's a common fallacy among conspiracy theorists, it's called epistemic nihilism)

And I'm not debating you.

what about the time lapsed photo graphs of certain landscapes, that have changed over the past 20+yrs then. like the one with the snow covered mountain. less and less snow over the yrs. i believe the pics have started in the 60's.

 

[K.I.T.T.]

The problem with the sciences is the hierarchy of superiority. What does that mean?

Well, the average ordinary citizen receives their information from some form of media. The people communicating to us within the media are simply parroting the information passed down to them, often with a minor exaggeration or embellishment.

If you climb the ladder of information until you get to the top, who do you find there? A single credentialed individual? Rarely. Usually it's a group or consortium, like the CDC or the EPA. Organizations, in other words.

Now, who pays the salaries of the people in these organizations? You'd think it would be the taxpayers, but you'd be wrong. The money comes from other more powerful organizations (usually corporations) who benefit from the opinions, conclusions or research of the organizations below them.

Ultimately, money is the global gatekeeper and there are so many levels of financial influence involved that most of what we hear or see in the media is far from the truth.

Prior to Covid, there existed financial instability in the textile commodity markets. One of those commodities was paper products. Toilet paper.

How does a corporation influence the market to a degree that will affect the demand for paper which results in an increase for supply?

Make people believe there's a shortage. Spread an illness and demand a quarantine. Problem solved.

Global warming is a completely normal event due to natural climate change. The human impact is miniscule in comparison to the planet's own repeating cycle of freezing and thawing. Is there a way to make a profit by convincing the average ordinary citizen that it's thier fault and that they should reduce their carbon footprint?

Absolutely. How can the good people do their part? How about electric cars? (Which are actually worse on the environment due to the materials needed for the batteries but that's an entirely different topic.)

Here's an idea: Let's reduce the size of the packaging of your ranch dressing and liquid detergent and claim a tax credit while simultaneously charging more for the lesser amount of product in the container. Double profits.

The global system of which we are all a part is extraordinarily complex, and for good reason. Keep the populace in a state of insecurity, anxiety and fear and they'll comply with their wallets.

The real science is one of mathematics and it's much more concerned with profits instead of human longevity.

 

[Qtek2020]

Mosquitoes have been found in Iceland for the first time as global heating makes the country more hospitable for insects. The country was until this month one of the few places in the world that did not have a mosquito population. The other is Antarctica.

Scientists have predicted for some time that mosquitoes could establish themselves in Iceland as there are plentiful breeding habitats such as marshes and ponds. Many species will be unable to survive the harsh climate, however.

Studies have shown that the Arctic region is warming at four times the rate of the rest of the planet, and Iceland has experienced record heat this year. Glaciers have been collapsing and fish from warmer, southern climes such as mackerel have been found in the country’s waters.

Matthías Alfreðsson, an entomologist at the Natural Science Institute of Iceland, confirmed the findings there. He identified the insects himself after they were sent to him by a citizen scientist.

He said: “Three specimens of Culiseta annulata were found in Kiðafell, Kjós, two females and one male. They were all collected from wine ropes during wine roping aimed at attracting moths.”
The species is cold-resistant and can survive Icelandic conditions by sheltering through winter in basements and barns.

As the planet warms, more species of mosquito have been found across the globe. In the UK, eggs of the Egyptian mosquito (Aedes aegypti) were found this year, and the Asian tiger mosquito (Aedes albopictus) has been discovered in Kent.

Mosquitoes found in Iceland for first time as climate crisis warms country

Three specimens discovered in what was previously one of the few places in the world without the insects

www.theguardian.com

Mother fuckers

 

[Deleted member 42069lol]

what about the time lapsed photo graphs of certain landscapes, that have changed over the past 20+yrs then. like the one with the snow covered mountain. less and less snow over the yrs. i believe the pics have started in the 60's.

Yes, glacier and ice sheets retreat is a stark sign of global warming, with landscape and satellite image timelines. It's much more conspicuous than rising sea levels (Glaciers are incredibly tiny compared to the massive global ocean, so effects on the former are much more pronounced).

 

[Deleted member 42069lol]

The problem with the sciences is the hierarchy of superiority. What does that mean?

Well, the average ordinary citizen receives their information from some form of media. The people communicating to us within the media are simply parroting the information passed down to them, often with a minor exaggeration or embellishment.

If you climb the ladder of information until you get to the top, who do you find there? A single credentialed individual? Rarely. Usually it's a group or consortium, like the CDC or the EPA. Organizations, in other words.

Strawman. That's not a problem, that's the only way science can work because not everyone is a climate scientist or astrophysicist. And you won't find a single scientist writing off laws and principles and findings, that's naive thinking. Most scientific work today needs teams. You don't know how science works.

Global warming is a completely normal event due to natural climate change. The human impact is miniscule in comparison to the planet's own repeating cycle of freezing and thawing. Is there a way to make a profit by convincing the average ordinary citizen that it's thier fault and that they should reduce their carbon footprint?

That's the main contradiction in your pseudo-intellectual ramblings. How do you know that it's a miniscule problem? What source did you trust?

The rest of your "essay" ties science to profits and government influence. That's partly true, science can be suppressed, shaped or forced by certain people in power. But with climate change, it cuts both ways. You only portray half the picture and that too in exaggeration. Yes, climate-change science can push profits in certain markets like electric cars or textiles. But your statements lack nuance. Most of the electric car sales happen not because people care for the planet but because they don't want to pay for gas or mostly because they "want" an electric car.

Now, the other half of the picture (the bigger part actually), where findings of climate change actually threatened the oil industry and their profits. When scientists began to declare "climate change/global warming is caused by burning fossil fuels", they were often threatened and their findings were vilified. There's this fascinating story of this scientist, Claire Patterson ("the man who saved the world from lead"). He showed that leaded gasoline was polluting the entire planet with lead, it even showed up in the ice sheet layers of Antarctica! (He himself went there and analysed the layers!). He was threatened by the oil industry monarchs repeatedly but he kept publishing and researching. He fought a legal battle against leaded gasoline for 20 years and won. He literally saved the planet from lead.

 

[Deleted member 42069lol]

More details about Clair Patterson (I admire his work and dedication so much):

When he started speaking out in the 1950s–60s, industry fought back hard, especially the Ethyl Corporation (a General Motors and Standard Oil partnership that produced tetraethyl lead). They tried to discredit his research and block his funding.

For over 20 years, Patterson worked to prove that lead was poisoning people and ecosystems. He published meticulous studies showing:

• Lead was everywhere—in the atmosphere, oceans, and human bones.
• The rise of environmental lead matched the use of leaded gasoline.

His persistence paid off:

• In 1970, the Clean Air Act began limiting lead emissions.
• By 1986, the U.S. banned leaded gasoline for most uses.
• Lead levels in human blood dropped dramatically in the following decades.

———

“The problem is not one of ignorance, but of vested interests.”

— Clair Patterson
(Said in reference to why leaded gasoline persisted for decades despite evidence of harm)

 

[Paytonus]

Every prediction is in 50 or 100 years so the believers won't be around and the past predictions from multiple sources from multiple countries have been wrong, I don't believe we have a crisis and I don't really want to use the word climate change, that's their word, in the 70's it was climate cooling threats, then up to 10-15 years ago it was global warming, they even use climate emergency, it's basically advertising to the idiots.

Also whatever the UN has it hands in I will never believe, they have to be the worst organisation the world has ever had to suffer, it's where old political leaders who have been voted out by their populace because they are useless go and retire to more taxpayer funded life, and to justify their existence and funding they have to have emergencies and tell democratically elected leaders what they need to do!! it's the biggest fucking rort ever, most leaders should be telling the UN the EU piss off I represent the people but that takes a leader and not many "leaders" are doing it.