NASA Study Indicates Antarctica is Gaining More Ice Than It's Losing - (7 Viewers)

[Isaac]

I just hope Arizona doesn't get too much global warming - we're right on the edge, another 10 degrees and we'd have to de-construct the civilizations herein and move elsewhere.

 

[AccessBlaster]

Seems stable here

 

[Uncle Gizmo]

temperatures being evidence for global warming, but when it is freezing, they fall silent.

As I have said many times I'm not convinced it's the CO2 causing the problem.

I recently watched a television documentary about interesting sites around the world. There's a place in Spain, Carchuna (View the following Google Map link in satellite View)

Carchuna · 18730, Granada, Spain

18730, Granada, Spain

maps.app.goo.gl

which is covered in plastic greenhouses making the whole area look like it's covered in snow, as seen from the space station!

Since the introduction of this intensive type of farming the areas average temperature has dropped 1 degrees centigrade!

Again, evidence for me at least that there is something naive about pointing at CO2 as the culprit, without considering other things.

 

[Steve R.]

As I have said many times I'm not convinced it's the CO2 causing the problem.
...
Again, evidence for me at least that there is something naive about pointing at CO2 as the culprit, without considering other things.

CO2 is the easy to understand and bogyman for the clueless. Real solutions, such as John Kerry giving-up his private jet, are never proposed.

 

[AccessBlaster]

 

[Uncle Gizmo]

There's an even bigger area Here:-

Google Maps

Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.

www.google.com

 

[Uncle Gizmo]

Here's a "Street View"

Google Maps

Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.

www.google.com

 

[Pat Hartman]

Reminds me of the tobacco fields in the Connecticut River Valley back in the 60's when everyone was still smoking. The shade grown tobacco was used for cigar wrappers I think.

Those pictures are really interesting. Do you know why they covered the fields? It seems like it may minimize evaporation. It looks like a very dry area. All the white reflects sunlight. It is the opposite of big cities where the blacktop absorbs heat and makes cities hotter.

 

[Uncle Gizmo]

Here is a very nice article about it.

A Greenhouse Effect has cooled the climate of Almeria

Greenhouses constructed since the 1980s in Almeria, southern Spain, have had an unexpected cooling effect on the local climate

geographyfieldwork.com

The last paragraph is very interesting!

I'm sure the usual band of critics will round on it and point out this that and the other is wrong with it, and indeed they may well be right. I just say keep an open mind, there's a lot we don't know!

 

[Isaac]

Thanks, very interesting article.

 

[Uncle Gizmo]

Here is another interesting article about the the rise of this form of agriculture. Some of the problems they have faced and overcome...

Greenhouse Horticulture in Spain: Well On Its’ Way To Sustainability - Seed World

Spanish greenhouse horticulture is becoming more sustainable with new technologies and practices. Learn how Spain is leading the way in sustainable agriculture.

european-seed.com

 

[AccessBlaster]

Who pays for the UN?​

 

[Galaxiom]

Who pays for the UN?​

View attachment 89430

A quick search shows US GDP is $20.5 Trillion which is 5.25 times the size of Germany's at $3.9 Trillion. Yet the US only pays about three times Germany's contribution to the UN.

Looks like the US needs to start pulling its weight.

 

[AccessBlaster]

A quick search shows US GDP is $20.5 Trillion which is 5.25 times the size of Germany's at $3.9 Trillion. Yet the US only pays about three times Germany's contribution to the UN.

Looks like the US needs to start pulling its weight.

A quick search of China GDP is 14.34 trillion so why the large offset?

 

[Galaxiom]

A quick search of China GDP is 14.34 trillion so why the large offset?

The USA has about 30 percent of the world's wealth. China has only recently grown at rates that brought it up the ladder. It will surpass the US before much longer.

China's time to contribute more will come. It will be accompanied by far more power and influence.

 

[Uncle Gizmo]

It will surpass the US before much longer.

Historically, When the top power loses its position there is a war!

 

[Jon]

A quick search of China GDP is 14.34 trillion so why the large offset?

I think it might be to do with GDP per capita. You can have two countries both with a high GDP, but one is comparatively poor and the other rich, as is the case with China vs America.

 

[Isaac]

A quick search shows US GDP is $20.5 Trillion which is 5.25 times the size of Germany's at $3.9 Trillion. Yet the US only pays about three times Germany's contribution to the UN.

Looks like the US needs to start pulling its weight.

I wouldn't care about GDP, I'd care about how much benefit is being received per country. Which of course, is going to be totally subjective, but you can figure that one out..

 

[AccessBlaster]

I think it might be to do with GDP per capita. You can have two countries both with a high GDP, but one is comparatively poor and the other rich, as is the case with China vs America.

China ranks 73 in the world per capita, they will never share their wealth with their 1,439,323,776 citizens. The burden to fund the UN will always be on western societies, no matter how wealthy China gets.

 

[Isaac]

I think it might be to do with GDP per capita. You can have two countries both with a high GDP, but one is comparatively poor and the other rich, as is the case with China vs America.

Does that actually make sense though, as to who contributes more to the United Nations? Does it make more sense to use how much money they have in total, or is it very important how much money they have per person?

Regardless of either, or the answer, I'd say it matters a lot how much a nation is benefitting from the UN.

Really, though, this is a non-issue. What people are probably thinking about (but not saying), has to do with Trump's focus on other countries paying "their fair share". And this was primarily focused on NATO, not the United Nations, so we're arguing about nothing here. and NATO was based on GDP, only many countries hadn't met their commitments ... Germany was one of the biggest violators, and still is.