• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

More alarmism 'Ecological grief':Greenland residents traumatised by climate emergency (1 Viewer)

litebeam

Well-known member
"The climate crisis is causing unprecedented levels of stress and anxiety to people in Greenland who are struggling to reconcile the traumatic impact of global heating with their traditional way of life."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/t...s-traumatised-by-climate-emergency/ar-AAFGY47


I read this piece and couldn't help but think of the "unprecendented stress and anxiety" of the Vikings who sought an agricultural life in Greenland in 900 A.D., only to be essentially 'frozen out' in only a few hundred years.

Maybe someone should inform today's Greenlanders of this dilemma. The cold will return. Although none of us may be here for it's arrival.

"We should remember, that the Earth’s coldest periods have usually followed excessive warmth. Such was the case when our planet moved from the Medieval Warm Period between 900 and 1300 A.D. to the sudden “Little Ice Age,” which peaked in the 17th Century. Since 2,500 B.C., there have been at least 78 major climate changes worldwide, including two major changes in just the past 40 years."

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/1000-years-ago-vikings-were-farming-greenland-david-moore

I'm sure the authors/contributors of this last piece (Wheeler, Harris et al.) will be roundly attacked by 'experts' here soon.
 
Last edited:
. . .Maybe someone should inform today's Greenlanders of this dilemma*. The cold will return. Although none of us may be here for it's arrival.

That, I’m sure, will be of great comfort to them. . ..
—————————————————————————————-
*this dilemma”. Makes no sense here. How about “these facts”, instead?

I'm sure the authors/contributors of this last piece (Wheeler, Harris et al.) will be roundly attacked by 'experts' here.

Ending with your customary whine, I see. What a shame, you were doing so well up to now. . ..
 
*Power yawn*
Predictable dodge of the issue. Is it your opinion then that current-day Greenlanders are the first to experience such dramatic climate change? Or is it possible that such 'anomalies could indeed be cyclic?

I'll won't wait for your answer, I know better that to expect a cogent discourse from you.
 
*Power yawn*
Predictable dodge of the issue. Is it your opinion then that current-day Greenlanders are the first to experience such dramatic climate change? Or is it possible that such 'anomalies could indeed be cyclic?

"Events" rather than "anomalies" would be the better word choice here. If something is "cyclic", it can hardly also be "anomalous".

I'll won't wait for your answer, I know better that to expect a cogent discourse from you.

Hooray! If nobody else joins in that would be the end of the thread then. . ..

"Cogent"' is ok but "reply" would be much better than "discourse".
 
Last edited:
"Events" rather than "anomalies" would be the better word choice here. If something is "cyclic", it can hardly also be "anomalous".



Hooray! If nobody else joins in that would be the end of the thread then. . ..

"Cogent"' is ok but "reply" would be much better than "discourse".

Endless word game nonsense.
 

It's a marketing scheme! ;)

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/news/2016/06/iceland-greenland-name-swap/

The transition from Icelandic monochrome winter to super-green summer is pretty incredible. You can literally see the country change colour from south to north on a day-by-day basis.

Nons(ci)ense in the OP aside, it does raise an interesting point that I'm curious to hear you opinion on Chosun - for a culture that is more strongly rooted in nature than our Western one I presume there is a stronger attachment to the ecological status quo, or in other words a narrower tolerance (expressed culturally/emotionally). Would you agree with that? And if so, how does 'positive' change impact? One could argue that a warmer climate in Greenland is a good thing (Russian scientists allegedly considered global warming a positive thing back in the day) - but the impact on the Inuit's traditional lifestyle is significant. And as the article points out not necessarily experienced as a positive thing.
I know very little about this but am curious to hear your thoughts.
Thanks,
Joost
 
Since I never hung around those corners of the forum before, I am genuinely interested: are you a genuine birder who happens to be a climate denier (which I can see happening despite it being somewhat unlikely considering that birding is likely to expose a person to science eventually), or are you a denier first who actively looks up communities to push their views in?
 
Since I never hung around those corners of the forum before, I am genuinely interested: are you a genuine birder who happens to be a climate denier (which I can see happening despite it being somewhat unlikely considering that birding is likely to expose a person to science eventually), or are you a denier first who actively looks up communities to push their views in?

There is a fairly large contingent of hunters/optics geeks predominantly of a right leaning persuasion which also use this forum. Luckily, there is also a large proportion of rational and scientifically literate birders/conservationists (despite being a conservation professional, I wouldn't include myself within this category, as much of it is beyond me!) to allow debate - the right love to think that their free speech is being shut down, when often it is the presentation of factual information to countenance their points which is the source of their frustration.

In reply to the OP, there are plenty of examples of how anthropogenic activities are impacting the natural world and climate. For example, check out the IPCC 2014 report highlighting how climate change is already affecting developing countries.

Sadly with the increase in populism, many countries which hold a high proportion of important ecological systems are at risk e.g. Bolsonaro destroying the Amazon, Trump downgrading protection status of endangered species, Duterte overseeing the highest murder rate for environmental activists globally etc... and of course we have more than our fair share of environmental issues in the UK!
 
Last edited:
Ah yes, more stonewalling, name-calling, adhom BS.
Trump, Duterte, right leaning hunter-geeks, and 'marketing schemes' aside...not a single reply to my posting regarding Greenland and the cyclic nature of climate change there.

Not one person willing to a address that this 'unprecedented' event has happened in the past and long before the possibility of AGW existed.
Pawns.
 
“Oh Greenland is a dreadful place
A land that's never green
Where the cold winds blow and the whale fish go
And the daylight's seldom seen brave boys
And the daylight's seldom seen.”
 
Not one person willing to a address that this 'unprecedented' event has happened in the past and long before the possibility of AGW existed.
Pawns.

You appreciate the guy you linked to literally is in oil & gas right? Pawn & kettle...

But anyway, you want science? I posted this last month but in the other thread but you ignored it. Please read the actual papers. I'm happy to provide geological context or explain the bits you don't understand.

Further coverage on the BBC today: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-49086783

Note that the three papers are free to read (but not download) on the NPG website:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1401-2.epdf
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41561-019-0400-0.epdf
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41561-019-0402-y.epdf
 
You appreciate the guy you linked to literally is in oil & gas right? Pawn & kettle...

But anyway, you want science? I posted this last month but in the other thread but you ignored it. Please read the actual papers. I'm happy to provide geological context or explain the bits you don't understand.

Further coverage on the BBC today: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-49086783

Note that the three papers are free to read (but not download) on the NPG website:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1401-2.epdf
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41561-019-0400-0.epdf
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41561-019-0402-y.epdf

Good work, Joost. Except (perhaps) for a perfunctory “don't-have-time-at-the-moment-but will-read-them-when I do”, a 3-gun salvo like that should scare off our rancher friend for a good long time.
 
Last edited:
Pawns? Pawns of what, Big Science?

Oh my this is hilarious, I'll save this quote for later.
The thread and position is nonsense of course, but such is the case with any climate change denial.

And the idea that climate change is cyclical is valid, but dig into the science regarding rates of change, etc. It's really not hard to find good science about it.
 
Last edited:
Ah yes, more stonewalling, name-calling, adhom BS.
Trump, Duterte, right leaning hunter-geeks, and 'marketing schemes' aside...not a single reply to my posting regarding Greenland and the cyclic nature of climate change there.

Not one person willing to a address that this 'unprecedented' event has happened in the past and long before the possibility of AGW existed.
Pawns.

So let me put this straight: you start a thread with a post which is in itself formulated in a know-it-all, condescending fashion and then feel somehow offended when people don't respond with kindness and willingness to engage in fair discussion? Are you genuinely that impervious to irony, or is this just your communication strategy?

You know, it's getting old. And it's not only the climate change question, it's a huge assortment of topics. People like you come with specific cherry-picked arguments, obscure sources, rush conclusions and derogatory wording (here, you really did not hold yourself using "alarmism" already on the topic) and if people are not willing to engage with all that, they declare victory, what really is the point of this at all? You aren't gonna convince anyone sane about anything with this kind of posting and you make it clear that you aren't even looking for your views to be challenged, so really, why?

As to the overall topic where the thread is going, I personally can't give a rat's ass about the fate of humanity as a whole and I do not care what happens on geological timescales. I am not even that moved by extinction of species - I do sometimes even drive emotionally loaded "conservationists" crazy with that heresy, but I am pretty sure that a particular animal is fully oblivious to the fate of its species as a whole. I do, however, care for people - and to a slightly lesser extent for animals - as in the collection of individuals and specimen that happens to be alive in this unfortunate time and we are clearly and undoubtedly ******* up things for them, on timescales of decades, so why not try to do something about it?
 
Warning! This thread is more than 5 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top