U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-14-2019, 06:04 AM
 
Location: Unperson Everyman Land
30,795 posts, read 20,310,669 times
Reputation: 8543

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur View Post
The answer is at your finger tips...google...

Ice cores from both Antarctica and Greenland show that the last ice age started to become milder 19.000 years ago, completely in accordance with increased solar radiation from the earth’s favourable orientation in its orbit around the sun.

It takes circa 10.000 years for an ice age to gradually come to an end

https://www.nbi.ku.dk/english/scienc...rgsmaal_svar1/
Yes, you are correct!

It was not increased CO2 that caused that ice to melt.

Relative to our experience, this melting, warming if you like, was a dramatic climatic change that occurred over an extended period of time.

Other, less dramatic, changes to the climate have occurred many times within these full-length glaciation cycles.

Within the modern record we have witnessed the Medieval Warm Period.

This was followed immediately by the Little Ice age.

So, the question becomes, what is the correct temperature?

That is, assuming one exists.

If as claimed, the surface temperature has increased by a degree or two over the last 140 years, how can we know for sure whether the increase (assuming it really increased) is unnatural and the result of increased CO2 or normal temperature variations that take place over decades and centuries.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-14-2019, 07:27 AM
 
67,197 posts, read 30,791,615 times
Reputation: 8819
Quote:
Originally Posted by RememberMee View Post
Any new insane denial tricks institute for the conservative studies shared with faithfuls? If you crap in the room you live, you'll affect livability of your room.
Someone needs to tell San Francisco, Los Angeles, Portland, Seattle, and other poop-filled west coast towns about your theory.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2019, 07:35 AM
 
67,197 posts, read 30,791,615 times
Reputation: 8819
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeaMaj7 View Post
Why are leftists so irrationally emotional when it comes to society?

This AGW war on CO2 is parallel to China's war on SPARROWS!

A great leap into STUPIDITY!
They're irrationally emotional when it comes to anything. They're emoters, not rational thinkers. It's a puerile cognitive state, much like a two-year-old throwing a temper tantrum when he doesn't get his way.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2019, 10:18 AM
 
Location: Myrtle Creek, Oregon
12,550 posts, read 12,727,290 times
Reputation: 20048
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey View Post
my point!

Lots of things cause the temperate to change.

Co2 doesn't appear to be a significant player.

Where i am seated, here in se michigan, glaciers extended straight up more than a mile.

That's a lot of ****ing ice!

It was also less than 18,000 years ago - a blink of an eye in geological time.

so, what caused that ice to melt?
co2.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2019, 10:29 AM
 
Location: Myrtle Creek, Oregon
12,550 posts, read 12,727,290 times
Reputation: 20048
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toyman at Jewel Lake View Post
What percentage of total yearly CO2 emissions is from human activity, vs natural occurrences?
A better question is, "What percentage of atmospheric CO2 is from human activity?"

The answer is about 50%.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2019, 10:53 AM
 
2,676 posts, read 904,530 times
Reputation: 1873
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redraven View Post
The part that I find amusing is that all the predictions made by the doomsayers since oh, about 1970, most, if not all, of them Have. Not. Come. TRUE!
And yet, we are supposed to believe them when they say that we have 12 years to "do something" (no definitive ideas about what needs done, though) or we will all begin to DIE!!
For the Umpteenth time, NOBODY SAID THAT!

The IPCC set a goal, that we would not exceed 2 degrees of warming before the end of the century. They have said that if we don't take action in the next 12 years, we will never be able to reach that goal. Nobody said the world is going to end in 12 years. Nobody said that in 12 years we're all going to begin to die. Nobody said anything dire is going to happen in 12 years. Just that in 80 years we won't be able to meet this somewhat arbitrary goal.

Reading comprehension - IT'S NOT THAT DIFFICULT, people!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2019, 10:56 AM
 
Location: Milwaukee
4,686 posts, read 2,202,575 times
Reputation: 2904
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roboteer View Post
After nearly 50 years of caterwauling and insisting man's activities cause climate change, still NO PROOF?


All I can find are statements like, "man puts out carbon and greenhouse gases, those things can change climate, therefore man is changing the climate."

Sort of like saying, "Jim left his lawn sprinklers running five minutes longer than he should have, water can flood cities, therefore Jim is flooding cities."

And papers that relate statements like the above, using many erudite pages, but which ultimately refer to another paper for proof. And sure enough, that other paper carries on for more pages, but refers to yet another. And that one points to yet another etc.

Are there any actual studies that methodically prove that man is generating enough to overwhelm the earth's natural tendencies to absorb them? And do more to change the climate than the sun (a nuclear bomb a million times the size of the entire planet), all the volcanoes on Earth, and everything else that has been varying the Earth's climate long before man learned how to use tools?

Not just guesses, not just "everybody knows that...", not just references, not just "but it must be true that...".

Where is any proof that man's activities have any effect on climate? And/or can do anything to change it back?

When the manmade-climate-change can spend 50 years insisting that government must take huge taxes from us, and spend it on trying to change the climate... but are unable to come up with any proof it can actually change it...

Isn't that a pretty good indication that there can be no proof, because man's activities actually have nothing to do with the climate change we're seeing?

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2019, 11:00 AM
 
2,676 posts, read 904,530 times
Reputation: 1873
Quote:
Originally Posted by mascoma View Post
The problem is that reducing CO2 significantly would destroy our economy. Millions of people could die from starvation. We are dependent of fossil fuels and will be for the foreseeable future.
Perhaps. That is a completely different question.

If we can quit arguing about whether global warming is real, we can then move on to the question of what to do about it. It might be that the benefits of reducing CO2 are not worth the economic costs. But we can't have that conversation when idiots are arguing that they know more about climate than the world's most highly educated and trained scientists.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2019, 11:13 AM
 
2,676 posts, read 904,530 times
Reputation: 1873
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009 View Post
What a crock.


The EPA still regulates air and water quality- too aggressively.


"Scientists" who support AGW are showered with grants, while those who oppose AGW and support rational science are vilified. It is an academic witch hunt.

.
What's a crock is this notion that scientists are getting rich off global warming. As you ought to know, scientists don't make a lot of money, especially those in government or academia. Scientists in industry can make a decent living.

I assure you, if any scientist could prove AGW wrong, he would be showered with funding and well-compensated by the fossil fuel industry.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-15-2019, 06:10 AM
 
Location: Unperson Everyman Land
30,795 posts, read 20,310,669 times
Reputation: 8543
Quote:
Originally Posted by TwoByFour View Post
Human caused warming is different than natural warming because of the time scales involved. Inter-glacial periods in the ice ages had warming periods that occurred over thousands of years. We are warming at a rate about 10x faster. Evolution cannot work fast enough to let species evolve on those time scales. And for humans it will likely be very disruptive also. People get desperate when their food and water disappears which will lead to massive migration and conflict. If all we had to worry about were the natural climate trends it would be far easier. Read Jerrod Diamond's work on the collapse of civilizations due to ecological problems caused by the people. It has happened several times, just on a smaller scale.
Gee-wiz Skippy...what makes you think the Earth is getting warmer?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top