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.
Rhode Islanders — who, according to a 2013 Stanford University study, are the most inclined in the nation (at 92 percent) to believe global warming is caused by humans — deserve better than science-denying horse**** presented as a legitimate point of view?
Rhode Islanders — who, according to a 2013 Stanford University study, are the most inclined in the nation (at 92 percent) to believe global warming is caused by humans — deserve better than science-denying horse**** presented as a legitimate point of view?
Global warming is not a liberal issue. Did you hear that last November was the warmest on record? If so, do you believe it's a lie concocted by liberals?
Do you understand Calculus? Ever study electrical or mechanical engineering? There is something called a "dampening effect" which while being mathematical it corelates directly to global warming. The dampening effect is causing greater oscillation in weather trends, and overall does relate to increasing warming temperature.
One of the most common misunderstandings amongst climate “skeptics” is the difference between short-term noise and long-term signal. In fact, “it hasn’t warmed since 1998” is ninth on the list of most-used climate myths, and “it’s cooling” is fifth. This myth stems from a lack of understanding of exactly what global warming is. The term refers to the long-term warming of the global climate, usually measured over a timescale of about 30 years, as defined by the World Meteorological Organization. This is because global warming is caused by a global energy imbalance – something causing the Earth to retain more heat, such as an increase in solar radiation reaching the surface, or an increased greenhouse effect.
There are also a number of effects which can have a large impact on short-term temperatures, such as oceanic cycles like the El Niño Southern Oscillation or the 11-year solar cycle. Sometimes these dampen global warming, and sometimes they amplify it. However, they’re called “oscillations” and “cycles” for a reason – they alternate between positive and negative states and don’t have long-term effects on the Earth’s temperature.
Right now we’re in the midst of a period where most short-term effects are acting in the cooling direction, dampening global warming. Many climate “skeptics” are trying to capitalize on this dampening, trying to argue that this time global warming has stopped, even though it didn’t stop after the global warming “pauses” in 1973 to 1980, 1980 to 1988, 1988 to 1995, 1995 to 2001, or 1998 to 2005.
Over the last 37 years one can identify overlapping short windows of time when climate “skeptics” could have argued (and often did, i.e. here and here and here) that global warming had stopped. And yet over the entire period question containing these six cooling trends, the underlying trend is one of rapid global warming (0.27°C per decade, according to the new Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature [BEST] dataset). And while the global warming trend spans many decades, the longest cooling trend over this period is 10 years, which proves that each was caused by short-term noise dampening the long-term trend.
In short, those arguing that global warming has stopped are missing the forest for the trees, focusing on short-term noise while ignoring the long-term global warming signal. Since the release of the BEST data which confirmed the global warming observed by all other global temperature measurements, climate “skeptics” have been scrambling for a way to continue denying that global warming is a problem, and focusing on the short-term noise has become their preferred go-to excuse.
If it makes you feel any better, it seems the BRIC nations for the most part seem to be ignoring global warming, and interestingly, they are the ones that will be experiencing the most disaster as sea levels rise. Anyone interested should see the September 2013 issue of National Geographic.
Global warming is not a liberal issue. Did you hear that last November was the warmest on record? If so, do you believe it's a lie concocted by liberals?
Do you understand Calculus? Ever study electrical or mechanical engineering? There is something called a "dampening effect" which while being mathematical it corelates directly to global warming. The dampening effect is causing greater oscillation in weather trends, and overall does relate to increasing warming temperature.
One of the most common misunderstandings amongst climate “skeptics” is the difference between short-term noise and long-term signal. In fact, “it hasn’t warmed since 1998” is ninth on the list of most-used climate myths, and “it’s cooling” is fifth. This myth stems from a lack of understanding of exactly what global warming is. The term refers to the long-term warming of the global climate, usually measured over a timescale of about 30 years, as defined by the World Meteorological Organization. This is because global warming is caused by a global energy imbalance – something causing the Earth to retain more heat, such as an increase in solar radiation reaching the surface, or an increased greenhouse effect.
There are also a number of effects which can have a large impact on short-term temperatures, such as oceanic cycles like the El Niño Southern Oscillation or the 11-year solar cycle. Sometimes these dampen global warming, and sometimes they amplify it. However, they’re called “oscillations” and “cycles” for a reason – they alternate between positive and negative states and don’t have long-term effects on the Earth’s temperature.
Right now we’re in the midst of a period where most short-term effects are acting in the cooling direction, dampening global warming. Many climate “skeptics” are trying to capitalize on this dampening, trying to argue that this time global warming has stopped, even though it didn’t stop after the global warming “pauses” in 1973 to 1980, 1980 to 1988, 1988 to 1995, 1995 to 2001, or 1998 to 2005.
Over the last 37 years one can identify overlapping short windows of time when climate “skeptics” could have argued (and often did, i.e. here and here and here) that global warming had stopped. And yet over the entire period question containing these six cooling trends, the underlying trend is one of rapid global warming (0.27°C per decade, according to the new Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature [BEST] dataset). And while the global warming trend spans many decades, the longest cooling trend over this period is 10 years, which proves that each was caused by short-term noise dampening the long-term trend.
In short, those arguing that global warming has stopped are missing the forest for the trees, focusing on short-term noise while ignoring the long-term global warming signal. Since the release of the BEST data which confirmed the global warming observed by all other global temperature measurements, climate “skeptics” have been scrambling for a way to continue denying that global warming is a problem, and focusing on the short-term noise has become their preferred go-to excuse.
If it makes you feel any better, it seems the BRIC nations for the most part seem to be ignoring global warming, and interestingly, they are the ones that will be experiencing the most disaster as sea levels rise. Anyone interested should see the September 2013 issue of National Geographic.
Not gonna derail the thread, but the topic is about whether warming trends are man-made (and whether RIers should be patted on the back for believing this more).
Not gonna derail the thread, but the topic is about whether warming trends are man-made (and whether RIers should be patted on the back for believing this more).
Normal fluctuations notwithstanding, CO2 levels are higher than they've been in millions of years, and is up 41 percent since the Industrial Revolution, 24% since 1958. If present trends continue it could double in a matter of decades.
The global concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere – the primary driver of recent climate change – has reached 400 parts per million (ppm) for the first time in recorded history, according to data from the Mauna Loa Observatory in Hawaii.
Fact: there are more greenhouse gases in the atmosphere than before
Fact: greenhouse gasses warm the climate
Fact: the long term trends are toward a warming climate and rising sea levels, which is coinciding with the increase in greenhouse gases
Fact: "we" produce a lot of greenhouse gases but so do volcanoes, methane buried in permafrost and the sea floor, and so on
Fact: the average climate temperatures oscillate between ice ages and very warm, with the looooong term forecast being really hot when the sun expands and consumes the planet
The most important fact is the 3rd because the rising sea levels are an undeniable trend, a trend that will most likely have grave consequences for Rhode Islanders if we don't prepare for it properly. Could the trend reverse? Sure, this is a complex planet, which "we" don't fully understand. But for what we can understand, rising sea levels and coastal communities don't mix well, so we better start preparing for it. The debate over the cause of all this is just a diversion from taking care of the more important issue. Will arguing over the cause realy make a difference if and when Providence is under water? It's similar to arranging deck chairs on the Titanic. Seems rather silly.
First, we need to prepare for rising seas based on the trend evidence. Second, we may want to find a way to reduce "our" emissions to possibly slow and even reverse the trend. But who knows, outside of the rising sea level challenges, maybe a warer climate is better for "us"? I dont mind shorter winters ;-) By the way a little investment in coastal infrastructure projects could be the shot in the arm this economy needs to get fully going?
It seems with the polar vortex dipping so low and the arctic oscillation in negative mode that climate change (including lack of arctic ice) could end up causing us very hot summers and potentially very cold winters here in RI.
Perhaps some climatologist could explain if we'll see a positive arctic oscillation again with out the ice?
So far this year we're luckier than the poor souls in the midwestern part of the country.
Agree with StoLat, RI will need to do a lot to prepare for rising seas.
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.
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.
