Losing Earth: The Decade We Almost Stopped Climate Change (vent, house, elevator)
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.
You have said this before, at #209 and I'm sure elsewhere. Name-calling, particularly Nazi allusions, is a sure way to shut down debate.
With climate change we indeed should be addressing whether the problem is man-made, and also whether anything we do in the U.S. and Canada likely has any effect. Or if we're just giving license to notorious employers of slave labor such as China to pollute more.
Last edited by elnina; 08-29-2018 at 04:42 AM..
Reason: Typo/OP request
You have said this before, at #209 and I'm sure elsewhere. Name-calling, particularly Nazi allusions, is a sure way to shut down debate.
With climate change we indeed should be addressing whether the problem is man-made, and also whether anything we do in the U.S. and Canada likely has any effect. Or if we're just giving license to notorious employers of slave labor such as China to pollute more.
Consider the source of such a comment being used over and over ...
It is a common 12 step program saying just like KISS means Keep It Simple Stupid
As you can see he or she is doing just that! Keeping it simple!
Those who refer back to "Nazi" in debates often forget that the term is a contraction/abbreviation of the name of the German political party National Sozialisten. Once in power, they turned the govt into an authoritarian/totalitarian regime, and that's what the debaters are really alluding to, not the specifics of the Nazi policies.
Isn't it ironic that it's so often the liberals here that make the reference when it's their own methods that employ excessive regulation to achieve their goals?
The previous Inter-Glacial Period was 10.4°F (5.7°C) and the Inter-Glacial Period before that was 7.8°F (4.3°C). During the previous Inter-Glacial Period, the more than 90% of the Greenland Ice-Sheet melted in its entirety.
Of the eight Inter-Glacial Periods recorded before now, those two, plus five others were warmer-than-present, and the 5 others fell into the range 7.8°F and 10.4°F.
The one that did not ended abruptly for unknown reasons, so the length of that Inter-Glacial Period is far shorter than the other seven Inter-Glacial Periods.
Unless this Inter-Glacial Period is cut short, it's perfectly reasonable and logical to assume that average global temperatures will continue to increase naturally, falling into the range 7.8°F to 10.4°F.
There's absolutely nothing you can do about it, so whether man-made "global warming" is real or not, the end result is the same.
You'll just have to learn how to deal with it. Humans during previous Inter-Glacial Periods -- dumb and ignorant as they were -- managed to survive.
It's not my fault you built cities on coastal areas long before you actually had an understanding of how the Earth works.
The claims by Hansen and Watson are false and not based on any scientific evidence. In spite of the fact that 7 of the 8 previous Inter-Glacial Periods were much, much warmer than present, their is no evidence that any part of Europe experienced drought, or that vast areas of China and such were subject to desertification.
For one thing, the rise of sea levels increases the surface areas of oceans and seas, resulting in an increase in the rate of surface water evaporation, which increases the amount of moisture in the air. Many areas of Earth will become wetter, not drier.
The question is -- can an earth with 8 billion people cope with it?
The question is -- can an earth with 8 billion people cope with it?
That's the penultimate argument of the defeated Warmists -- the ultimate being the ad hominem attack.
8 billion is only about 60% of the carrying capacity of the planet. Remember that half the world's population lives within 50 miles of an ocean and that there's room enough for 12 billion to all tread water at the same time in Lake Superior. Half the food produced today goes to waste and we can easily double production over the next 2 decades by spreading modern techniques to 3rd world farmers. (Do you realize how many of them still broadcast seed by hand, making weeding & irrigation inefficient? We're talking low tech improvements.)
You're going to have to come up with better arguments.
Here's a short, pretty straight forward- no politics just honest science and logical analysis- of warming since 1850. The comments nitpick a little about the graphing techniques, but that only influences the details, not the basic message of the article.... Forget your pre-ordained biases when you read it and follow his argument-- it'll open your eyes. https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/08/...ing-the-earth/
To begin with, the Roman Warm Period was at least 4degC warmer than it is now-
You really have to fact check every thing said on internet forums and it seems the denial folks have no problem really distorting reality to prove their point.
This same poster posted a plot (I can point to this if requested - its already in this thread multiple times) showing that we are actually only about a 1/4 of a degree cooler than the Roman Warm period. At our present warming trend and if things stay the same, we should exceed this in 15 to 30 years.
Here is a 5 minute video comparing medieval warm periods to now
In Nevada this summer is actually milder than normal and in the winters there are record freezes going on > https://youtu.be/Hl0GSLcwHVs but don't believe your own eyes..
PEOPLE LIKE CLIMATE CHANGE AND VEGANISM BECAUSE IT'S TRENDY, And they love to tell others about it...
The deficit is much more critical because the US has already defaulted on it and if that dollar collapses YOU'LL HAVE PEOPLE LOOTING YOUR HOMES...
As a guy who has lived, hunted, and Swam in open Ocean his entire life I can tell you for a fact that CITY PEOPLE KNOW NOTHING ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT AND ARE ACTUALLY TERRIFIED OF IT....
Here's a short, pretty straight forward- no politics just honest science and logical analysis- of warming since 1850. The comments nitpick a little about the graphing techniques, but that only influences the details, not the basic message of the article.... Forget your pre-ordained biases when you read it and follow his argument-- it'll open your eyes. https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/08/...ing-the-earth/
Um... that it a conservative blog. If you blindly want to hear that the warming is not human caused you will enjoy reading that. However, I think its pretty much BS.
First off, they use a very hand picked set of Hadcrut 4 data
(first picture is from the wattsupwiththat - conservative blog) Note that the average temperature shown from around 1880 to now is only about .15C
You may notice that the plot from the conservative blog looks way different that what the Hadcrut data looks like posted three different ways (Sphere H4, Hudcrut4.6, Cowtan & way) Hmm.. this plot shows the average temperature change from around 1880 to now being on the order of 1C. Odd that the conservative blog hand picked data so that somehow reduced the temperature change by over a factor of 6
That blog also claims the temperature rise we are seeing is due to natural variations.. which needs another post to address..
Last edited by waltcolorado; 08-30-2018 at 08:51 AM..
FYI, a little difficult to read but if you are inclined, this is an interesting read on the role of CO2 as a feedback mechanism and as a driver for climate change. There is a little for everyone on both sides of the fence here as this guy somewhat dismisses the gloomy predictions as just guesses and notes the role that water and clouds will take in negative feedback.
Artificially increasing CO2 must reduce slightly the IR radiation escaping to space from the atmosphere. This results in a sudden energy imbalance causing the surface to warm slightly in compensation, thereby restoring energy balance. The reduction in outgoing IR energy with more CO2 is because the effective height of emission rises to a colder level. All layers in the atmosphere, including the surface, are in local thermodynamic equilibrium at the appropriate lapse rate temperature. Of course if the surface warms up a bit then there will also be a bit more evaporation and more clouds because 70% of the earth is covered by oceans. This is where it gets complicated and no-one really knows how much it will warm if we double CO2. Climate models may claim to take all these feedbacks into account but at the end of the day they are just guesses, which is also why there is such a large spread in resultant climate sensitivity.
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.
