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.
No insult. You told me definitively that weather /= climate. So I defer to your expertise and ask you to explain it.
So please do.
Weather is the condition of the atmosphere at a particular place over a short period of time, whereas climate refers to the weather pattern of a place over a long period, long enough to yield meaningful averages. Meteorology studies weather, while climatology studies climate; both are atmospheric sciences.
Weather is the condition of the atmosphere at a particular place over a short period of time, whereas climate refers to the weather pattern of a place over a long period, long enough to yield meaningful averages. Meteorology studies weather, while climatology studies climate; both are atmospheric sciences.
This is political science
Voting for the establishment is a vote for climate change
They will put the people first when Hell freezes over.
But... Obama said he was going to reduce sea level rise?
You mean he failed?
We're all gonna drown!
No, Obama probably did reduce sea level rise over what it would have been under McCain/Romney, but much less than would have been possible if he hadn't been blocked whenever possible by the Koch-controlled Republican puppets and their legions of Fox News-watching climate change deniers.
You might drown, but much of the U.S. will be well above the new sea levels.
If all of the world's ice melts, we'll see sea levels over 200 feet higher, and likely more as the oceans warm and consequentially expand (you did take general science, didn't you; it's not obvious).
Weather is the condition of the atmosphere at a particular place over a short period of time, whereas climate refers to the weather pattern of a place over a long period, long enough to yield meaningful averages. Meteorology studies weather, while climatology studies climate; both are atmospheric sciences.
Indeed. I'm glad you said that. So here's a question for you.
Several 10s of million years ago, Antarctica had palm trees and Kansas was under a big sea in the middle of North America. This was before humans existed.
So the question is this. Who or what caused that climate change?
Indeed. I'm glad you said that. So here's a question for you.
Several 10s of million years ago, Antarctica had palm trees and Kansas was under a big sea in the middle of North America. This was before humans existed.
So the question is this. Who or what caused that climate change?
Super volcanos, asteroids or obviously extra terrestrials
Indeed. I'm glad you said that. So here's a question for you.
Several 10s of million years ago, Antarctica had palm trees and Kansas was under a big sea in the middle of North America. This was before humans existed.
So the question is this. Who or what caused that climate change?
and I presume you ask that because you don't think man is responsible for the current change in the climate?
Will be 70 degrees in Philadelphia tomorrow; but we already had three days in row with 70+ temperatures in the past 10 days. "Springtime" is in full flush ... daffodils, forsythias, cherry trees, magnolias, redbuds ... in bloom. Spring doesn't 'officially' begin for 5 more days.
I'm told that coconut palm trees are beginning to sprout on the Jersey shore ...
I hear the groundhog, Punxsutawny Phil, is going to retire because winters in Pennsylvania will always be over within a few weeks of Groundhog Day.
Indeed. I'm glad you said that. So here's a question for you.
Several 10s of million years ago, Antarctica had palm trees and Kansas was under a big sea in the middle of North America. This was before humans existed.
So the question is this. Who or what caused that climate change?
The scientists have explanations. My memory is that massive volcanic activity was responsible.
Solar radiation definitely has an impact, and an extended solar minimum conceivably could offset even the impact of man-made carbon emissions for several centuries.
More recent history is more relevant than ancient earth history.
What scientists have predicted, very accurately, in the absence of other factors, human greenhouse gas emissions will be devastating.
Some scientists are even more frightened than you might imagine, because most projections haven't factored in the consequences of the release of the world's massive reserves of potential methane, a super greenhouse gas compared to carbon dioxide.
Maybe we should cut climate change research funding or put a gag order (popular with Republicans in states such as FL and NC) on discussion of the research findings.
Since when does ignorance and unwillingness (laziness?) to do research serve as clever skepticism?
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.
