Global Warming...New Report...and it ain't happy news

@Frank Apisa,

the people who deny that global warming is even happening re mostly politically agenda driven. They are kinda STUCK in a response mode that, like many other evidence driven theories, begins to sound pitifully lacking in any evidence that supports their viewa.

The last 10 years (despite the Rush Limbo's puffery about it being excessively cold ), has seen the increase of the AVERGAE GLOBAL temperatures to a significant extent.

Its kind of neat how, with computer driven graphic tools for GIS, we can take all the average deviations on temperatures around the PLANET, and contour them and easily see that, with the exception of an annual ring of anomalously cold temps that seem to glide around the globe, the entire Northen hemispehere winters, (Ans the SOuthern Hemisphere summers) are getting hotter and desertification marching along so that, previous farm areas are going to need huge influxes pf water that can only ne gotten by redesigning dams or desal of sea water.

And to deny that sea level isnt rising,thats equally irrational.

1 Reply

@parados,

Would this be shredded evidence, or bought evidence with research grants, or evidence that simply has never been compiled ?

The ignorant masses ? The whole purpose of democracy is being bypassed by Global Warming Thuggees . Dont bother to vote, we, the scientists, for the scientists, will tell you what is true and by science you had better believe us or the plagues of Egypt will look like a girl school's picnic .

What evidence am I missing ? The rubbish about how British ships have recorded temps since the invention of a ships log ? I've heard that one before, now tell me who compiled all that data ? I quite like sailing and I have never heard of such a massive undertaking yet Thuggees quite often like to quote that one . Thousands of ships every year recording every day for centuries . Who compiled it ?

0 Replies

@FBM,

Ive seen calculations done by renowned climate scientists whove reached very different conclusions on the "percentage responsibilities" of anthropogenic climate change.
Im really not qualified in those calcs but I always wonder, where anytime a math expansion is developed. "WHAT WERE THE CONSTANTS INJECTED INTO THE CALCULATIONS"?

I see that our effects of acidification are equally ignificant and can be controlled by limiting our acide deposition to an etent that can be hndled by the atmospheric turnover rates.

When I look at stuff like ice core data and varve deposits and ocean sediment cores, I dont see a really clear "us or them" conclusion.
Am I being too nit picky? prhaps, but Im always sensitive of outliers and things that dont fit a pattern.
(Too many years prospecting I guess)

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Quote:

And to deny that sea level isnt rising, thats equally irrational.

70mm over 30 years ? Where were the recordings done and to what accuracy ?

Quote:

The last 10 years (despite the Rush Limbo's puffery about it being excessively cold ), has seen the increase of the AVERGAE GLOBAL temperatures to a significant extent.

The world is 1.08 degrees cooler than it was in 1998.
Global warming reversed its rise in 1998.

https://w3.newsmax.com/NMWOS/media/Images/CTI/no_global_warning-bw.jpg

1 Reply

@Ionus,

Denialism is mostly an act of removing oneself from any rational thought.
Most earth shaking discoveries were not based upon denial of an entire force or phenom, but were developed through skeptical inquiry of the methodology or the evidence.

Even Galileo wasnt a denialist, He was a skeptic of the Ptolemeic system . Galileos FINDINGS were denied by folks who needed a counter argument to fulfill a series of religious pronouncements that were best designed to CONTROL the laity.

Galieo was the skeptic, the Church was the denialist.

See the difference?

You seem to have an eagenda because you arent being fully honest with any evidence. If you were youd have to say (at the least)" THE CLIMATE IS WARMING MEASURABLY, I CAN READ THE DATA"

2 Replies

@farmerman,

I think it's very wise and reasonable to demand as much precision as is available. Do you have access to primary sources for the relevant data? If so, you should be able to find the constants used in the calculations. I have a paid subscription to professional journals, but I haven't used it to look for this particular data.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Quote:

Most earth shaking discoveries were not based upon denial

I cant think of a major discovery that was not met with denial . Debunking Aristotle's medicine, germ theory, Solar Orbits, Evolution, Innoculation are just some off the top of my head . All were met with denial not skepticism .

0 Replies

@Ionus,

Quote:

I have a friend who has a ScD (as opposed to a PhD

Thats a European Affectation left over from the 19th century .
US doesnt distinguish and "prestige" differences and, in most cases, dont even offer an ScD as opposed to a PhD.

In fact, many state "teachers Colleges" used to offer ScD's or DEd" (education doctorates)
for public school teachers to get into admin.
(Theyve since changed that career pth also)

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Quote:

Galieo was the skeptic, the Church was the denialist.

Your knowledge of history has let you down . Galileo was a dickhead who continually humiliated the Pope . He was locked up more for that then his ideas which the Pope agreed with when he was presented with them earlier . The Church was a skeptic . Other scientists were denialists to save their own skin .

Quote:

You seem to have an eagenda because you arent being fully honest with any evidence. If you were youd have to say (at the least)" THE CLIMATE IS WARMING MEASURABLY, I CAN READ THE DATA"

What happened to scientific skepticism ? It has been thrown out in the rush for prestige and research money . Who even says that measuring the hottest and coldest of the day is an accurate measurement of heat absorbed during the day ?

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Ah, FM...an ScD is an honorary title given on top of a PhD as recognition by one's peers for a lifetime of scientific work .

0 Replies

@Ionus,

I love how the Faux echopress likes to 'Cherry Pick" on the 89 outlyer.

Too bad good data exists before 89 and when you take a longer look, it become a little more obvious what is the trend.

http://ete.cet.edu/gcc/style/images/uploads/Global_temps_anom-annual-5_yr_1.png

Rap

2 Replies

Olympic records will continually be broken because measuring time for events will get more accurate . Using data from the last 134 years to declare we have the nine hottest years on record is the same thing . A temp 134 years ago...30 degrees C (actual temp - 30.4) but a temp reading today...30.3 degrees C .
See the problem ?

1 Reply

@raprap,

Quote:

Faux echopress

What is that ?

It seems the planet only got hotter about the same time scientists had a vested interest .

How many data collection points were there in 1880 ? How many now ? Whats it called when you change the nature of the experiment before it finishes ?

0 Replies

@Ionus,

Hey Tommy! See the deaf, dumb and blind kid. Sure plays a mean pinball.

Ok, for a moment let's hypothetically go along with the possibility that this is some reporting or temp measurement inaccuracy anomaly. How do explain the historic rising of the sea-levels, the historic melting of the ice sheets at BOTH poles?

While you're in denial, Nero, fiddling away...Rome burns to the ground.

1 Reply

@raprap,

Where's the graph from ?

0 Replies

@Ragman,

Quote:

Hey Tommy! See the deaf, dumb and blind kid. Sure plays a mean pinball.

Is that hilariously funny where you are because here it just looks a tad sad .

Quote:

How do explain the rising of the sea-levels

I have expressed skepticism as to where they were measured and how accurately . Feel free to tell me what you know...

Quote:

the melting of the ice sheets at BOTH poles?

I thought extraordinary deductions required extraordinary proof ? How long has those ice sheets been there ? We know the North Pole has melted away completely several times . And...wait for it...the Polar Bear melted into the Brown Bear pop and re-emerged when the ice did ! Surprised ?

Oh and your history has let you down . Nero didnt fiddle why Rome burned . He was away on holidays but dont let that stop you from believing in rubbish.

1 Reply

@FBM,

FBM wrote:

Quote:
Consensus: 97% of climate scientists agree

Consensus: 97% of climate scientists agreeMultiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals1 show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree: Climate-warming trends over the past century are very likely due to human activities...

To me, that last sentence in the quote is revealing in its absence of detail.

We already know the climate is warming, it has been for over 10k years, well before humans had any hope of impacting anything. And logically we can assume that humans are contributing to the warming lately.

But what is going unsaid is "the relative contribution" of human activity to the natural increase. And its very unsatisfying to me to hear scientific statements end with sentences like "trends over the past century are very likely due to human activities...".

Until someone can come up with even a reasonable estimate of "relative contribution" then that type of statement if of little use, and even dubious as to its accuracy.

2 Replies

@Ionus,

ROFLMAO.....
So you doubt the sea level rise but you are willing to argue that melting poles have occurred in the past. Willful blindness on your part. Melting poles in the past always led to sea level rise.

1 Reply

German mathematician and astronomer Johannes Kepler who was best known for his theories explaining the motion of planets, said the Universe was created, on Apr 27, 4977 BC.

It appears scientists do get it wrong...I believe they get it more wrong than right, but eventually it irons out .

2 Replies

@parados,

Quote:

ROFLMAO.....
So you doubt the sea level rise but you are willing to argue that melting poles have occurred in the past. Willful blindness on your part. Melting poles in the past always led to sea level rise.

What an idiot...do you realise that if something happened in the past, even several times, it does not mean it is happening now ? There were dinosaurs in the past...shouldnt you look out the window ? Laughing

1 Reply

Global Warming...New Report...and it ain't happy news

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know