• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Impending Collapse of the Global Warming Scare[W:254]

Re: The Impending Collapse of the Global Warming Scare

Steve Case said:
Think about the scientists who contracted with the tobacco
industry a few decades ago. They knew what the tobacco
companies wanted to find, and find it they did. We all saw
them testify before congress all those years ago. If the tobacco
companies stopped funding them, I would imagine that they
wouldn't have produced those studies and would have done
something else. If the Trump administration stops funding
Climate Change research, I imagine all those scientists will find
something else to occupy their time.
Click to expand...

I wonder if funding started going to the proper skeptical approach, how many papers would then be called denier papers by the hard core alarmists?
 
Re: The Impending Collapse of the Global Warming Scare

Nomad4Ever said:
Yes, we have locked ourselves into a certain level of global warming; however, putting more carbon into the atmosphere WILL increase the effects of global warming, it is just long term. Yes, if we stopped all emissions right now we would keep warming, but eventually it would stop. If we keep putting out emissions, it will keep warming. So 100 years from now the difference won't be noticeable, but 200-300 years from now it will.

Here is a quote from (https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/jan/16/greenhouse-gases-remain-air), "Between 65% and 80% of CO2 released into the air dissolves into the ocean over a period of 20–200 years. The rest is removed by slower processes that take up to several hundreds of thousands of years, including chemical weathering and rock formation. This means that once in the atmosphere, carbon dioxide can continue to affect climate for thousands of years." Oh, and that CO2 that goes into the ocean isn't good either, in fact it may be worse than the CO2 that stays in the atmosphere and continues to warm the climate, since it is leading to the acidification of the ocean.
Click to expand...

This is straight up alarmist dogma. We have discussed the errors of this extensively.

You seem to be saying that stopping all US production of CO2 would make a difference. As I have stated it will not, not any difference that we can actually detect. There is no level to which we can possibly cut emissions that will be worth it. This is assuming that the models used by the IPCC are correct, and we already know that they are not accurate, so most likely they understate the futility of cutting emissions. China, India, and other developing nations will continue to increase consumption of coal no matter what we do. Mitigation as a strategy is dead. Better hope that adaptation will suffice.
 
Re: The Impending Collapse of the Global Warming Scare

LowDown said:
This is straight up alarmist dogma. We have discussed the errors of this extensively.

You seem to be saying that stopping all US production of CO2 would make a difference. As I have stated it will not, not any difference that we can actually detect. There is no level to which we can possibly cut emissions that will be worth it. This is assuming that the models used by the IPCC are correct, and we already know that they are not accurate, so most likely they understate the futility of cutting emissions. China, India, and other developing nations will continue to increase consumption of coal no matter what we do. Mitigation as a strategy is dead. Better hope that adaptation will suffice.
Click to expand...

Reliance on adaptation may not be such a good idea:

Burning all fossil fuels, we conclude, would make most of the planet uninhabitable by humans, thus calling into question strategies that emphasize adaptation to climate change.
Click to expand...

Climate sensitivity, sea level and atmospheric carbon dioxide
 
Re: The Impending Collapse of the Global Warming Scare

LowDown said:
This is straight up alarmist dogma. We have discussed the errors of this extensively.

You seem to be saying that stopping all US production of CO2 would make a difference. As I have stated it will not, not any difference that we can actually detect. There is no level to which we can possibly cut emissions that will be worth it. This is assuming that the models used by the IPCC are correct, and we already know that they are not accurate, so most likely they understate the futility of cutting emissions. China, India, and other developing nations will continue to increase consumption of coal no matter what we do. Mitigation as a strategy is dead. Better hope that adaptation will suffice.
Click to expand...

How is it alarmist? My main point was that CO2 we emit stays in the atmosphere for much longer than our lifetimes, and any CO2 we don't emit will have a compounding effect in helping to curb climate change in the long term. I'm not spouting the fear based rhetoric that if we don't shut down all coal and oil production the world will end ect ect. Just stating facts.

Global warming is a global problem, and as such requires a global solution. I did not mean to suggest the U.S. alone could stop it. Your assertion that will can't do anything to stop global warming may I fear be realistic, but in an idealized world if all countries did slowly transition off fossil fuel it would have a very noticeable effect.

Put aside the climate then for a second, what about ocean acidification of the ocean? That is very directly related to how much CO2 we emit and has a very real threat of leading to the collapse of the ocean ecosystem. This may be slightly alarmist, but I am to say the least slightly alarmed. With our technology I do believe climate change won't be too bad, but we aren't at the point where we can fix the oceans. I encourage you to read this scholarly article on the effects we are already seeing of ocean acidification. What is Ocean Acidification?
 
Re: The Impending Collapse of the Global Warming Scare

[h=1]Message to Katherine Hayhoe[/h]Posted on 24 Jan 17 by GEOFF CHAMBERS • 17 Comments
Barry Woods just alerted the rest of us to this gem ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vOibBy290cM In which you can see a bunch of desperate individuals issue a Message to Trump from Climate Scientists. Let’s forget for a moment that two of them (Peter Gleick and Stephan Lewandowsky) are proven liars, and concentrate on the first messenger, Katherine Hayhoe, … Continue reading →
 
Re: The Impending Collapse of the Global Warming Scare

LowDown said:
Up to now the alarmists have been able to ignore questions from skeptics and go without having to explain the multitude of contradictions in their theory because their government paymasters have been alarm mongers themselves. But now that's about to change. Pressed to provide real evidence for their claims they won't be able to do it.

Manhattan Contrarian
Click to expand...
Pssst, Global Warming does not require that you believe in it to be True. Awwwwww
 
Re: The Impending Collapse of the Global Warming Scare

Casper said:
Pssst, Global Warming does not require that you believe in it to be True. Awwwwww
Click to expand...
True, but the data does need to support that the concept is a viable one.
While the idea that CO2 is a greenhouse gas, and will cause some warming, is widely accepted,
that alone would not be cause for alarm.
The alarm was for the predicted amplified feedbacks occurring at the mid to high end of the IPCC prediction.
Thos numbers are looking less likely with each passing year.
 
Re: The Impending Collapse of the Global Warming Scare

longview said:
True, but the data does need to support that the concept is a viable one.
While the idea that CO2 is a greenhouse gas, and will cause some warming, is widely accepted,
that alone would not be cause for alarm.
The alarm was for the predicted amplified feedbacks occurring at the mid to high end of the IPCC prediction.
Thos numbers are looking less likely with each passing year.
Click to expand...

Funny.

Because in MY world, each passing year seems to be demonstrating spiking temperatures worldwide- for three years running, in fact.

Its almost like the warming is starting to accelerate. Just like they said...
 
Re: The Impending Collapse of the Global Warming Scare

Threegoofs said:
Funny.

Because in MY world, each passing year seems to be demonstrating spiking temperatures worldwide- for three years running, in fact.

Its almost like the warming is starting to accelerate. Just like they said...
Click to expand...
Still counting weather events as climate, I see!
 
Re: The Impending Collapse of the Global Warming Scare

Threegoofs said:
Funny.

Because in MY world, each passing year seems to be demonstrating spiking temperatures worldwide- for three years running, in fact.

Its almost like the warming is starting to accelerate. Just like they said...
Click to expand...

Spiking temperatures, or spiking 24 hr averages?

In urban heat islands, or out away from the cities?

The specifics are important.
 
Re: The Impending Collapse of the Global Warming Scare

longview said:
Still counting weather events as climate, I see!
Click to expand...

They don't know the difference.

That why it's now "Climate Change."
 
Re: The Impending Collapse of the Global Warming Scare

Lord of Planar said:
Spiking temperatures, or spiking 24 hr averages?

In urban heat islands, or out away from the cities?

The specifics are important.
Click to expand...

You'll just find a way to deny the science no matter what...so does it really matter to you?
 
Re: The Impending Collapse of the Global Warming Scare

Threegoofs said:
You'll just find a way to deny the science no matter what...so does it really matter to you?
Click to expand...
Since when is pointing out possibilities, a denial of science?

You proved once again, it is you who is a denier of science.
 
Re: The Impending Collapse of the Global Warming Scare

Casper said:
Pssst, Global Warming does not require that you believe in it to be True. Awwwwww
Click to expand...

Look at the evidence if you are able.
 
Re: The Impending Collapse of the Global Warming Scare

Threegoofs said:
Funny.

Because in MY world, each passing year seems to be demonstrating spiking temperatures worldwide- for three years running, in fact.

Its almost like the warming is starting to accelerate. Just like they said...
Click to expand...

You must be on some other planet. The temperatures returned to the previous baseline, where temperatures stopped rising 18 years ago, last month.
 
Re: The Impending Collapse of the Global Warming Scare

LowDown said:
You must be on some other planet. The temperatures returned to the previous baseline, where temperatures stopped rising 18 years ago, last month.
Click to expand...

I think the word 'baseline' means something different in your bizarroworld.
 
Re: The Impending Collapse of the Global Warming Scare

Threegoofs said:
I think the word 'baseline' means something different in your bizarroworld.
Click to expand...

Check it out:

Global Temps.JPG

UAH MSU ver. 6.0
 
Re: The Impending Collapse of the Global Warming Scare

Surface Detail said:
I see the temperature rising by about 0.14C per decade together with some noise. What do you see?
Click to expand...

Why don't you use surface temperatures? Not the data you like to see?
 
Re: The Impending Collapse of the Global Warming Scare

Threegoofs said:
Why don't you use surface temperatures? Not the data you like to see?
Click to expand...

I was just commenting on the satellite data that LowDown posted. But yes, I think it makes more sense to use surface temperatures (that is where we live, after all) which, I believe, show a slightly steeper rise of about 0.17 C per decade.
 
Re: The Impending Collapse of the Global Warming Scare

Surface Detail said:
I was just commenting on the satellite data that LowDown posted. But yes, I think it makes more sense to use surface temperatures (that is where we live, after all) which, I believe, show a slightly steeper rise of about 0.17 C per decade.
Click to expand...

Whoops. Thought I was responding to LowDown.
 
Re: The Impending Collapse of the Global Warming Scare

Before the 2015/2016 El Nino, the pause was alive and well in the GISS record.
Wood for Trees: Interactive Graphs
Moving around the start and end dates, does change the slopes, but also demonstrates the not so good signal to noise ratio
within the temperature records.
How 2015/2016 El Nino will average out can be speculated, but not measured for several years.
 
Re: The Impending Collapse of the Global Warming Scare

longview said:
Before the 2015/2016 El Nino, the pause was alive and well in the GISS record.
Wood for Trees: Interactive Graphs
Moving around the start and end dates, does change the slopes, but also demonstrates the not so good signal to noise ratio
within the temperature records.
How 2015/2016 El Nino will average out can be speculated, but not measured for several years.
Click to expand...

Damn longview... I read your admission that cherry picking start and end dates changes the slope and was thinking there might be hope for you after all. Then I went and looked at your graph and realized your still just being dishonest.

Your graph:
trend.jpg
http://woodfortrees.org....

Problem with this graph is that when you chose 2014 for an end date that is actually January 1,2014. So you are cutting off over three years. The last El Nino wasn't 3 years long.

Here is what the graph looks like when you include all the data:
trend2.jpg
http://woodfortrees.org...

Now if you want to actually be honest and use real scientific method you should be showing graphs like this that remove all the El Ninos and not just the ones that give you the slope you want:
ENSO corrected Schmidt.png
https://twitter.com/ClimateOfGavin...

Longview... your insistance on ignoring the last few years of record warmth because of an El Nino while you keep all the other El Ninos and cherry pick data to get the slope you want is just bad science.
 
Re: The Impending Collapse of the Global Warming Scare

Buzz said:
Damn longview... I read your admission that cherry picking start and end dates changes the slope and was thinking there might be hope for you after all. Then I went and looked at your graph and realized your still just being dishonest.

Your graph:
View attachment 67213146
http://woodfortrees.org....

Problem with this graph is that when you chose 2014 for an end date that is actually January 1,2014. So you are cutting off over three years. The last El Nino wasn't 3 years long.

Here is what the graph looks like when you include all the data:
View attachment 67213148
http://woodfortrees.org...

Now if you want to actually be honest and use real scientific method you should be showing graphs like this that remove all the El Ninos and not just the ones that give you the slope you want:
View attachment 67213150
https://twitter.com/ClimateOfGavin...

Longview... your insistance on ignoring the last few years of record warmth because of an El Nino while you keep all the other El Ninos and cherry pick data to get the slope you want is just bad science.
Click to expand...
I stated I excluded 2015 and 2016, the years affected by the El Nino with my opening sentence,
Before the 2015/2016 El Nino, the pause was alive and well in the GISS record.
Click to expand...
Since we will not know in a scientifically measurable way what the temperature for 2015 and 2016 was for another 20 months,
putting guessed place holders in is simply a guess.
As long as the end point is not contaminated by the El Nino, there is still a noticeable slope difference.
Wood for Trees: Interactive Graphs
But as I already said if the slope changes a lot by moving an end point one year ether way, it is because the signal to noise ratio
of the signal is large.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom