Is it too late to avoid catastrophe?

[Winston]

Lately, I've been thinking that we are certain to face the societal problems warned of by scientists and politicians. 2 degrees warming seems inevitable now. And 2 degrees warming seems like the best case scenario, rather than the fought for boundary.

What do you guys think?

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/08/01/magazine/climate-change-losing-earth.html

Here's an interesting article highlighting what former politicians and administrators were doing or trying to do about climate change, before it was so politicized.

 

[Steve Case]

...
What do you guys think?

CO2 is Not A Problem.

 

[Tim the plumber]

+2c will have to get going soon or the whole thing will look like it is never going to happen.

At rates of warming since 1998 it will be about 200 years before we get there.

 

[late]

We'll prob extinct ourselves.

( I just decided it's time for it to be a verb, Herb.)

 

[longview]

Lately, I've been thinking that we are certain to face the societal problems warned of by scientists and politicians. 2 degrees warming seems inevitable now. And 2 degrees warming seems like the best case scenario, rather than the fought for boundary.

What do you guys think?

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/08/01/magazine/climate-change-losing-earth.html

Here's an interesting article highlighting what former politicians and administrators were doing or trying to do about climate change, before it was so politicized.

How about a bit of reality!
Observed warming is roughly .9 C, but CO2 forcing is at 55%.
Amplified feedbacks cannot be very high, least they would have already sent us to our doom.
The year to year CO2 increases have been slower from 3 ppm per year down to around 2 ppm per year.
https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/gr.html
Also consider that while the average temperature may increase by say 1.5 C, the maximum temperatures are likely
to only increase by .5 C of that 1.5, with the larger portion being an increase in evening lows, and most of those in the cooler months.
If we want to look at things that could cause a catastrophe in the future, we have a few, but CO2 is not high on the list.
# 1 on the list is energy, If we cannot provide in a sustainable form, sufficient energy to allow everyone alive to live
a first world lifestyle if they want, then we will always have political strife.
# 2 Fresh Water, we have been able to grow enough food, but it has placed a strain on our supplies of fresh water.
We are using the aquifers faster than they are replenishing. Global warming is not running people out of the middle east,
dry wells and war are.
We could solve the water problem with sufficient energy, but we need the energy to do so.

 

[Tim the plumber]

We'll prob extinct ourselves.

( I just decided it's time for it to be a verb, Herb.)

How?

Your attachment to doom is frightening.

 

[late]

How?

Your attachment to doom is frightening.

It's not the failure, it's the cascade.

Cascades are simply not predictable.

 

[ataraxia]

CO2 is Not A Problem.

Says who? Some real estate and casino guy from Manhattan? VS. Every the unanimous consensus and formal statements from every single scientific organization on the entire planet? :lamo

 

[Lord of Planar]

Lately, I've been thinking that we are certain to face the societal problems warned of by scientists and politicians. 2 degrees warming seems inevitable now. And 2 degrees warming seems like the best case scenario, rather than the fought for boundary.

What do you guys think?

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/08/01/magazine/climate-change-losing-earth.html

Here's an interesting article highlighting what former politicians and administrators were doing or trying to do about climate change, before it was so politicized.

I laugh at all this BS.

Warming is real, but not as bad as advertised.

 

[Steve Case]

Says who? Some real estate and casino guy from Manhattan?...

Says me. You guys have been at this for over thirty years and it's not happening.

...Every the unanimous consensus and formal statements from every single scientific organization on the entire planet? :lamo

I'd accept Climate Science:
If climate science wasn't pushed as an absolute in schools.
If the predictions from climate science seemed to be true.
If climate scientists didn't rig the peer review process.
If climate scientists didn’t sabotage scientific careers.
If IPCC reports weren't re-written after final approval.
If climate scientists didn't try to sue the opposition.
If climate scientists didn't appear to fudge the data.
If climate scientists didn't resort to name-calling.
If climate scientists complied with FOI requests.
If climate scientists agreed to debate the issue.
If climate scientists didn’t exaggerate findings.
If climate scientists didn’t rig grant programs.

Canards and BS:
Methane is 86 times more powerful than CO2 at trapping heat.
Warm water is melting the Antarctic ice cap from below.
Thermal exapansion affects relative sea level
Water vapor rains out after a few days
Cattle are a major source of methane.
People depend on glaciers for water.
Burning biomass is carbon neutral.
The coral reefs are in danger.
Polar bears are going extinct.
CFCs caused the Ozone Hole.
Average world temperature
97% of scientists agree
Antarctica is melting.
Greenland is melting.
Drought is increasing
Ocean acidification

 

[Tim the plumber]

It's not the failure, it's the cascade.

Cascades are simply not predictable.

What are you talking about?

The earth has been lots warmer without dying.

 

[Threegoofs]

Lately, I've been thinking that we are certain to face the societal problems warned of by scientists and politicians. 2 degrees warming seems inevitable now. And 2 degrees warming seems like the best case scenario, rather than the fought for boundary.

What do you guys think?

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/08/01/magazine/climate-change-losing-earth.html

Here's an interesting article highlighting what former politicians and administrators were doing or trying to do about climate change, before it was so politicized.

Catastrophe is a bad way to think about this.

There will always be catastrophes in the future, and many will have global warming as a contribution.

We can mitigate these catastrophes and make life more pleasant for our grandchildren if we work on the issue of GHG sooner rather than later.


It’s never too late, because its really impossible to predict the future of human affairs. All we can do is manage risk.

And from the derpy responses this thread is getting, it sure looks like that risk is going to get higher before it gets lower.

 

[Masterhawk]

I sure hope it isn't too late because wind and solar are on the rise. From 2000 to 2017, wind went from supplying just 0.15% of America's electrical consumption to 6.33% and solar went from a measly 0.013% to 1.32%. Granted, both have a long way to go before totally replacing fossil fuels but they're clearly making progress.

 

[FreeWits]

Says me. You guys have been at this for over thirty years and it's not happening.



I'd accept Climate Science:
If climate science wasn't pushed as an absolute in schools.
If the predictions from climate science seemed to be true.
If climate scientists didn't rig the peer review process.
If climate scientists didn’t sabotage scientific careers.
If IPCC reports weren't re-written after final approval.
If climate scientists didn't try to sue the opposition.
If climate scientists didn't appear to fudge the data.
If climate scientists didn't resort to name-calling.
If climate scientists complied with FOI requests.
If climate scientists agreed to debate the issue.
If climate scientists didn’t exaggerate findings.
If climate scientists didn’t rig grant programs.

Canards and BS:
Methane is 86 times more powerful than CO2 at trapping heat.
Warm water is melting the Antarctic ice cap from below.
Thermal exapansion affects relative sea level
Water vapor rains out after a few days
Cattle are a major source of methane.
People depend on glaciers for water.
Burning biomass is carbon neutral.
The coral reefs are in danger.
Polar bears are going extinct.
CFCs caused the Ozone Hole.
Average world temperature
97% of scientists agree
Antarctica is melting.
Greenland is melting.
Drought is increasing
Ocean acidification

As expected, a lot of your objection isn't based on truth, it's based on being a contrarian. While some people against climate science are respectable, you are not one of those people.

 

[FreeWits]

Says who? Some real estate and casino guy from Manhattan? VS. Every the unanimous consensus and formal statements from every single scientific organization on the entire planet? :lamo

Actually, nearly every climate scientist disagrees on the model of how much CO2 influences the planet. Do you now disagree with all climate models?

 

[Bum]

Meh....I always wanted to surf in Iowa anyway.

 

[longview]

Actually, nearly every climate scientist disagrees on the model of how much CO2 influences the planet. Do you now disagree with all climate models?

I think I disagree with almost all the climate models. I do not think we have a full understanding how CO2 operates in our atmosphere.
The diurnal asymmetry in the warming alone should be a red flag, that CO2 is not doing what we think.
I have only found the data for the US, but the asymmetry is amazing.
Summer increases in minimum temperatures,
https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cag/natio...ase=10&firsttrendyear=1935&lasttrendyear=2018
vs summer changes in maximum temperatures,
https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cag/natio...ase=10&firsttrendyear=1935&lasttrendyear=2018
.19 F per decade vs .01 F per decade.
FYI anyone who says summers seem hotter than ever, in the US is likely deceiving themselves.
Summer evenings are warmer, but the daily highs have not change much on average.

 

[Jack Hays]

Lately, I've been thinking that we are certain to face the societal problems warned of by scientists and politicians. 2 degrees warming seems inevitable now. And 2 degrees warming seems like the best case scenario, rather than the fought for boundary.

What do you guys think?

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/08/01/magazine/climate-change-losing-earth.html

Here's an interesting article highlighting what former politicians and administrators were doing or trying to do about climate change, before it was so politicized.

I don't think we'll ever get to 2 degrees, certainly not by 2100. With the Sun approaching minimum, I'm actually looking forward to a period of cooling.

As for the NY Times piece, it turns out it causes most trouble among climate activists.

 

[Jack Hays]

Lately, I've been thinking that we are certain to face the societal problems warned of by scientists and politicians. 2 degrees warming seems inevitable now. And 2 degrees warming seems like the best case scenario, rather than the fought for boundary.

What do you guys think?

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/08/01/magazine/climate-change-losing-earth.html

Here's an interesting article highlighting what former politicians and administrators were doing or trying to do about climate change, before it was so politicized.

The catastrophe would be the abandonment of democracy.

[h=1]Climatism versus Democracy[/h]Posted on 03 Aug 18 by GEOFF CHAMBERS • 5 Comments
Translated from this post by Benoît Rittaud: The dream of environmental dictatorship is being expressed more and more openly, and the normal social safeguards no longer work. Take this headline to an interview with climatologist François-Marie Bréon in Libération, 29/07/2018: “The Battle for the Climate conflicts with Individual Freedoms.” This title alone might suggest a … Continue

 

[Lord of Planar]

I don't think we'll ever get to 2 degrees, certainly not by 2100. With the Sun approaching minimum, I'm actually looking forward to a period of cooling.

As for the NY Times piece, it turns out it causes most trouble among climate activists.

Even without the sun cooling, the equalization curve of the sun from it's 1958 peak is around maximum now. I don't expect but insignificant warning if we continue to warm. The suns cooling will take decades to see results from.

 

[Steve Case]

...
FYI anyone who says summers seem hotter than ever, in the US is likely deceiving themselves.
Summer evenings are warmer, but the daily highs have not change much on average.

No, the daily highs have changed, NOAA's Climate at a Glance allows you to select Maximum
Temperature as a Parameter and it quickly becomes apparent that for the warm months of the
year, May through October, maximum temperatures have dropped for most of the nation:

For the Nation as a whole Max temps have dropped since 1930:



The daily highs have changed since the Dust Bowl of the 1930s.

 

[Steve Case]

...
FYI anyone who says summers seem hotter than ever, in the US is likely deceiving themselves.
Summer evenings are warmer, but the daily highs have not change much on average.

No, the daily highs have changed, NOAA's Climate at a Glance allows you to select Maximum
Temperature as a Parameter and it quickly becomes apparent that for the warm months of the
year, May through October, maximum temperatures have dropped for most of the nation:

For the Nation as a whole Max temps have dropped since 1930:

View attachment 67237425

The daily highs have changed since the Dust Bowl of the 1930s.

 

[Steve Case]

...
FYI anyone who says summers seem hotter than ever, in the US is likely deceiving themselves.
Summer evenings are warmer, but the daily highs have not change much on average.

No, the daily highs have changed, NOAA's Climate at a Glance allows you to select Maximum
Temperature as a Parameter and it quickly becomes apparent that for the warm months of the
year, May through October, maximum temperatures have dropped for most of the nation:

For the Nation as a whole Max temps have dropped since 1930:

View attachment 67237425

The daily highs have changed since the Dust Bowl of the 1930s.

[For some reason I'm having difficulty posting this ??? ]

 

[Steve Case]

testing 123

 

[Lord of Planar]

testing 123

LOL...

Three is right. It appears three times now.

Good find.