• 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!

2019 set to be warmer than 2018

Media_Truth said:
As I stated earlier, there were probably more Animal Kingdom beings roaming the planet in the middle ages than there are now - incests, birds, wild animals, larger animals, etc. I will agree, that more PEOPLE have exacerbated the problem - burning more FOSSIL FUELS.
Click to expand...

Don't forget dragons...
 
Renae said:
No, you don't know the history of the Eugenics Movement do you?


https://niflheimmedia.wordpress.com/2016/07/10/eugenics-and-climate-change/


Just a nice example to educate you. You need it.
Click to expand...

Wow... this article is just a cut and paste of a Moony Times propaganda piece from about 10 years ago that is full of lies and misinformation. And this is on top of the stupidity of comparing Eugenics to the science of climate change.

I think its time for you to quit pretending that your military training in meteorology has educated you in any meaningful way concerning climate change because if you believe that garbage it clearly did not.
 
Buzz said:
Wow... this article is just a cut and paste of a Moony Times propaganda piece from about 10 years ago that is full of lies and misinformation. And this is on top of the stupidity of comparing Eugenics to the science of climate change.

I think its time for you to quit pretending that your military training in meteorology has educated you in any meaningful way concerning climate change because if you believe that garbage it clearly did not.
Click to expand...

I think it's time for you top stop pretending you have any valid point to make. That was just a quick grab with the information relevant that I found. I can find more. The point is Eugenics was the predominate movement of the early part of last century, Scientist, Political Figures, Governments all went with it being "Settled Science" and attacked anyone that disagreed. This is HISTORY, FACTS, REALITY. AGW is following the same baseline
 
Threegoofs said:
NASA has just posted a projection of the 2019 global temp, and it looks like it’s gonna be another hot one!

a3654de72fcf5aeb0ac5ea98f2209cb4.jpg


The graphic was posted by Gavin Schmidt, Head of NASA GISS, and as you can see, they’ve had a fairly good track record of projections in the past.

Twitter

That’s:
...1.2±0.15 ºC above the late 19th C. A warmer yr than 2018 (which will #4), almost certain >1ºC yr, and 1 in 3 chance of a new record.
Click to expand...

So what ? So Gavin Schmidt said so .... really :roll:
 
Renae said:
I think it's time for you top stop pretending you have any valid point to make. That was just a quick grab with the information relevant that I found. I can find more. The point is Eugenics was the predominate movement of the early part of last century, Scientist, Political Figures, Governments all went with it being "Settled Science" and attacked anyone that disagreed. This is HISTORY, FACTS, REALITY. AGW is following the same baseline
Click to expand...

The ‘predominant movement’.

LOL.

You know less about Scientific history than you do about climate science.
 
Threegoofs said:
The ‘predominant movement’.

LOL.

You know less about Scientific history than you do about climate science.
Click to expand...

You never fail to amuse. You are the best advert for AGW skepticism we could ever dream of :lol:
 
flogger said:
So what ? So Gavin Schmidt said so .... really :roll:
Click to expand...

It's a projection, nothing more. What you need to realize is the 17 of the last 18 years are the warmest in recent history, and the last 4 years are the hottest. Whether or not next year is the warmest, the third warmest or the tenth warmest, is irrelevant. Now if it was cooler than the 1980s, then your denial may have some merit. Until then, you're just a regurgitation of oil-industry propaganda.
 
Media_Truth said:
It's a projection, nothing more. What you need to realize is the 17 of the last 18 years are the warmest in recent history, and the last 4 years are the hottest. Whether or not next year is the warmest, the third warmest or the tenth warmest, is irrelevant. Now if it was cooler than the 1980s, then your denial may have some merit. Until then, you're just a regurgitation of oil-industry propaganda.
Click to expand...

Cooling has begun. 2016>2017>2018> . . . .

 
Jack Hays said:
The next several years of continued cooling will settle the matter.
Click to expand...

The CO2 increase last month was 0.6 PPM, with overall Atmospheric CO2 at about 410 PPM right now. The normal increase is only about 0.3 to 0.4 PPM. Doesn't bode well for your amateur theory.
 
Media_Truth said:
The CO2 increase last month was 0.6 PPM, with overall Atmospheric CO2 at about 410 PPM right now. The normal increase is only about 0.3 to 0.4 PPM. Doesn't bode well for your amateur theory.
Click to expand...

CO2 lags temperature; it does not lead it.
 
Jack Hays said:
CO2 lags temperature; it does not lead it.
Click to expand...

It can both lead or lag. Stop with the parroting of pseudoscience memes from your silly blogs.
 
Renae said:
I think it's time for you top stop pretending you have any valid point to make.
Click to expand...

If I don't have a point to make then why are you defending yourself from the point I'm making?

Renae said:
That was just a quick grab with the information relevant that I found.
Click to expand...

Is that your excuse for linking to lies and misinformation? So did you not read the whole thing or do you just not care if it was full of ****?

Renae said:
I can find more.
Click to expand...

Really? You think so? O.K... show us all some more articles linking eugenics to climate science that doesn't also contain denialist BS or come from people who are known to push denialist BS.

Renae said:
The point is Eugenics was the predominate movement of the early part of last century, Scientist, Political Figures, Governments all went with it being "Settled Science" and attacked anyone that disagreed. This is HISTORY, FACTS, REALITY. AGW is following the same baseline
Click to expand...

You might have a point if the people who believe we need to do something about AGW were advocating solutions that were similar to those suggested by eugenics. But that is not what is happening. Nobody is saying we need to kill or sterilize anyone to stop AGW.

Oh... and one more thing. Your cited article is linking climate science to the Nazi holocaust. This is both disgusting and pathetic.

Aren't you one of those people who have whined and complained about being called a denier as if we were accusing you of denying the Holocaust?
 
Media_Truth said:
The CO2 increase last month was 0.6 PPM, with overall Atmospheric CO2 at about 410 PPM right now. The normal increase is only about 0.3 to 0.4 PPM. Doesn't bode well for your amateur theory.
Click to expand...

You are ASSuming that the CO2 warming will be large than the solar cooling.
 
Buzz said:
If I don't have a point to make then why are you defending yourself from the point I'm making?



Is that your excuse for linking to lies and misinformation? So did you not read the whole thing or do you just not care if it was full of ****?



Really? You think so? O.K... show us all some more articles linking eugenics to climate science that doesn't also contain denialist BS or come from people who are known to push denialist BS.



You might have a point if the people who believe we need to do something about AGW were advocating solutions that were similar to those suggested by eugenics. But that is not what is happening. Nobody is saying we need to kill or sterilize anyone to stop AGW.

Oh... and one more thing. Your cited article is linking climate science to the Nazi holocaust. This is both disgusting and pathetic.

Aren't you one of those people who have whined and complained about being called a denier as if we were accusing you of denying the Holocaust?
Click to expand...

No, it's not about the solutions, it's about the group think that created and drove both Eugenics and now the AGW movement. In both cases you have a political cause, that is built around a science that "is settled" and "cannot be challenged" that purports to "save humanity".
It took the Nazi's to wake people up on Eugenics... what will it take to wake people up on AGW?
 
Threegoofs said:
NASA has just posted a projection of the 2019 global temp, and it looks like it’s gonna be another hot one!

a3654de72fcf5aeb0ac5ea98f2209cb4.jpg


The graphic was posted by Gavin Schmidt, Head of NASA GISS, and as you can see, they’ve had a fairly good track record of projections in the past.

Twitter

That’s:
...1.2±0.15 ºC above the late 19th C. A warmer yr than 2018 (which will #4), almost certain >1ºC yr, and 1 in 3 chance of a new record.
Click to expand...
Warmer in 19, I hope so. I will check the Old Farmer's Almanac.


Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
 
Renae said:
No, it's not about the solutions, it's about the group think that created and drove both Eugenics and now the AGW movement. In both cases you have a political cause, that is built around a science that "is settled" and "cannot be challenged" that purports to "save humanity".
It took the Nazi's to wake people up on Eugenics... what will it take to wake people up on AGW?
Click to expand...

This is just ridiculous. Man has used science and politics to do many things over our history meant to improve our lives or to fix problems. Sometimes the things that have been done were beneficial and other times we were wrong and it was a bad idea. But to suggest that the fight against AGW is going to lead to another holocaust is nothing but alarmism.
 
Buzz said:
This is just ridiculous. Man has used science and politics to do many things over our history meant to improve our lives or to fix problems. Sometimes the things that have been done were beneficial and other times we were wrong and it was a bad idea. But to suggest that the fight against AGW is going to lead to another holocaust is nothing but alarmism.
Click to expand...

The fight against AGW has already killed and impoverished far more than WWII in total never mind just the Holocaust.

The doubling of food price due to the use of food as fuel, removing it from the mouths of the hungry, is causing many many deaths per year. I guess at a figure of 20 million less deaths next year if this practice was to stop today.

The effect on the economy of the poor of the world, 3 billion people live on less than $2.50 a day, is far greater than that even. The year after a stop of this policy of sending vast amounts of money to the hands of the landowners at the cost of the world's poor, would be that the poor of the world would have a very rapid increase in wealth. That water pipe they wanted so as to not have to get disentry again or the sewer to take away the waste from the street their children play in or even some school fees might get paid.
 
Is Time Magazine still going with climate change or are they back to the coming ice age yet?
 
Renae said:
No, you don't know the history of the Eugenics Movement do you?


https://niflheimmedia.wordpress.com/2016/07/10/eugenics-and-climate-change/


Just a nice example to educate you. You need it.
Click to expand...

The idea that we could improve the human race by controlling human reproduction, aka eugenics, is not wrong on a scientific basis, but it is inhuman for any group to decide who deserves to reproduce and who does not. That's why the idea was never acted upon.

AGW, on the other hand, is a scientific fact (based on the findings of thousands of researchers in dozens of disciplines) and most certainly should be acted upon before the solutions become so costly that they cannot be initiated. Global warming is already costing lives and causing entire micro cultures to migrate to higher, or cooler, or wetter ground.

The earth will endure, as it has done through many changes over the last 4 billion years, but we may not. If we continue to bury our heads in the sand and ignore the science, as too many conservatives are wont to do, then perhaps we deserve extinction.
 
Terryj said:
Your assumption that AGW is well established flys in the face of a number of climate scientist who disagree with this. As of May 2015 the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere was 400 ppm, the Earth’s atmosphere is 78 percent nitrogen, 21 percent oxygen and 1 percent other gases, including about 0.04 percent carbon dioxide. So what is driving your AGW?

Most if not all climate scientist will tell you the biggest driver of Climate Change is water vapor, not CO2. The biggest contributor to this water vapor is the SUN. With the activity of sun spots of the last solar cycle has led to an increase of the suns intensity thereby increasing the water vapor in the atmosphere, which holds in more of the Earth radiated heat causing the planet to warm. Yes, CO2 can contribute to this but not in the extent as they would have you to believe. Once the sun enters it's solar minimum we will most likely see water vapor decrease allowing the atmosphere to cool.
Click to expand...

A number, eh? Care to be more specific? Show me a report based on real science that denies the overwhelming consensus and I will most likely be able to tie that writer's funding to the fossil fuel industry.

CO2 is, in fact, the biggest contributor to AGW.

https://www.ucsusa.org/global-warmi.../CO2-and-global-warming-faq.html#.XB_vUxJlA1I

For those averse to reading, here's one with graphics:

https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/carbon-dioxide/

Click Play on the Time Series graphic.

Enjoy!
 
Phys251 said:
What is a scientific theory?
Click to expand...

A scientific theory is defined as "a coherent group of tested general propositions, commonly regarded as correct, that can be used as principles of explanation and prediction for a class of phenomena." Example: Einstein's theory of relativity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom