Page 18 of 23 FirstFirst ... 81617181920 ... LastLast
Results 171 to 180 of 222

Thread: Big Freeze and Climate Change- Stupidity or cynicism?

  1. #171
    Sage
    longview's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    19,060

    Re: Big Freeze and Climate Change- Stupidity or cynicism?

    Quote Originally Posted by Threegoofs View Post
    I guess you’re just gonna just roll with the fact that the paper literally says the opposite of what you claimed.

    I don’t need to do your homework. Hell- I directed you to the paper since you didn’t even know the authors name!
    I have to say, I am not sure trolley you used to arrive at that destination.
    Here is what is said in the abstract.
    https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley....9/2011GL049444
    Therefore, we conclude that the current decadal mean temperature in Greenland has not exceeded the envelope of natural variability over the past 4000 years, a period that seems to include part of the Holocene Thermal Maximum.
    Notwithstanding this conclusion, climate models project that if anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions continue, the Greenland temperature would exceed the natural variability of the past 4000 years sometime before the year 2100.
    So Greenland decadal mean temperature, is still within the envelope of natural variability,
    but the same models that expect .21C per decade of ongoing warming say Greenland may leave the natural variability envelope by 2100.

  2. #172
    Educator
    Steve Case's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    USA - Milwaukee, WI
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:36 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,081

    Re: Big Freeze and Climate Change- Stupidity or cynicism?

    Quote Originally Posted by marke View Post
    If warming has been noticeably occurring for the last century then why did experts claim just 50 years ago that research proved the earth had been cooling at an alarming rate over the previous century?
    Did they? The Global Cooling scare was about cooling after World War II. You can correct me if I'm wrong about that.
    Beware of averages. The average person has one breast and one testicle. Dixie Lee Ray

  3. #173
    Sage
    longview's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    19,060

    Re: Big Freeze and Climate Change- Stupidity or cynicism?

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Case View Post
    Did they? The Global Cooling scare was about cooling after World War II. You can correct me if I'm wrong about that.
    It was actually 44 years ago, and possible cooling was a real concern.
    https://archive.org/stream/understan...0unit_djvu.txt
    The NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES put together a report for
    UNITED STATES COMMITTEE FOR THE GLOBAL ATMOSPHERIC RESEARCH PROGRAM in 1975.
    In reality while warming is hypothesized to be bad, we know from historical records that cooling would actually be very bad.
    Warming, so far, just seems to be increasing the amount a arable land, without much downside.

  4. #174
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    22,059

    Re: Big Freeze and Climate Change- Stupidity or cynicism?

    Quote Originally Posted by flogger View Post
    Given the short duration of these graphs its a bit like tailoring your wardrobe by looking out your window one day in July and deciding thats it I don't need jackets or long trousers..... ever
    I've always said you can make graphs like those play songs and dance to them if you get to choose the timeframe and axis graduations.
    When you can't do that, you either change the data or draw a line through the unfortunate sections and hope no one notices.

    IF EVERYTHING IS IMPORTANT THEN NOTHING IS

  5. #175
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    22,059

    Re: Big Freeze and Climate Change- Stupidity or cynicism?

    Quote Originally Posted by Visbek View Post
    Yep. Again, you fail to understand the actual claims made by climate scientists about hurricanes -- even when I point them out to you repeatedly. Hmmmm.





    Yes, I've seen deniers latch onto Zwally's work; Zwally himself was worried that would happen. (https://www.mediamatters.org/researc...ort-his/206612).

    As mentioned in other discussions here rather recently, Zwally (who is a respected researcher) is using less accurate measures of measurement. And again, I pointed out that the bigger concern is the loss of ice shelves. We don't know yet if that's going to happen, but events like the collapse of Larsen Ice Shelf C is not a good sign.

    Anyway... so far, that means you have failed to refute the following impacts of AGW in recent years:
    • more extreme weather events (heat waves, high precipitation events, cold snaps etc)
    • hurricanes that are larger, more intense, travel slower, and produce larger storm surges
    • larger and more intense heat waves
    • forest fires happening in unprecedented areas (e.g. the northern parts of Sweden... which are in the Arctic Circle, by the way)
    • loss of ice/glacial masses in Greenland, Himalayas, the Arctic etc
    • loss of fresh water
    • rapid rise in sea levels
    • acidification of oceans
    • massive loss of coral reefs
    • rapid increase in CO2, CH4 and other GHG concentrations in the atmosphere
    • rapid increase in global temperatures
    • more extreme weather events
    • permafrost starting to melt

    Just to name a few.
    I showed you a graph of the hurricane occurrence data. You just don't accept it.
    Weather events are no more extreme than in cycles past.

    Zwally is respected ... but his results don't conform to what you want to believe so you make up something about his measurements being less accurate.
    You're a scream.

    IF EVERYTHING IS IMPORTANT THEN NOTHING IS

  6. #176
    Proud member of the 'ilk'

    Threegoofs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    The birthplace of Italian Beef
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:20 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    34,776

    Re: Big Freeze and Climate Change- Stupidity or cynicism?

    Quote Originally Posted by bubbabgone View Post
    I've always said you can make graphs like those play songs and dance to them if you get to choose the timeframe and axis graduations.
    When you can't do that, you either change the data or draw a line through the unfortunate sections and hope no one notices.
    Yeah. You can do that with graphs.

    That’s what your denier bloggers do.

    However, scientists who study this understands the data in depth, and are not fooled by graphical tricks.

    That’s why the OVERWHELMINGLY agree that AGW is real, and is a looming problem globally.

    And it’s why you still whine about ‘climategate’ and pretend data from 20 years ago was manipulated when the last 20 years of science have only confirmed what we were pretty sure of.
    Many Trump supporters have lots of problems, and those deplorables are bringing those problems to us. They’re racists. They’re misogynists. They’re islamophobic. They're xenophobes and homophobes. And some, I assume, are good people.

  7. #177
    Educator
    Steve Case's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    USA - Milwaukee, WI
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:36 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,081

    Re: Big Freeze and Climate Change- Stupidity or cynicism?

    Quote Originally Posted by longview View Post
    It was actually 44 years ago, and possible cooling was a real concern.
    https://archive.org/stream/understan...0unit_djvu.txt
    The NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES put together a report for
    UNITED STATES COMMITTEE FOR THE GLOBAL ATMOSPHERIC RESEARCH PROGRAM in 1975.
    In reality while warming is hypothesized to be bad, we know from historical records that cooling would actually be very bad.
    Warming, so far, just seems to be increasing the amount a arable land, without much downside.
    On a very short search I find that Global Cooling papers were as early as 1970
    https://www.pnas.org/content/67/2/898.short
    It was pretty much the whole decade of the '70s. By the '80s it had morphed
    into "Nuclear Winter" much like "Global Warming" morphed into "Climate Change"
    and around 1990 or so, I swear I saw "Nuclear Winter" and "Global Warming"
    stories running at the same time in the so-called popular press. Maybe even
    in the same publication.

    In any case, the polar bears are fine, Antarctica isn't melting, multi-meter sea
    level rise isn't happening, forest fires are less frequent, floods and droughts
    aren't occurring more often nor are hurricanes or extreme tornadoes. Heavy
    industry and the world's economy aren't ever going to be powered by wind
    mills or solar panels and contrary to popular belief an increase in CO2 is mostly
    beneficial.
    Beware of averages. The average person has one breast and one testicle. Dixie Lee Ray

  8. #178
    Proud member of the 'ilk'

    Threegoofs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    The birthplace of Italian Beef
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:20 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    34,776

    Re: Big Freeze and Climate Change- Stupidity or cynicism?

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Case View Post
    On a very short search I find that Global Cooling papers were as early as 1970
    https://www.pnas.org/content/67/2/898.short
    It was pretty much the whole decade of the '70s. By the '80s it had morphed
    into "Nuclear Winter" much like "Global Warming" morphed into "Climate Change"
    and around 1990 or so, I swear I saw "Nuclear Winter" and "Global Warming"
    stories running at the same time in the so-called popular press. Maybe even
    in the same publication.

    In any case, the polar bears are fine, Antarctica isn't melting, multi-meter sea
    level rise isn't happening, forest fires are less frequent, floods and droughts
    aren't occurring more often nor are hurricanes or extreme tornadoes. Heavy
    industry and the world's economy aren't ever going to be powered by wind
    mills or solar panels and contrary to popular belief an increase in CO2 is mostly
    beneficial.
    Your referenced paper talks about substantial warming from CO2.

    It’s also a one and a half page opinion piece.

    But thanks for the diligent literature search Big Freeze and Climate Change- Stupidity or cynicism?
    Many Trump supporters have lots of problems, and those deplorables are bringing those problems to us. They’re racists. They’re misogynists. They’re islamophobic. They're xenophobes and homophobes. And some, I assume, are good people.

  9. #179
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    22,059

    Re: Big Freeze and Climate Change- Stupidity or cynicism?

    Quote Originally Posted by Visbek View Post
    lol

    1) You obviously didn't bother to read the paper to which you pointed. Again, it's trying to explain why CO2 dropped during the Ordovician ice age. Do you really not understand how that does not support your claim?


    2) As to the chart.... The early CO2 proxy measurements had a resolution of about 10 million years; the glacial period in question was probably 1 million years long. Unsurprisingly, newer techniques (which by now are nearly a decade old) have higher resolutions, and they show... wait for it... drops in CO2 levels during the Late Ordovician period.
    https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...3101821000115X
    https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/gsa...dFrom=fulltext

    I.e. you're relying on denier crap that is at least a decade old. No surprise there.


    3) Unsurprisingly, the end of the Ordovician Ice Age was accompanied by... wait for it... increases in CO2 ppm. Huh.

    So no, your outdated denialist misunderstanding of science does not, in fact refute the causal impact of CO2 on global temperatures.



    lol

    No, I missed it because you didn't bother to actually read what you were linking
    I read the paper and it said nature overwhelmed whatever effect CO2 was having. And that's the way it goes in the climate world.
    Maybe the point was too subtle for ya. It does require some reasoning on the part of the reader.
    Maybe you should read it again but this time try to find where it said the cooling wasn't a natural occurrence.

    The CO2 level was still well over 4000 PPM when temps plummeted.

    IF EVERYTHING IS IMPORTANT THEN NOTHING IS

  10. #180
    Sage
    Visbek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:22 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    12,795

    Re: Big Freeze and Climate Change- Stupidity or cynicism?

    Quote Originally Posted by bubbabgone View Post
    I showed you a graph of the hurricane occurrence data. You just don't accept it.
    Good gravy. How many times do I need to say it? Current climate science does not predict an increase in the FREQUENCY of tropical storms. Some researchers think there could be fewer tropical storms in the future. What is happening is that hurricanes are becoming wetter, more intense, move more slowly (hence do more damage), and produce larger storm surges. And yes, those effects are actual and documented, see links already provided.

    So no, I did not in any way criticize the research which shows a consistent frequency of storms.

    I mean, seriously. Do you not just not understand that "frequency" and "intensity" are not the same thing? Yeesh.


    Weather events are no more extreme than in cycles past.
    *bzzt* wrong https://www.sciencedaily.com/release...0321130859.htm


    Zwally is respected ... but his results don't conform to what you want to believe so you make up something about his measurements being less accurate.


    No, nothing is "made up." Zwally specified his data sources, and he did not use research projects known to be more reliable (notably GRACE). And again, Zwally himself is not a denier, and is very clear he was worried his work would be willfully distorted by deniers (as you've done here).


    And again You haven't even touched:
    • larger and more intense heat waves
    • forest fires happening in unprecedented areas (e.g. the northern parts of Sweden... which are in the Arctic Circle, by the way)
    • loss of ice/glacial masses in Greenland, Himalayas, the Arctic etc
    • loss of fresh water
    • rapid rise in sea levels
    • acidification of oceans
    • massive loss of coral reefs
    • rapid increase in CO2, CH4 and other GHG concentrations in the atmosphere
    • rapid increase in global temperatures
    • more extreme weather events
    • permafrost starting to melt
    "Everyone should listen to me all the time about everything."
    - Rosa Diaz

Page 18 of 23 FirstFirst ... 81617181920 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •