Climate change

[rogerdodger]

this came up in another thread and I wanted to share these excellent graphics that allow people to draw their own conclusions, the data source for each graphic is cited:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-5aceb360-8bc3-4741-99f0-2e4f76ca02bb

 

[sapo]

Not a bad article! I'm not really a "believer" in man-made global warming..I agree there is some warming going on in areas right now (although it's hugely exaggerated) but the earth has natural warming and cooling cycles. It's just being used as a political tool by some.

 

[CastingCall]

Not a bad article! I'm not really a "believer" in man-made global warming..I agree there is some warming going on in areas right now (although it's hugely exaggerated) but the earth has natural warming and cooling cycles. It's just being used as a political tool by some.

-----sapo! Iagree with you 100% Tony

 

[bass]

That is a nice article Roger. The science certainly points to mankind being at least part of the problem or perhaps acting as a catalyst for the present warming cycle. That said, I can't be the only one who is looking forward to catching Columbia River tarpon

 

[rogerdodger]

Not a bad article! I'm not really a "believer" in man-made global warming..I agree there is some warming going on in areas right now (although it's hugely exaggerated) but the earth has natural warming and cooling cycles. It's just being used as a political tool by some.

I think if you consider this graph of average world temperature from 1880 to 2015:

and compare to this graph of CO2 concentration since 1960:

it leads to these questions: is the increase in average world temperature connected with the increase in CO2?

is the increase in CO2 the result of deforestation and burning fossil fuels?

depending how you answer these questions will determine in large part how you feel about the increase in global temperatures.

I will add just one more bit of data from NASA- Total Solar Irradiance, which has been flat, within +/-0.009%, since 1975.

 

[DrTheopolis]

Uh-oh, here we go.

First, I doubt bringing hydrocarbons from beneath the earth's surface and burning them down to CO2 and H2O at the rate we do is the greatest idea. Let me enter that into the record.

Next, the graphs Roger posted are complete garbage. It's quite well known that under the direction of the Evil One, James Hansen, NASA/NOAA went back and ALTERED OBSERVED DATA (with some lame excuse that equated to "people couldn't read a thermometer in the Old Days.")... which is pretty much the antithesis of "science." To put it in perspective -- imagine back when you were in high school (or even worse, college), and you made predictions based on how you thought an experiment would turn out. Then, when the data that you actually observed were nowhere near the numbers you expected, you figured it would be OK to go back and alter the data to make your experiment seem like not such a failure. Pretty sure if your teacher found out, you'd get an F instead of a D+.

And that's exactly what NASA et al have been doing -- trying to avoid the D+ (which you get for the effort, not the results).

The satellite records (which have only been around a few decades) are the only measurement system that hasn't been altered, and it doesn't show the alarming uptick the others do.

Pretty much every climate model NASA or the IPCC has offered over the last 15+ years has grossly overestimated warming. The models work under the assumption that CO2 is the primary driver of warming, and every last one of them has overestimated. This would lead a reasonable person to believe that the forcing effect of CO2 has been overvalued.

Don't get me wrong -- I'm all about science -- but this BS is science -- it's politics, and has been used as yet another tool to drive a wedge between people, to increase the power of our Dear Leaders.

Government-funded science is a joke. We need to keep science and politics separate.

 

[sapo]

Uh-oh, here we go.

First, I doubt bringing hydrocarbons from beneath the earth's surface and burning them down to CO2 and H2O at the rate we do is the greatest idea. Let me enter that into the record.

Next, the graphs Roger posted are complete garbage. It's quite well known that under the direction of the Evil One, James Hansen, NASA/NOAA went back and ALTERED OBSERVED DATA (with some lame excuse that equated to "people couldn't read a thermometer in the Old Days.")... which is pretty much the antithesis of "science." To put it in perspective -- imagine back when you were in high school (or even worse, college), and you made predictions based on how you thought an experiment would turn out. Then, when the data that you actually observed were nowhere near the numbers you expected, you figured it would be OK to go back and alter the data to make your experiment seem like not such a failure. Pretty sure if your teacher found out, you'd get an F instead of a D+.

And that's exactly what NASA et al have been doing -- trying to avoid the D+ (which you get for the effort, not the results).

The satellite records (which have only been around a few decades) are the only measurement system that hasn't been altered, and it doesn't show the alarming uptick the others do.

Pretty much every climate model NASA or the IPCC has offered over the last 15+ years has grossly overestimated warming. The models work under the assumption that CO2 is the primary driver of warming, and every last one of them has overestimated. This would lead a reasonable person to believe that the forcing effect of CO2 has been overvalued.

Don't get me wrong -- I'm all about science -- but this BS is science -- it's politics, and has been used as yet another tool to drive a wedge between people, to increase the power of our Dear Leaders.

Government-funded science is a joke. We need to keep science and politics separate.

Yep, exactly. Ya the satellite data hasn't shown much warming at all since it's been around..

Totally agree on the government-funded science. Some politicians just use global warming as a political tool to get the government more power, trying to regulate everything, etc.

 

[GaryP1958]

We are at the end of a mini ice age!

 

[pinstriper]

We are at the end of a mini ice age!

Wait, are you suggesting that you can influence conclusions by being selective with the endpoints on the data ? You don't say !

 

[wils]

I remember the scientists telling me that I was causing global cooling leading to the next ice age via the destruction of the ozone with my cans of aerosal sprays.
Maybe we should go back to using cans of aerosol spray to counter global warming.

I've heard recently that entire island nations are going to be totally swamped.......... merely by the oceans rising a few inches? How high are these island nations anyway?

And Al Gore - the self-appointed King of the Alarmists - has that really big house that he buys "carbon credits" for....RIGHT ON THE OCEAN. I hope that he has good flood insurance....

Are we contributors to our environment - good and/or bad? Yup.
To the extent that some want to force us to believe? I guess it all depends on who's paying the scientists.

 

[sapo]

Yep wils. Sadly lots of people are mislead by the "crisis" of global warming presented to us by our politicians

 

[troutmasta]

Roger if your silly charts were right then that would mean the ruthless Federal Government and its dark leader would not be there to sell us an agenda, designed to corrupt the minds of the people, in a conspiracy to rob of us of our electoral power and further corrupt the system for their own benefit.

It would just mean that as a society, we elect representatives to protect us and that is what they've appointed these people to do.

I think we can all agree, that just doesn't seem rational.

Here's a chart for you-
Where in the World Is Climate Change Denial Most Prevalent?

Its quite obvious that the conspiracy extends beyond our borders...To think 90+ percent of the human race is caught up in this thing..and all so the American Government can push its secret agenda.

Well played NOAA....well played.

 

[Shaun Solomon]

I get a kick out of people who presume we are powerless as a species to have an impact on climate because "the world is just SO BIG!"

Nope... As always, people are lacking in imagination and a sense of scale. People also think one hundred years is a long time because that is a long human lifespan.

Whatever. I will be dead soon, and I didn't have any kids.

SS

 

[sapo]

Lol^^

 

[sapo]

Roger if your silly charts were right then that would mean the ruthless Federal Government and its dark leader would not be there to sell us an agenda, designed to corrupt the minds of the people, in a conspiracy to rob of us of our electoral power and further corrupt the system for their own benefit.

It would just mean that as a society, we elect representatives to protect us and that is what they've appointed these people to do.

I think we can all agree, that just doesn't seem rational.

Here's a chart for you-
Where in the World Is Climate Change Denial Most Prevalent?

Its quite obvious that the conspiracy extends beyond our borders...To think 90+ percent of the human race is caught up in this thing..and all so the American Government can push its secret agenda.

Well played NOAA....well played.

Interesting chart. Looks like quite a few people listen to the liberal mainstream media, don't do any research for themselves. (And yes, the NYT is quite liberal.)

Good sarcasm though.

 

[GaryP1958]

Global warming is a political joke but no doubt man does really screw up Mother Earth, the thing is she always wins! Current mankind and our current civilization will be a minor blip on the history of earth!

 

[troutmasta]

[MENTION=13167]sapo[/MENTION], ya I'm sure the majority of the world is influenced by the liberal mainstream media. What's more likely is that a small portion of the world, blames there actions on the misconceptions of others. "Don't do any research for themselves?" Note the charts at the top of the page, they are not estimations, they're graphs, things actually happening found by someone researching.

But I'm sure the liberal mainstream media is in cohoots with the federal government and those liars at NASA and NOAA in an attempt to do whatever Unamerican thing, the small percentage of the world believes they're trying to do.

 

[sapo]

No use arguing, let's keep the talk fishy...I could go on for days lol, point is, it's used for politics more than anything else. Scientists have made predictions in the past (Al Gore claiming the arctic would be ice-free by the summer of 2014) that haven't come true.

Essentially, there is evidence of warming for quite a while now, but it's being overly exaggerated by global warming alarmists. The point of it is to get more control for the government, more regulations, path to socialism/communism.

Studies were conducted and 71% of Republicans and 29% of Democrats do not believe in man-made global warming. I'm sure that "small percentage" is very unscientific and ignorant..and I'm sure they're just a "small few".

Anyway, i'm done with this talk...seems like a 50/50 split on this forum between yes and no on manmade global warming

 

[troutmasta]

Hillarious :lol:

Path to Socialism and Communism....change the record please...I thought that's what welfare and gun control were for?

I'll settle on the "vast majority of the world" if you want to dissect numbers, as far as this small sub population of Americans, ya it may be 50/50 but that is fortunately not the consensus of the "vast majority of the world".

 

[GaryP1958]

End of this debate!