I'm never purposefully obtuse. It's a major pet peeve.
I think the main argument is that humans are incapable of heavily influencing any of those sources.just because the climate has changed without human influence in the past doesn't mean humans can never influence it. people die of natural causes all the time. doesn't mean nobody ever gets murdered.
every climate scientist, every alarmist... heck even nutjobs like al gore all know "the climate has always changed" so it really boggles my mind when people bring that up in an argument
the climate has always changed due to various phenomena... fluctuation of cosmic rays, the solar/sunspot cycle, the earth's tilt on its axis, the gradual warming of the sun over time (separate from its sunspot cycles), and the content of the atmosphere. i'm probably missing a bunch
when humans are heavily influencing one of those sources... it follows that the climate can be affected. the idea that pumping a lot of CO2 into the atmosphere would lead to warming has been around since the 1800's (i pointed these out to you last time... when you made that silly claim about the supposed "shift from global warming to climate change"
I think most people are in favor of this.i dont know that a carbon tax is really the best way to address the issue. i think it makes sense to subsidize renewable energy and put a lot of funding towards researching nuclear and solar would make sense. increase the efficiency of those sources to the point where fossil fuels are no longer economically viable
but i think you know very well what people are referring to when we talk about "climate change"... maybe i'm wrong
that's not much of an argument when we've already seen how much humans can influence the content of the atmosphere... particularly CO2I think the main argument is that humans are incapable of heavily influencing any of those sources.
I think most people are in favor of this.
their source as your own link put it, is page 4 of this linked attachment
https://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/n...lysis-2017.pdf
please look at page 4
Looks like an "El Nino" anomaly. Does this take away from the fact that the Earth's temperature has dropped since Trump was elected?
their source as your own link put it, is page 4 of this linked attachment
https://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/n...lysis-2017.pdf
please look at page 4
El Nino causes higher temperatures. La Nina causes lower temperatures.
that's why looking at the same graph on page 4, you can tell that 1998 had a particularly strong el nino event. you can guess what 2017-2018 have been. page 6 of that same attachment walks you through the cycles.
and no, of course it doesn't change that temperatures are were lower in 2017 than 2016. but that has nothing to do with "climate change alarmism." it's an expected outcome when you have la nina following an el nino year. and despite being affected by la nina, 2017 was still one of the 3 warmest years on record
Heartland Ins ute Compares Climate Science Believers And Reporters To Mass ‘Murderers And Madmen’
The Chicago-based anti-science think tank
is comparing all those who accept climate science — and the journalists who report on it accurately — to Charles Manson, the Unabomber, and Osama Bin Laden.
This far-beyond-the-pale ad campaign to promote their Chicago conference later this month is a moment of truth for both the think tank and the broader community of disinformers and their enablers.
GM ended their financial support of Heartland earlier this month, as has AT&T, but
why are State Farm and Microsoft still supporting it?
Many other public corporations have donated money or provided resources to Heartland,
including Eli Lilly & Co., GlaxoSmithKline, Nucor, Pfizer, and Time Warner Cable.
Will they cut ties or implicitly endorse these extreme ads?
Heartland ended their gruesome failure today at 5 pm, but in a release, refused to admit it was a mistake or apologize. Heartland Ins ute President Joseph Bast tried to call this an “experiment” even though a series of billboards were planned (see below) and stated,
“We do not apologize for running the ad.”
This is a collective act by the Ins ute expressing its core worldview. A sustained billboard campaign would have to be signed off at the highest levels. Heartland displays the above image on its main website, proudly announcing its campaign and linking to its robust defense of “Our Billboards” on its conference website.
Billboards in Chicago paid for by The Heartland Ins ute point out that some of the world’s most notorious criminals say they “still believe in global warming” — and ask viewers if they do, too…
The billboard series features Ted Kaczynski, the infamous Unabomber;
Charles Manson, a mass murderer;
and Fidel Castro, a tyrant.
Other global warming alarmists who may appear on future billboards include
Osama bin Laden and
James J. Lee (who took hostages inside the headquarters of the Discovery Channel in 2010).These rogues and villains were chosen because they made public statements about how man-made global warming is a crisis and how mankind must take immediate and drastic actions to stop it.
Why did Heartland choose to feature these people on its billboards?
Because what these murderers and madmen have said differs very little from what spokespersons for the United Nations, journalists for the “mainstream” media, and liberal politicians say about global warming….
The point is that believing in global warming is not “mainstream,” smart, or sophisticated.
In fact, it is just the opposite of those things. Still believing in man-made global warming — after all the scientific discoveries and revelations that point against this theory — is more than a little nutty. In fact, some really crazy people use it to justify immoral and frightening behavior.
https://thinkprogress.org/heartland-...-65bb91ce3e39/
2012 news
So have any new findings solidified your current stance?
Links and discussion.
Thanks.
West Antarctic ice melt poses unique threat to U.S.
News of Antarctica's accelerating ice melt garnered worldwide headlines yesterday,
as scientists revealed that 3 trillion tons of ice has been lost to the sea since 1992 —
mostly from the thawing West Antarctic Ice Sheet and Antarctic Peninsula.
Why it matters:
The location of the ice melt is important for determining the future of coastal communities, according to climate scientists.
And, due to West Antarctica melting, it turns out that the U.S. coastline will be hit extra hard, paying a sea level rise tax of about 25%.
https://www.axios.com/losing-ice-fro...6e66d5403.html
Three Climatic Monsters with Asteroid Impact
CO2 with consequent global warming, when excessive, literally kills the oceans. As it happens, the oceans absorb 30-40% of CO2 and 80-90% of planetary heat
a new carbon sink theory claims the oceans have maxed-out, thus unable to absorb additional CO2 after taking up approximately 130B tons of CO2 over the past century (all-time approximately 38,000 gigatons of CO2, which is 16xs terrestrial CO2).
it is believed the oceans could reverse course and start emitting CO2, a “reverse sink,” at some juncture. The implications are daunting,
because of excessive CO2, more acidic, thus imperiling the life cycle of pteropods, tiny pea-like free-swimming snails at the base of the food chain that multiply by the billions, maybe trillions, serving as a source of sustenance for everything from krill to large whales.
a recent long-term study shows plankton production down 40% over the past 50 years. This is one more endangered resource of planetary oxygen, too much heat.
global warming slows down the thermohaline, ocean conveyor belt, which is now at its slowest in 1,600 years. The thermohaline is the deep-water circulation pattern around the world that forms the structure of ocean currents and ocean health.
global warming is killing off underwater kelp forests, key to survival for many species. Along the northern California coast for hundreds of miles bull kelp forests died. Australia now lists its giant kelp forests as an “endangered ecological zone”
Methane clathrates in the Arctic pose extraordinary risks to all humanity, especially in the shallow waters, depth 50m, of the East Siberian Arctic Shelf, A joint U.S./Russian research effort out of the University of Alaska/Fairbanks has discovered ever-increasing zones of methane bubbling to surface, in some cases up to a mile in diameter.
“Can civilization withstand a 50-gigaton CH4 burp?” His answer: “No, I don’t think it can.”
The Colorado River Basin ecosystem –CRB- may be the prototype of collapsing ecosystems as a result of the human footprint.
(1) excessive GHGs warm the planet and alter hydrology systems such that the Rocky Mountains, the source of the river, receive less moisture in the form of snow, and
(2) human consumption, as well as water usage mismanagement, drains the system dry.
Just ask Las Vegas as they installed a “third straw” to suck up the last remaining drops at Lake Mead. “The risks of Lake Mead dropping to catastrophically low levels have ramped up dramatically,
the Southwest is experiencing its worst drought in 1,200 years.
the Bureau says 2018 Rocky Mountain runoff will be down 40% in the midst of a 19-year penetrating drought. Ipso facto, there is a
high probability of the “first-ever water shortage in the Colorado River Basin- ecosystem” in the near future,
The entire Middle East Mediterranean coastline is drying up faster than anywhere else on the planet. Thus, spawning eco migrants by the tens of thousands.
Monster #3 concerning ecosystems collapsing is also all about
loss of insect abundance as insects are primary to creation and support of soil, new soil, aerate soil, and pollinate crops, ecosystems that support all life.
The way it works is as follows: Insects do fine without humans but humans cannot exist without insects.
recent readings have shown a drop of up to 80% in flying insect abundance, extinction-type numbers.
The Stanford University Global Index for invertebrates is down 40% over the past 40 years.
it appears that humans are poisoning the planet. According to Julian Cribb, author of Surviving the 21st Century:
“Ours is a poisoned planet – This explosion in chemicals happened so rapidly people are unaware.”
Each year an avalanche of toxic chemicals, amounting to 250B tons, drips over the earth, which over time, will sanitize all life,
three monster climatic events are on a collision course as the forces of the Great Acceleration triggers one tipping point after another, no turning back. Already,
year-over-year, scientists are surprised by past projections, always too low in hindsight!
The Stern Report likely still serves as a reliable road map for what happens going forward, “assuming business as usual.” However, the report is dated as CO2 is increasing at a 50% faster rate today than in 2008, which likely means the report is way too conservative. (Here we go again with expectations too low with hindsight).
“The rate of carbon dioxide growth over the last decade is 100 to 200 times faster than what the Earth experienced during the transition from the last Ice Age. This is a real shock to the atmosphere.”
https://www.counterpunch.org/2018/07/13/three-climatic-monsters-with-asteroid-impact-part-2/
U.S. energy-related CO2 emissions expected to rise slightly in 2018, remain flat in 2019
https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=34872
Repug kakistocratic EPA is bent to increase CO2 emissions, and pollutions every type, as dictated by BigCorp.
Pruitt's replacement is expected to be much worse than Pruitt
CO2 emission per capita per year per country (2000 data)
USA "worst in class" of industrial countries of CO2 emitters / capita
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...er_country.png
then add in vastly under-estimated methane emissions from oil/gas extraction
"Climate change is a fact of life, as is not contested by Defendants. But the serious problems caused thereby are not for the judiciary to ameliorate. Global warming and solutions thereto must be addressed by the two other branches of government."
-John F. Keenan, U.S. District Court judge for the Southern District of New York
lol
10-10-2010 beginning of thread, CO2 concentration in atmosphere: 386ppm
Current CO2 concentration 410ppm
"our data is not comparable to official national CO2 data".
Good data on burning fuels, but misses other factors, as well as overall context of energy intensity of economic outputs.
US has been steadily using less and less coal, the most intensive form of fuel.
A trend that Trump wants to reverse. Because he is an idiot.
That is one of the dumbest things I have seen you say, and you say a lot of dumb, lying, debunked things.
CO2 concentration 1970: 325 ppm
CO2 concentration on my join day here, 2005: Approx 380 ppm
CO2 at thread start, 2010, -- 388
CO2 now --410
ftp://aftp.cmdl.noaa.gov/products/tr...co2_mm_mlo.txt
June Temperature
5th Warmest June since 1880: 2018
Coolest June since 1880: 1893
The world is most definitely getting hotter.
CO2 concentrations are rising at the fastest rate we have ever recorded.
The scientists who study this are pretty clear that there is a causal connection, and we are responsible.
I told you almost a decade ago, that the data will just get clearer and clearer. That is exactly what has happened.
Every single one of your trolling, failed talking points has been demolished.
and yet... you dig in your heels. That takes a special kind of stupid.
... and seriously, even Darrin would be embarrassed to make this point.
Just... wow.
Otis Nixon says hi
Not a denier. A proponent. Plants LOVE 2000 ppm; we're at ~400. 20% there.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
