Page 27 of 146 FirstFirst ... 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 ... LastLast
Results 651 to 675 of 3644
  1. #651
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Moose, Iowa
    Posts
    7,926
    Lolz. Really? Almost nowhere has the weather not gone off the rails. No study even needed anymore.

    Troll paid or unpaid posts fake facts 24 hours a day while the rest of us have lives to lead.



    Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

  2. #652
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    In a van... down by the river
    Posts
    13,654
    RJ's a bot, folks. Move along... nothing to see here.

  3. #653
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    1,084
    Quote Originally Posted by NWFlow View Post
    Please stop asking for evidence and then citing obviously agenda-based sources. Also, my post you are responding to wasn't talking about extreme weather events, I was talking about global temperature development. I am going to give you the benefit of the doubt and respond assuming you just misunderstood my post, but please note that this "bait and switch" tactic is a bullshit debate tactic often employed by people trying to refute scientific evidence without corresponding supporting evidence.

    It seems like maybe you don't understand the concept of uncertainty in the scientific process and your arguments switch somewhat haphazardly between rejecting the economics of renewable energy sources, global temperature development over the Holocene, and frequency of extreme weather events. I don't know much about the economics of renewables, but I do know that analyses of trends in global temperatures and frequency/intensity analyses of extreme events especially beyond the instrumental record require different proxies with different spatial and temporal resolutions. Thus, the uncertainty regarding global temperature development over the Holocene is lower than the uncertainty associated with reconstructions of extreme weather events. I'd agree with you that we are much less certain about short-duration extreme events (i.e. flooding / intense precipitation / intense tropical storms) than we are about global temperature development -- and this is well-reflected in the IPCC report, no?
    I did not cite an agenda based source. All I intended to link there is the heat wave graph from EPA. I didn't even read whatever was written below.

    I'm not asking for any reconstruction of of extreme weather beyond the instrumental record. I'm in total agreement that there are limitations with that. I am saying that the instrumental record has zero evidence of extreme weather getting worse during our 150 year period of warming. Given everything we have been told, this should not be the case.

  4. #654
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Edge of the Great Basin
    Posts
    5,539
    Quote Originally Posted by ron johnson View Post
    1. What other abrupt non comet related events are you talking about? There is nothing remotely abrupt about our warming over the past 150 years.

    2. What regional temperature data am I cherry picking? The best record we have is from Greenland.

    3/4. If we look over the geologic time record we actually don't understand that CO2 is really important in regulating the climate. If you look way back in time there is virtually no correlation between CO2 levels and temperature. In more recent times there has been correlation, but the correlation is not temperature following CO2 levels, the correlation is that CO2 levels have followed temperature with a lag time of 800 years.

    None of this is to say rising CO2 can't cause temperatures to warm, but the record doesn't give evidence of this.

    Also as a side note, life on earth is dead at CO2 levels of 180ppm. I'd rather be sitting at 400ppm than 280.
    1 - There are multiple abrupt climate change events in the geologic record. For example, climate during the last glacial period was far from stable. There are at least 25 events involving an abrupt warming to near-interglacial conditions that occurred in a matter of decades.

    2 - So we have these different proxies that give us information about past climate and ideally you don’t rely on just one. So instead you use a multi-proxy approach, multiple records to reconstruct the changes that have been going on. Things like tree rings, the composite oxygen isotope record, an aggregation of ocean core data, ice-core samples, etc.

    The key is global mean temperature, not regional variations. And what we see is global deep ocean temperature data along with global tropical temperature data indicates global temperatures have returned to the Holocene maximum.


    3- What we’ve learned through studying these long-term processes, these long-term records, is that carbon dioxide CO2 is the guerrilla in the climate system. CO2 controls these large scale shifts in climate over the Earth’s history. So if there’s more CO2, greenhouse gases, in the atmosphere either through the release of deep deposits or through the extraction due to chemical weathering it’s these large scale changes in greenhouse gases that tend to shift the significant modes in climate.

    4 - If you'd rather be sitting at 400ppm than 280 then you're potentially looking at something approximating a Pliocene climate which was at 380ppm when temperatures may not have been more than 1-2°C warmer on global average compared with peak Holocene temperature.

  5. #655
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Wyoming
    Posts
    1,624
    Jong Rohnson shows how we got into the climate crisis today. There is an all out effort to overwhelm the truth with a bunch of bots or hired hacks who spew absolute bullshit to try to create doubt about the climate crisis. The fossil fuel companies have taken their strategy from the tobacco industry, and they have hired merchants of doubt.

    The longer they can keep people from the truth, the more money they can make exploiting our future.

  6. #656
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    1,084
    Quote Originally Posted by NWFlow View Post
    https://www.nature.com/articles/nclimate2617#ref11

    Here's a nice study with a good library of cited literature more about extreme events, and also has a nice discussion (with cited literature) regarding attribution studies.
    You don't think the IPCC doesn't look at all these studies? This is what SR15 has to say on droughts: "low confidence in the sign of drought trends since 1950 at global scale... likely to be trends in some regions of the world, including increases in drought in the Mediterranean and W Africa & decreases in droughts in central N America & NW Australia."

    On rainfall: "
    There is high confidence that mean precipitation over the mid-latitude land areas of the Northern Hemisphere has increased since 1951"

    "There is, in particular, low confidence regarding observed trends in precipitation in monsoon regions."

    "for land regions where observational coverage is sufficient for evaluation, it was assessed that there is medium confidence that anthropogenic forcing has contributed to a global-scale intensification of heavy precipitation over the second half of the 20th century."

    All they have is high confidence in higher mean precipitation in the Northern Hemisphere since 1950, and medium confidence in an intensification of heavy precip globally. Hardly "extreme." There is no observed trends for floods, wildfires, hurricanes, and tornadoes.

  7. #657
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    1,084
    Quote Originally Posted by Kinnikinnick View Post
    Ron Johnson is either a shill for the fossil fuel industry or most likely simply unable to even understand the sources that he himself posts.

    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    And what sources are those?

  8. #658
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Middle of the NEK
    Posts
    5,754
    Name:  638.jpg
Views: 308
Size:  75.9 KB
    Aim for the chopping block. If you aim for the wood, you will have nothing. Aim past the wood, aim through the wood.
    http://tim-kirchoff.pixels.com/

  9. #659
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    1,084
    Quote Originally Posted by neufox47 View Post
    Sea level rise is accelerating. https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/sea-level/

    Greenland getting that warm is unusual and getting that warm as frequently as it is is very unusual.

    You dismiss cost projections by saying it doesn’t matter because you don’t live on the coast, oh good I’m sure the economy will be fine!
    LOL seriously? You are touting sea levels rising to 3.3mm/year from 3.1? We're doomed.

    Greenland has been warmer than today for the majority of the past 10,000 years.

    The US and Europe could switch to 100% non carbon tomorrow and there is likely to still be sea level issues.

  10. #660
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    1,084
    Quote Originally Posted by From_the_NEK View Post
    Has he actually even replied to posts outside this thread? His troll game is either very strong or he is getting paid a lot by the Russians to sow discontent and misinformation.

    More likely, as seems to be the case with most of the climate deniers I know, is that he is just here replying as just another way to "Stick it to the Libs!"

    This can't be a conservative vs liberal argument but it always comes back around to that.
    This shit is going to fuck up this planet for the survival of our species as we currently exist.
    I'm not even a conservative. Half my wardrobe is Patagonia believe it or not.

    The trolling is coming from you, Kinni, WMD and co. You guys are so out of your depth you have no choice but to resort to name calling.

  11. #661
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    1,084
    Quote Originally Posted by old goat View Post
    I did and it says exactly what I said. I guess you think that you can throw in a source, claim it proves your point, and nobody will actually look at the source and see that it doesn't say what you say it says.
    On droughts: "low confidence in the sign of drought trends since 1950 at global scale... likely to be trends in some regions of the world, including increases in drought in the Mediterranean and W Africa & decreases in droughts in central N America & NW Australia."

    On floods: "There is low confidence due to limited evidence, however, that anthropogenic climate change has affected the frequency and the magnitude of floods."

    On tropical cyclones: "Numerous studies towards and beyond AR5 have reported a decreasing trend in the global number of tropical cyclones and/or the globally accumulated cyclonic energy" and "there is only low confidence regarding changes in global tropical cyclone numbers under global warming over the last four decades."

    Tornadoes and forest fires aren't mentioned, but you can be sure if the IPCC could find something, they would be in there.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	tornadoes-1954-2018.jpg 
Views:	30 
Size:	116.8 KB 
ID:	291357
    Name:  fires.png
Views: 292
Size:  103.3 KB

  12. #662
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Wyoming
    Posts
    1,624
    We are so out of our depth that we are drowning as the ice caps melt and sea levels rise.

    "2°C: BEYOND THE LIMIT
    Extreme climate change has arrived in America"

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/graph...OkXeYpgJFPy82c

    Over the past two decades, the 2 degrees Celsius number has emerged as a critical threshold for global warming. In the 2015 Paris accord, international leaders agreed that the world should act urgently to keep the Earth’s average temperature increases “well below” 2 degrees Celsius by the year 2100 to avoid a host of catastrophic changes.

    The potential consequences are daunting. The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change warns that if Earth heats up by an average of 2 degrees Celsius, virtually all the world’s coral reefs will die; retreating ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica could unleash massive sea level rise; and summertime Arctic sea ice, a shield against further warming, would begin to disappear.

    But global warming does not heat the world evenly.

    A Washington Post analysis of more than a century of National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration temperature data across the Lower 48 states and 3,107 counties has found that major areas are nearing or have already crossed the 2-degree Celsius mark.

    — Today, more than 1 in 10 Americans — 34 million people — are living in rapidly heating regions, including New York City and Los Angeles. Seventy-one counties have already hit the 2-degree Celsius mark.

    — Alaska is the fastest-warming state in the country, but Rhode Island is the first state in the Lower 48 whose average temperature rise has eclipsed 2 degrees Celsius. Other parts of the Northeast — New Jersey, Connecticut, Maine and Massachusetts — trail close behind.

    — While many people associate global warming with summer’s melting glaciers, forest fires and disastrous flooding, it is higher winter temperatures that have made New Jersey and nearby Rhode Island the fastest warming of the Lower 48 states.

    The average New Jersey temperature from December through February now exceeds 0 degrees Celsius, the temperature at which water freezes. That threshold, reached over the past three decades, has meant lakes don't freeze as often, snow melts more quickly, and insects and pests don't die as they once did in the harsher cold.

    The freezing point “is the most critical threshold among all temperatures,” said David A. Robinson, New Jersey state climatologist and professor at Rutgers University’s department of geography.

    The uneven rise in temperatures across the United States matches what is happening around the world.

    Rhode Island is the first state in the Lower 48 whose average temperature rise has eclipsed 2 degrees Celsius.
    In the past century, the Earth has warmed 1 degree Celsius. But that’s just an average. Some parts of the globe — including the mountains of Romania and the steppes of Mongolia — have registered increases twice as large. It has taken decades or in some cases a century. But for huge swaths of the planet, climate change is a present-tense reality, not one looming ominously in the distant future.

    To find the world’s 2C hot spots, its fastest-warming places, The Post analyzed temperature databases, including those kept by NASA and NOAA; peer-reviewed scientific studies; and reports by local climatologists. The global data sets draw upon thousands of land-based weather stations and other measurements, such as ocean buoys armed with sensors and ship logs dating as far back as 1850.

    In any one geographic location, 2 degrees Celsius may not represent global cataclysmic change, but it can threaten ecosystems, change landscapes and upend livelihoods and cultures.

  13. #663
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Wyoming
    Posts
    1,624
    Time for everyone to block Ron Johnson. Everything he posts is a lie.

  14. #664
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Edge of the Great Basin
    Posts
    5,539
    Quote Originally Posted by ron johnson View Post
    Greenland has been warmer than today for the majority of the past 10,000 years.
    This is not true for central Greenland and it is not true for the global record. And assuming you're referring to Easterbrook’s GISP2 Greenland ice sheet regional proxy then that has been debunked and is also not true.

  15. #665
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Wyoming
    Posts
    1,624
    "'Coal is over': the miners rooting for the Green New Deal
    Appalachia’s main industry is dying and some workers are looking to a new economic promise after Trump’s proves empty"

    Carl Shoupe, a retired coalminer in Harlan county, Kentucky, who worked as a union organizer for 14 years, said people in Appalachia need to start moving away from relying solely on the coal industry as an economic resource for the region.

    “What we’ve been doing is trying to transition into the 21st century and get on past coal,” he said.

    Those transition efforts are still being impeded by the coal industry, as Shoupe says the majority of property in the area is still owned by coal companies and they have denied his efforts to develop solar panel fields.

    The Green New Deal, a resolution proposed by Ocasio-Cortez, calls on the federal government to transform the United States’ energy infrastructure and economy to deal with the climate crisis. The resolution includes a call to create millions of high-wage union jobs through a federal jobs guarantee and a just transition for vulnerable communities.

    Republicans – and Fox News – have slammed the proposal. “It’ll kill millions of jobs. It’ll crush the dreams of the poorest Americans and disproportionately harm minority communities,” the US president said last month.

    Trump wears a coalminer’s hard hat while addressing his supporters at a rally in West Virginia in 2016.
    Facebook Twitter Pinterest
    Trump wears a coalminer’s hard hat while addressing his supporters at a rally in West Virginia in 2016. Photograph: The Washington Post/Getty Images
    Shoupe doesn’t think so. “They have bushwhacked this Green New Deal, told all kinds of lies. For different people in different parts of the country, it means different things,” he said.

    Stanley Sturgill, a coalminer for 41 years in Harlan county, Kentucky, explained the Green New Deal would open the door for elected officials to use the plan to render solutions needed in their own communities.

    “If it was called the Red New Deal, it would be approved by now,” said Sturgill. “What you’re doing with the Green New Deal is you’re opening the door to infringe on the Republicans’ money and that’s what they’re afraid of. Republicans laugh and say you can’t pay for it. But if you tax everybody what they should be taxed, and I’m talking about the wealthy, there wouldn’t be a problem.”

    Sturgill cited the coal companies that receive billions of dollars in annual government subsidies and tax breaks, while hiring expensive lawyers to fight paying black lung benefits to coalminers. “I fought seven years before I got my black lung benefits, and they were hoping I died before getting paid,” added Sturgill.

    Thousands of coalminers are currently at risk of losing their pensions. The coalminers’ pension fund is estimated to become insolvent by 2022 as many of the companies that were paying into the fund have filed for bankruptcy. The Black Lung Disability Trust Fund that was founded to provide benefits to coalminers with black lung disease – a progressive disease that eventually suffocates sufferers – is also severely underfunded.
    https://www.theguardian.com/environm...Whxh5rigBBhwVc

  16. #666
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The Bull City
    Posts
    14,003
    Fire devastation has gone down thanks to our increasingly better detection, mitigation, and fire fighting techniques.

    Globally, according to the new data, the number of floods and other hydrological events have quadrupled since 1980 and have doubled since 2004, highlighting the urgency of adaptation to climate change. Climatological events, such as extreme temperatures, droughts, and forest fires, have more than doubled since 1980. Meteorological events, such as storms, have doubled since 1980.
    https://www.sciencedaily.com/release...0321130859.htm
    Go that way really REALLY fast. If something gets in your way, TURN!

  17. #667
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    1,084
    Quote Originally Posted by MultiVerse View Post
    1 - There are multiple abrupt climate change events in the geologic record. For example, climate during the last glacial period was far from stable. There are at least 25 events involving an abrupt warming to near-interglacial conditions that occurred in a matter of decades.

    2 - So we have these different proxies that give us information about past climate and ideally you don’t rely on just one. So instead you use a multi-proxy approach, multiple records to reconstruct the changes that have been going on. Things like tree rings, the composite oxygen isotope record, an aggregation of ocean core data, ice-core samples, etc.

    The key is global mean temperature, not regional variations. And what we see is global deep ocean temperature data along with global tropical temperature data indicates global temperatures have returned to the Holocene maximum.


    3- What we’ve learned through studying these long-term processes, these long-term records, is that carbon dioxide CO2 is the guerrilla in the climate system. CO2 controls these large scale shifts in climate over the Earth’s history. So if there’s more CO2, greenhouse gases, in the atmosphere either through the release of deep deposits or through the extraction due to chemical weathering it’s these large scale changes in greenhouse gases that tend to shift the significant modes in climate.

    4 - If you'd rather be sitting at 400ppm than 280 then you're potentially looking at something approximating a Pliocene climate which was at 380ppm when temperatures may not have been more than 1-2°C warmer on global average compared with peak Holocene temperature.
    1. Sure, I'm with you, but there is nothing abrupt about the warming of the past 150 years.

    2. Right.

    3. This isn't true, I addressed this in the post you are quoting.

    4. This is highly speculative, but sure. There isn't any evidence that 1-2 degrees warmer would be bad for society, other than sea level rise, but that is a function of humans building along the coasts than anything inherently bad about the warmth.

  18. #668
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Wyoming
    Posts
    1,624
    "New Pentagon Report: “The effects of a changing climate are a national security issue”"

    In the Fiscal Year 2018 National Defense Authorization Act, the U.S. Congress asked the Department of Defense (DoD) to provide a report on “vulnerabilities to military installations and combatant commander requirements resulting from climate change over the next 20 years.” That report was delivered to Congress yesterday, prosaically-titled Report on Effects of a Changing Climate to the Department of Defense.

    The first sentence in the “background” section of the study is worth noting. It reaffirms that the DoD continues to take climate change seriously, as it has across four administrations, both Republican and Democrat. The sentence reads: “The effects of a changing climate are a national security issue with potential impacts to Department of Defense (DoD or the Department) missions, operational plans, and installations.”

    There are many other important points covered in the report. It recognizes the impacts of climate change on missions, operational plans and installations, it highlights specific examples of climate impacts, it provides an overview of work that the Department is doing in this space, and it reveals that about 2/3 of the 79 military installations surveyed are already facing climate change-related risks (recurrent flooding at 15 bases, drought exposure at 43 bases, and wildfire risk to 36 bases).
    https://climateandsecurity.org/2019/...ecurity-issue/

  19. #669
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    1,084
    Quote Originally Posted by MultiVerse View Post
    This is not true for central Greenland and it is not true for the global record. And assuming you're referring to Easterbrook’s GISP2 Greenland ice sheet regional proxy then that has been debunked and is also not true.
    I'm not buying the Easterbrook debunking. We have another proxy that suggests it was even warmer: https://phys.org/news/2018-06-ancien...y-thought.html

    "Other records have shown that northern Greenland's climate was much warmer than people expected during those periods, and those results received justified skepticism," Axford said. "Now we have an independent record that confirms that when the Arctic warmed in the past, there was especially strong warming in northern Greenland."

  20. #670
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Wyoming
    Posts
    1,624
    "World food security increasingly at risk due to 'unprecedented' climate change impact, new UN report warns"
    https://news.un.org/en/story/2019/08/1043921

    "Climate Change Threatens the World’s Food Supply, United Nations Warns"
    https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/08/c...od-supply.html

    The report, prepared by more than 100 experts from 52 countries and released in summary form in Geneva on Thursday, found that the window to address the threat is closing rapidly. A half-billion people already live in places turning into desert, and soil is being lost between 10 and 100 times faster than it is forming, according to the report.

    Climate change will make those threats even worse, as floods, drought, storms and other types of extreme weather threaten to disrupt, and over time shrink, the global food supply. Already, more than 10 percent of the world’s population remains undernourished, and some authors of the report warned in interviews that food shortages could lead to an increase in cross-border migration.

    A particular danger is that food crises could develop on several continents at once, said Cynthia Rosenzweig, a senior research scientist at the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies and one of the lead authors of the report. “The potential risk of multi-breadbasket failure is increasing,” she said. “All of these things are happening at the same time.”

  21. #671
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    1,084
    Quote Originally Posted by SumJongGuy View Post
    In other news, BOTH arctic and antarctic volume shrunk to historic lows. Think about that for a minute. It's the middle of winter down in the antarctic and still shrinking.

    July 2019 was hottest month on record for the planet
    Polar sea ice melted to record lows
    They aren't saying that Antarctica is still shrinking in July, just that it had the least sea ice of the previous 41 July's.

  22. #672
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    1,084
    WMD showing all he is capable of... copy and paste any sensational headline he can find.

  23. #673
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Wyoming
    Posts
    1,624
    What's the Big Deal With a Few Degrees?


  24. #674
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Edge of the Great Basin
    Posts
    5,539
    Quote Originally Posted by ron johnson View Post
    I'm not buying the Easterbrook debunking. We have another proxy that suggests it was even warmer: https://phys.org/news/2018-06-ancien...y-thought.html

    "Other records have shown that northern Greenland's climate was much warmer than people expected during those periods, and those results received justified skepticism," Axford said. "Now we have an independent record that confirms that when the Arctic warmed in the past, there was especially strong warming in northern Greenland."
    From your quoted phys.org article:

    There is one caveat. Well-known changes in Earth's orbit caused warming during the early Holocene and Last Interglacial periods. Today, warming stems from man-made sources and is happening much faster than warming during those interglacial periods. That means there is a chance that Earth might not respond to current-day warming in the same way.

    "Past climate is our best analog for future warming, and our results hint that land at these very high latitudes in the Arctic may warm even more than predicted in the coming century," Axford said. "But nothing in Earth's past is a perfect analog because what's happening today is totally unprecedented."


    Also worth mentioning, your article doesn't support the idea that "Greenland has been warmer than today for the majority of the past 10,000 years." Instead, what the article says, even according your own quotes, is it looks like Greenland is more sensitive to warming than previously thought.

  25. #675
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    1,084
    Quote Originally Posted by MultiVerse View Post
    Also from your quoted phys.org article:

    There is one caveat. Well-known changes in Earth's orbit caused warming during the early Holocene and Last Interglacial periods. Today, warming stems from man-made sources and is happening much faster than warming during those interglacial periods. That means there is a chance that Earth might not respond to current-day warming in the same way.

    "Past climate is our best analog for future warming, and our results hint that land at these very high latitudes in the Arctic may warm even more than predicted in the coming century," Axford said. "But nothing in Earth's past is a perfect analog because what's happening today is totally unprecedented."
    None of this is true though. Anyone with eyes can look at the record and see that there is nothing unprecedented about this warming compared to other inter glacial periods. 1 degree of warming in 150 years.... totally unprecedented.

Posting Permissions

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