Page 32 of 64 FirstFirst ... 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 ... LastLast
Results 776 to 800 of 1585
  1. #776
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    309
    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 your chart is based on Easterbrook’s GISP2 Greenland ice sheet regional proxy then that has been debunked and is also not true.

    Temps have been rising for 150 years but most of the warming has occurred in the last 35 years.
    I've already been through this with you. It's hard to debunk Easterbrook when we have an independent proxy suggesting it was even warmer, and in this case neufox and I are talking strictly about Greenland: https://phys.org/news/2018-06-ancien...y-thought.html

    "...most of the warming has occurred in the last 35 years."

    -Not true, about half a degree pre 1940, half a degree post 1940.

  2. #777
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Big in Japan
    Posts
    35,998
    I just have to drop into this conversation and mention that I was watching CNN the other day, and they had a reporter up in Greenland because, you know, Trump, and they did this really stupid thing where they showed a glacier calving in, you know, August, and spent the next few minutes with the CLIMATE CHANGE! shit. My palm is still stuck to my forehead.

    Let's do some livin'
    After, we die

  3. #778
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Edge of the Great Basin
    Posts
    1,563
    Quote Originally Posted by ron johnson View Post
    I've already been through this with you. It's hard to debunk Easterbrook when we have an independent proxy suggesting it was even warmer, and in this case neufox and I are talking strictly about Greenland: https://phys.org/news/2018-06-ancien...y-thought.html

    "...most of the warming has occurred in the last 35 years."

    -Not true, about half a degree pre 1940, half a degree post 1940.
    Yep, you keep making the same false assertions. 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 to your own quotes last time, is it looks like Greenland is more sensitive to warming than previously thought. So it makes sense to see evidence of warmer/warming in the past/present at higher latitudes.


    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."


    According to NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies GLOBAL LAND-OCEAN TEMPERATURE INDEX most of the warming occurred in the past 35 years:

    The planet's average surface temperature has risen about 1.62 degrees Fahrenheit (0.9 degrees Celsius) since the late 19th century, a change driven largely by increased carbon dioxide and other human-made emissions into the atmosphere. Most of the warming occurred in the past 35 years, with the five warmest years on record taking place since 2010. Not only was 2016 the warmest year on record, but eight of the 12 months that make up the year — from January through September, with the exception of June — were the warmest on record for those respective months.

  4. #779
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    309
    Quote Originally Posted by MultiVerse View Post
    Yep, you keep making the same false assertions. 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 to your own quotes last time, is it looks like Greenland is more sensitive to warming than previously thought.


    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."


    According to NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies GLOBAL LAND-OCEAN TEMPERATURE INDEX :
    The planet's average surface temperature has risen about 1.62 degrees Fahrenheit (0.9 degrees Celsius) since the late 19th century, a change driven largely by increased carbon dioxide and other human-made emissions into the atmosphere.4 Most of the warming occurred in the past 35 years, with the five warmest years on record taking place since 2010. Not only was 2016 the warmest year on record, but eight of the 12 months that make up the year — from January through September, with the exception of June — were the warmest on record for those respective months.
    It certainly does support the idea that Greenland has been warmer than today for the majority past 10,000 years. It supports the GISP data, which shows that its been warmer for the majority of the past 10,000 years: "This confirms controversial geological records constructed from ice cores taken nearby, which also indicated significant warming during these time periods."

    The quotes from Axford sound like someone trying to keep his job. I challenge you to show me how the 1 degree of warming in the past 150 years is happening much faster, let alone unprecedented, compared to the past.



    Edit: I guess you edited your post after I responded? I'm pretty sure the NASA GISS comment wasn't in there before.

    In any case, take a look at the GISS data yourself. It doesn't even show what they are saying. It has steady temps 1880-1920, ~.6' warming 1920-1945, steady temps 1945-1980, then ~.5' warming 1980-today.
    Last edited by ron johnson; 08-20-2019 at 02:55 PM.

  5. #780
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Edge of the Great Basin
    Posts
    1,563
    Nope. Your phys.org article says that Greenland has been warmer in the past not that Greenland has been warmer for the past 10,000 years.

    From your article:

    During the Last Interglacial, global sea levels increased by 15 to 30 feet, largely due to thinning of Greenland and Antarctica's ice sheets. But now Northwestern's team believes northern Greenland's ice sheet experienced stronger warming than previously thought, which could mean that Greenland is more responsible for that sea-level rise.

  6. #781
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    309
    Quote Originally Posted by MultiVerse View Post
    Nope. Your phys.org article only shows that Greenland has been warmer in the past not that Greenland has been warmer for the past 10,000 years.
    Get real. The article confirms the early Holocene GISP data, but somehow we are supposed to believe that the the rest of the GISP data is false?

  7. #782
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Loveland, Chair 9.
    Posts
    3,592
    man, if you guys would just keep your offices and houses at 78 and sleep at 82; we'd have no problems; think how much CO2 the country would not burn.

    https://www.ajc.com/news/national/de...0a1z9dIV3vVYP/

    "According to Consumer Reports, the program, overseen by the federal Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Energy, suggests that cost- and energy-conscious homeowners keep their thermostats set to 78 degrees or higher during the summer. The recommended minimum temperatures are even higher for when you're out of the house or asleep, at 85 and 82 degrees, respectively."
    Eat em up Houston Cougars !

  8. #783
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    17,979
    Quote Originally Posted by SkiCougar View Post
    man, if you guys would just keep your offices and houses at 78 and sleep at 82
    Kind of strange people would have a problem with 78 during the day. Most people would consider that to be a perfectly comfortable temperature outdoors in the shade, so why do they need to keep their house cooler? 82 seems pretty hot for sleeping, though. Glad that's not something we have to deal with in Seattle (yet).

  9. #784
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Loveland, Chair 9.
    Posts
    3,592
    Quote Originally Posted by The AD View Post
    Kind of strange people would have a problem with 78 during the day. Most people would consider that to be a perfectly comfortable temperature outdoors in the shade, so why do they need to keep their house cooler? 82 seems pretty hot for sleeping, though. Glad that's not something we have to deal with in Seattle (yet).

    everybody is different but my parents keep it at 78 as like most older people; they like it warmer; all of the offspring complain when we walk in. our office AC went out and it was 80 for a month, it just takes some productivity out of you.
    Eat em up Houston Cougars !

  10. #785
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Wasatch Back: 7000'
    Posts
    8,677
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	67365F54-405C-43BC-961C-32634A40DF1C.jpg 
Views:	34 
Size:	181.2 KB 
ID:	291871
    "My policies are based not on some economics theory, but on things I and millions like me were brought up with: an honest day's work for an honest day's pay; live within your means; put by a nest egg for a rainy day; pay your bills on time; support the police." M. Thatcher (RIP)
    "...
    Judges smoke it, even the lawyer too...So you've got to legalize it..." Peter Tosh

  11. #786
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Moose, Iowa
    Posts
    5,815
    Quote Originally Posted by The AD View Post
    Kind of strange people would have a problem with 78 during the day. Most people would consider that to be a perfectly comfortable temperature outdoors in the shade, so why do they need to keep their house cooler? 82 seems pretty hot for sleeping, though. Glad that's not something we have to deal with in Seattle (yet).
    Holy shit 82 at night! Insane. This is proof the staff writers at CR have an average age of 90.

    Also 78 can feel too warm inside in a humid climate if the ac isn't running because the temp outside is only a couple degrees warmer. I am always adjusting my thermostat...on super hot days 80 can feel great but on super humid nights that aren't super warm you might have to go 74.

    Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

  12. #787
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Loveland, Chair 9.
    Posts
    3,592
    Quote Originally Posted by uglymoney View Post
    Holy shit 82 at night! Insane. This is proof the staff writers at CR have an average age of 90.

    Also 78 can feel too warm inside in a humid climate if the ac isn't running because the temp outside is only a couple degrees warmer. I am always adjusting my thermostat...on super hot days 80 can feel great but on super humid nights that aren't super warm you might have to go 74.

    Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
    second that.

    I understand as a ski forum TGR is going to like it colder naturally, but I have never heard of anyone that like to sleep at 82, most like 72 or lower; even my "78 feels right" parents don't like it over 75 at night.
    Eat em up Houston Cougars !

  13. #788
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Middle of the NEK
    Posts
    4,513
    Quote Originally Posted by SkiCougar View Post
    everybody is different but my parents keep it at 78 as like most older people; they like it warmer; all of the offspring complain when we walk in. our office AC went out and it was 80 for a month, it just takes some productivity out of you.
    It's not just the heat but the humidity!
    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/

  14. #789
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The Bull City
    Posts
    4,041
    Quote Originally Posted by From_the_NEK View Post
    It's not just the heat but the humidity!
    Ski Coug's got it bad. Houston's the only place in the US that's more miserable than South Florida when it comes to hot and humid..
    Go that way really REALLY fast. If something gets in your way, TURN!

  15. #790
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    cow hampshire
    Posts
    4,241
    Wow. I haven't looked at this thread in a while, but was wondering why it kept making it to the top of the page. I should have known a troll denier had snuck in.

    The Amazon rainforest is on fire. It's a fucking rainforest. Nothing has changed. It's all good.

  16. #791
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    truckee
    Posts
    10,740
    Quote Originally Posted by SkiCougar View Post
    second that.

    I understand as a ski forum TGR is going to like it colder naturally, but I have never heard of anyone that like to sleep at 82, most like 72 or lower; even my "78 feels right" parents don't like it over 75 at night.
    The point is that if we're going to do anything about global warming it will require people to sleep at warmer temps than they are comfortable with and to do a whole lot of other things that are inconvenient, uncomfortable, or downright unpleasant--like give up AC altogether and maybe move to someplace where they don't need it. There isn't going to be a technological fix that allows us to live our lives like we do now.

  17. #792
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Tejas
    Posts
    5,656
    Quote Originally Posted by uglymoney View Post
    Holy shit 82 at night! Insane. This is proof the staff writers at CR have an average age of 90.

    Also 78 can feel too warm inside in a humid climate if the ac isn't running because the temp outside is only a couple degrees warmer. I am always adjusting my thermostat...on super hot days 80 can feel great but on super humid nights that aren't super warm you might have to go 74.

    Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
    Pssh. That sounds nice. Family and I went out to eat last night. Came home around 9 and it was still 101. I saw it peak at 111 yesterday afternoon. Oh yeah, and humid as balls too. Just shoot me already. Can't wait for what these dorks call "Fall." Will still be in the high 80s and chicks be breaking out the Ugg boots and Pumpkin Spice Lattes. It's hilarious. At least today and the next couple weeks are only supposed to be in the 90s. I'll freaking take it. Actually been a very unseasonably mild summer though up until late July/August, though. Been rough these last few weeks.

  18. #793
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Loveland, Chair 9.
    Posts
    3,592
    Quote Originally Posted by SumJongGuy View Post
    Ski Coug's got it bad. Houston's the only place in the US that's more miserable than South Florida when it comes to hot and humid..
    true dat.

    this site called weatherspark rates all sorts of climate for cities(dew point, humidity, temp, etc) and gives the cities ratings over the year as cool, cold, dry, mild, warm and miserable and only Houston, new Orleans and Miami had miserable ratings for multiple months in the summer.

    as the board knows, i'm a conservative so i'm obviously slow and stupid; but i'm wising up and moving to Boston when the opportunity comes. ironically, boston.
    Eat em up Houston Cougars !

  19. #794
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    The Cone of Uncertainty
    Posts
    46,762
    The weather's coming with you, unfortunately.

  20. #795
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Big in Japan
    Posts
    35,998
    Wear a Yankee hat.

    Let's do some livin'
    After, we die

  21. #796
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Moose, Iowa
    Posts
    5,815
    Quote Originally Posted by AustinFromSA View Post
    Pssh. That sounds nice. Family and I went out to eat last night. Came home around 9 and it was still 101. I saw it peak at 111 yesterday afternoon. Oh yeah, and humid as balls too. Just shoot me already. Can't wait for what these dorks call "Fall." Will still be in the high 80s and chicks be breaking out the Ugg boots and Pumpkin Spice Lattes. It's hilarious. At least today and the next couple weeks are only supposed to be in the 90s. I'll freaking take it. Actually been a very unseasonably mild summer though up until late July/August, though. Been rough these last few weeks.
    We had some hot spells this summer for sure but right now isn't bad. Like 80 right now and overcast with glass water and nobody on the river but us.

    I have been to Texas in the summer. Definitely next level. We can hold our own on the humidity here though. Millions of acres of corn throwing off moisture all day doesn't help.

    Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

  22. #797
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The Bull City
    Posts
    4,041
    Go that way really REALLY fast. If something gets in your way, TURN!

  23. #798
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    truckee
    Posts
    10,740
    Quote Originally Posted by SumJongGuy View Post
    cool. or actually, I guess not.

  24. #799
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Location
    Jong Kong
    Posts
    46
    Quote Originally Posted by neufox47 View Post
    Are you seriously presenting yourself as an expert on this stuff because you took 2 years of environmental science classes? Hold the phone everyone, forget what those PHD physicists and Climatologists said about CO2 and whether it lags or contributes to climate change. This guy took two years of undergrad Environmental Science classes! And he says they made serious errors in their calculations, he’s probably about to win the Nobel prize with this find!
    Typical bullshit argument from a true asshole. All I did was present data (collected by the fucking experts) and shared my experience as someone who actually took time out of their life to study the dynamic systems of this planet. What the fuck have you done? Post some shit on TGR? I also said to present facts and logic and change my mind.. Learn basic comprehension skills, then come back and share what you've learned, you fucking twat.

    Edit: CO2 has been proven to lag behind temp rise. It's a feedback loop.. Higher temp = more CO2 = higher temp. If you think I made that up, you're pretty dense. That's why I posted the second graph, says it right on there..

    Sent from my SM-G950U using TGR Forums mobile app
    Last edited by SlyFoxxx; 08-21-2019 at 04:53 PM.
    "Skiing is the easy part, Carl."

  25. #800
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    309
    Quote Originally Posted by SumJongGuy View Post
    If you had been paying any attention to this thread you would know that graphic is unreliable. Temperature swings in the past 20,000 years were much more profound than that smooth rise and fall represented in the graphic.

Posting Permissions

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