Global Warming & Climate Change Discussion

[silkstone]

Therein lies the problem. Changes in greenhouse gasses are only relevant when trying to reconcile observed temperature versus a preindustrial temperature in models. No doubt a correlation exists but correlation does not imply causation.

You do understand the science behind how GH gasses absorb energy, yes? This is not something that is difficult to determine. It can be reproduced in the lab.

You are saying that the mass of gas (quantity of volume if you like) has nothing to do with the total radiant energy absorbed?

 

[xfia]

The object was to get them thinking, asking questions and researching. It was good preparatory work for college. The most important thing a university education provides isn't the information given. It is getting people to analyze, question and think for themselves. The uneducated mindset truly only spouts what was given to them, no thinking involved. Those are the truly dangerous people because they are so easily swayed. This class gave them a head start on college level classes.

I had some good teachers at school in the US that would spend their own money on paper to print out packets for a week instead of using old books with misinformation.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

You do understand the science behind how GH gasses absorb energy, yes? This is not something that is difficult to determine. It can be reproduced in the lab.

You are saying that the mass of gas (quantity of volume if you like) has nothing to do with the total radiant energy absorbed?

The extra greenhouse gasses undeniably cause some warming but it most definitely doesn't add up to 100% of the change. Case in point: they say 2015 was the warmest year on record. I'd argue that has a lot to do with limited snow coverage at the end of the year more than anything else. Places that usually had feet of snow on the ground at the end of the year didn't have any snow coverage until this year. That causes the earth to warm when it should have been cooling. The models in use now don't account for albedo. Everyone is quick to blame greenhouse gasses when they aren't the only factor at play.

Going further, last year was much the same here. The reason for this is because the jet stream stayed far north most of the winter months. This is likely because of el nino, not greenhouse gasses. Greenhouse gasses likely contributed to a slight warming but not the bulk of it.

 

[silkstone]

So understanding the Physics behind greenhouse gasses is irrelevant to the greenhouse effect? You do realise that 90% of the absorption of radiant energy occurs because of the atmosphere, right?

Here's a basic overview of the Physics: http://missionscience.nasa.gov/ems/13_radiationbudget.html

And here's a breakdown of the numbers: http://eesc.columbia.edu/courses/ees/climate/lectures/radiation_hays/

This is not statistics, looking for correlation. There is the same correlation in dropping something and knowing it will fall. Maybe the mass of the planet didn't pull it down, it could have been the underground, invisible, spaghetti monster with his multitude of arms.

To even think that surface ice has much of an influence is just crazy talk.

 

[magibeg]

Therein lies the problem. Changes in greenhouse gasses are only relevant when trying to reconcile observed temperature versus a preindustrial temperature in models. No doubt a correlation exists but correlation does not imply causation.

Sure, that's great and all if you ignore known properties of chemistry and physics. Not sure why it seems people believe that CO2 was discovered to be a greenhouse gas after the world started warming. Its properties have been known for hundreds of years.

 

[SK-1]

Wait wait... I think I found out why they stopped using that old fashioned crappy satellite temp data.
http://www.weathertrends360.com/Blog/Post/2011-Global-Temperatures-are-inWERE-ALL-DOOMED-1145

 

[Caring1]

Wait wait... I think I found out why they stopped using that old fashioned crappy satellite temp data.

I think infra red satellite temperature recordings will be more accurate than the old terrestrial data they have been using.
As the picture shows, the land based sites aren't always in an optimal position.

 

[SK-1]

Yes Caring1. Sometimes I forget I'm posting in a Tech site. I have a bad habit of being a Sarcastic Ninja (rip WileE ) It's obvious the sat data would be more reliable but it doesn't fit the warmest narrative. Hard to accurately measure anything with a faulty ruler.

 

[silkstone]

Right, so temperatures aren't going up and the weather isn't changing, it's all a global conspiracy designed to attack your way of life.

 

[SK-1]

Right, so temperatures aren't going up and the weather isn't changing, it's all a global conspiracy designed to attack your way of life.

And speaking of warmest narratives...News flash..They have always changed... Sup with you?

 

[xfia]

There is only a hole in the ocean in the golf of mexico and a hole in the atmosphere.. yes temps have always changed naturally but this time industrial revolution has added factors to the point of where no one can say what will happen for sure.
Will the ring of fire incinerate all the garbage in the ocean? seems like maybe yes unless garbage has a conscious and is swimming all its pieces into perfect position on hunch.

 

[silkstone]

And speaking of warmest narratives...News flash..They have always changed... Sup with you?

And round and round we go, where we stop nobody knows.

 

[SK-1]

Busted "science".
http://realclimatescience.com/2016/03/noaa-radiosonde-data-shows-no-warming-for-58-years/

 

[LightningJR]

Busted "science".
http://realclimatescience.com/2016/03/noaa-radiosonde-data-shows-no-warming-for-58-years/

Very reputable looking web site...

I don't understand why so many people think man made global warming isn't a problem, can people not fathom that over 7 billion people will affect the climate of the world? Or is it political, do people just believe what their party tells them to believe like blind sheep? Or is it religious, do they think god wont allow us to destroy ourselves? Or do people just have a distrust of Scientists and if people do then why? I don't fully understand how they can ignore all the brilliant minds telling us what they are seeing, they have the expertise in these sort of things, it's baffling to see people pick and choose based on random bullshit.

I am not old enough to have experienced the time when cigarettes were considered healthy but I have read about it, stupidity can get you killed.

Everything that you see around you was because of scientists and inventors, great minds. The lifespan in developed worlds is in the 80's or high 70's all because of brilliant minds but no, none of that matters, man made global warming is wrong because I said so... because the internet comment section said so, because the politician I like said so, because god said so, because I have family that works in oil, because I like my big trucks and doing whatever I want, because scientists are full of shit trying to make money, the oil companies are on the people's side, they don't want to make money, I like all the things the scientists say are bad.. Scientists say evolution is real, god says it isn't, scientists are the devil..

Is any of this the thinking of the climate deniers?? Please clarify for me.

 

[SK-1]

Very reputable looking web site...

Glad you depend on looks for your scientific analysis. Nooice....

I am not old enough to have experienced the time when cigarettes were considered healthy

Young and naive...yes I was too. But don't worry. Wisdom will bestow it's amazing presence to you with age.

The good thing about facts? They T-bone feelings.

 

[LightningJR]

Glad you depend on looks for your scientific analysis. Nooice....

You're right, looking like a website from 2005 doesn't mean it's not legit, showing no credentials or scientific background from the author does.

Young and naive...yes I was too. But don't worry. Wisdom will bestow it's amazing presence to you with age.

The good thing about facts? They T-bone feelings.

I would agree with you if it were 10 years ago and I was 18 but I have grown a lot on many things. As time goes by and people get 40, 50 and older wisdom fades and is replaced by conspiracies. Much worse than naivete since growing stops and regression starts.


I agree facts trump feelings, it's one of the biggest issues with climate deniers.

You have no reply to the specifics of what I said below what you quoted? If so I can only conclude that you have no credible argument.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Radiosondes are basically weather baloons that measure the temperature as they rise through the atmosphere. They give a snapshot of atmospheric temperature rather than surface.

Greenhouse gases cause solar radiation to reflect back to the surface (causing surface temperature warming) rather than be absorbed in the atmosphere. How much energy the atmosphere absorbs should be more or less constant and the radiosonde reflects that.

 

[newconroer]

You're right, looking like a website from 2005 doesn't mean it's not legit, showing no credentials or scientific background from the author does.



I would agree with you if it were 10 years ago and I was 18 but I have grown a lot on many things. As time goes by and people get 40, 50 and older wisdom fades and is replaced by conspiracies. Much worse than naivete since growing stops and regression starts.


I agree facts trump feelings, it's one of the biggest issues with climate deniers.

You have no reply to the specifics of what I said below what you quoted? If so I can only conclude that you have no credible argument.

I am actually less worried about who is right or who is wrong. What concerns me is how YOU might turn around and tell ME that I should STOP doing what I am doing, because YOU are worried about something.

This could apply to global warming, smoking(second hand included), abortion, gun control, affirmative action, etcetc.

People seem to think 'science' and 'facts' trump the unfortunate reality that people WANT and NEED and the human race IS the DOMINANT species and will do WHATEVER it WANTS WHENEVER IT WANTS to on planet Earth.

This idea that we'll take a bunch of science theories, postulate and present them to the world from 'credible' sources and then somehow change people's mind, is lofty at best.

The real crime is when these efforts fail, so we resort to harsh tactics, of which eventually lead to violence.

Tolerance is an odd thing these days ; lots of preachers and few practitioners.

 

[LightningJR]

I am actually less worried about who is right or who is wrong. What concerns me is how YOU might turn around and tell ME that I should STOP doing what I am doing, because YOU are worried about something.

This could apply to global warming, smoking(second hand included), abortion, gun control, affirmative action, etcetc.

People seem to think 'science' and 'facts' trump the unfortunate reality that people WANT and NEED and the human race IS the DOMINANT species and will do WHATEVER it WANTS WHENEVER IT WANTS to on planet Earth.

This idea that we'll take a bunch of science theories, postulate and present them to the world from 'credible' sources and then somehow change people's mind, is lofty at best.

The real crime is when these efforts fail, so we resort to harsh tactics, of which eventually lead to violence.

Tolerance is an odd thing these days ; lots of preachers and few practitioners.

Yeah that's a whole different issue, people's selfishness. If we all keep changing nothing then we will destroy ourselves and we'll deserve it.

I am not the one to tell anyone to stop anything, I don't have the answers to all of the world's problems. I think politicians need to start the change since they have most of the power.

Empathy is another big problem, a lot of people don't give a shit because they will probably be dead by the time the real shit starts so some people just don't give a rats ass which is extremely short sighted and makes me very angry.

 

[rruff]

I think politicians need to start the change since they have most of the power.

Nah.... politicians have to cater to their masters as well as public opinion. The masters like the status quo apparently, so the propaganda supports it enough to create confusion.

I'm not all that worried about global warming. In a few decades AI will make consumer capitalism obsolete, and most people will no longer serve an economic function. Reduced consumption and depopulation would be the "natural" outcome, and that would tend to solve a lot of our resource issues.

 

[SK-1]

Trump!
If you look at the satellite data 2014 was not the warmest year ever in fact there has been no global warming for over 18 years. The Reason they can say it’s the warmest year is because they are using the ground weather station data which is heavily influenced by the Urban Heat Island effect, many of which are near pavement. Even still they had to cherry pick that data to get at the warmest year ever and it is only the warmest by only two-100ths of a degree within a dataset that has a variability of a half of a degree. The fact they they had to ignore accurate data and fudge sketchy data to push their agenda proves (IMHO) that climate change is a hoax.

 

[LightningJR]

Trump!
If you look at the satellite data 2014 was not the warmest year ever in fact there has been no global warming for over 18 years. The Reason they can say it’s the warmest year is because they are using the ground weather station data which is heavily influenced by the Urban Heat Island effect, many of which are near pavement. Even still they had to cherry pick that data to get at the warmest year ever and it is only the warmest by only two-100ths of a degree within a dataset that has a variability of a half of a degree. The fact they they had to ignore accurate data and fudge sketchy data to push their agenda proves (IMHO) that climate change is a hoax.

Watch the video I linked above. He gives many ways of showing that the world is warming. Can you refute every point with other facts??

 

[jaggerwild]

OK,
global warming then why are countries causing sever weather? That's right man made weather, It's OK yer young n all. The earth was here long before us and it will be here long after us, only real question is will we be here. Buy a diesel if you think global warming, lots of people talk about it. Mean while there eating meat buying egg's in Styrofoam , blah blah blah. Back to my hamburger, yum!!!!

 

[LightningJR]

OK,
global warming then why are countries causing sever weather? That's right man made weather, It's OK yer young n all. The earth was here long before us and it will be here long after us, only real question is will we be here. Buy a diesel if you think global warming, lots of people talk about it. Mean while there eating meat buying egg's in Styrofoam , blah blah blah. Back to my hamburger, yum!!!!

I didn't understand any of this. Sorry.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

FYI, that video says "we are gonna get more intense storms, more droughts and floods" twice and that's false. There has been no discernable change in cylcone activity (tropical nor land), the observed storms are inside of normal expectations, and not "more droughts and floods"--the location of droughts and floods move. Places that are generally dry could get more precipitation where places that usually get a lot of precipitation can get drier; the aggregate is about the same in terms of precipitation--maybe a little more because a warmer atmosphere holds more. In short, the weather argument he used there hasn't really panned out and there's no expectation of getting documentation to prove it for decades at the earliest.

There was a lengthy discussion on this a while back...


The most damaging facet of a warmer planet is the sea rising. Most of the human population is located in coastal regions and they may have to move in land. Are we talking a Water World scenario? Absolutely not.

Ocean acidifcation may prove to be far worse than warming in terms of environmental disasters.