Global Warming & Climate Change Discussion

[claes]

That politician is the only reason why a thread like this one exists.

Go read the OP silly — they, like you, were initially convinced that global warming didn’t exist and was merely political theatre and then changed their mind due to overwhelming evidence. This was nine years after that movie was released, and the OP makes no mention of it.

The movie itself was actually released long after scientific consensus has been established and still, to this day, holds.

@mods can we just can ban non-scientific denial from this thread? It’s one thing when deniers post climate charts and argue “look it used to be hotter” but this bullshit is over the top.

 

[RandallFlagg]

Some people might be that stupid, but most have a few brain cells and prefer to live. Supposing the occurrence of lethal heat indexes during the middle of the day in summer, how do you think people will adapt?

A few things that come to mind are:
1) stay in AC (or cellars if in a poor area) during the hottest part of the day
2) live somewhere else in the summer
3) move permanently


"Were it not for high levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, Earth would be due for an ice age, a period of extreme cooling of the climate during which ice sheets cover large swatches of the land.

While it may appear to be good news that humans have successfully delayed the next ice age, it's actually not.

Ice ages play a significant role in shaping the landscape and leaving behind fertile soil for Earth's civilizations. They carve channels in Earth, leaving behind rivers and lakes. If the period between ice ages becomes too long, the planet may become relatively dry and barren"

I'd like some evidence for that last bit... "the planet may become relatively dry and barren". That doesn't square with anything I've seen regarding earth's much warmer history, when there were no ice ages at all.

Always fails to amaze me that people think the warming trend is somehow worse than an Ice age. Geological records say otherwise - ice ages are massive extinction events. 13,000 years ago as the last Ice Age ended, Manhattan was under a 1-2 mile thick sheet of ice.

The secret to this whole thing IMO has been well known for almost 70 years now. Ewing and Donn figured it out. Global warming is a fact and it really does not matter 'why' - the earth has been warming for 13,000 years now. People can't stop it.

This is from September of 1958. They knew then that the world would continue to warm for about another 100 years - up to the 2050s.


"If the Arctic Ocean were open water, warmed by the Atlantic, warmer than the land around it, water would evaporate and fall as snow on the land. More snow on Greenland and northern Canada would make glaciers grow. Glaciers don’t grow now because there is no open water in the Arctic to provide the moisture for snow."

“Well, we figured, the Arctic Ocean would get warmer. Because water would flow more freely between it and the Atlantic, dissipating the cold. And of course, the Atlantic Ocean would get colder. But wait a minute . . . we saw it simultaneously. If the Arctic Ocean were open water, warmed by the Atlantic, warmer than the land around it, water would evaporate and fall as snow on the land. More snow on Greenland and northern Canada would make glaciers grow. Glaciers don’t grow now because there is no open water in the Arctic to provide the moisture for snow."

The Coming Ice Age, by Betty Friedan

A true scientific detective story

harpers.org

 

[bogmali]

Let's cut the political BS or I will shut this thread down! IDC if you're staff or not-Last warning.......oh and don't tell us to delete something just because you don't agree to them-it doesn't work like that champ

 

[moproblems99]

Sure rich people can escape climate change and skirt responsibility with their money; that doesn’t mean science doesn’t help explain phenomena or that humans don’t have an impact on CO2 emissions or that the effects of climate change aren’t already readily observable

I don't know about you but it's getting to be pretty normal that hurricanes are year round now (almost). A few more years, this will all be normal and we'll forget about what used to be normal. What you complaining about snowflake? Please see the --sarcasm (-s for lazy people) fuck windows version.

 

[R-T-B]

The heat didn't kill them, gravity did.

They died trying to escape the heat, does it really make a difference that they did not wait long enough to become literal chicken nuggets, which many of them did indeed end up doing on the pavement below?

1) stay in AC (or cellars if in a poor area) during the hottest part of the day

In Washington, those who has AC's watched them fail because they weren't rated for heat like that.

It's not an instant answer. Hell, it's not an answer at all, it's copium deluxe for a shitstorm of a situation.

 

[lexluthermiester]

They died trying to escape the heat, does it really make a difference that they did not wait long enough to become literal chicken nuggets, which many of them did indeed end up doing on the pavement below?

Of course it matters. The heat itself didn't kill them. It was a combination of nest placement and an attempt to seek a better location. If someone jumps off a cliff to escape a forest fire, did the fire kill them or did the impact with the ground kill them? You might call that semantics, but many others would call it critical thinking. So claiming that the heat killed whole swathes of birds is both inaccurate and misleading.

 

[claes]

The above assumes that birds are rational agents. They are not. A better example might be lemmings, but it still wouldn’t be analogous.

#KrITIKalTHInKInG

 

[Easy Rhino]

@mods can we just can ban non-scientific denial from this thread? It’s one thing when deniers post climate charts and argue “look it used to be hotter” but this bullshit is over the top.

You don't have a single study that has enough data to back the idea that man is causing the globe to warm. There isn't a single study that has accurately predicted anything in the past 40 years. There simply is not enough data. I remember the calls for a coming global ice age. I was not born yesterday. Also, you cannot say how warm the earth should be because that is unknown. You can post all of the charts that you want but charts don't mean anything when the data behind them is made up based on false predictive analysis. I mean, I can post similiar stuff like this which debunks most of the basis data used to predict (badly predict) the global temperature over the past 15 years. https://electroverse.net/why-is-nobody-talking-about-greenland/

 

[claes]

You don't have a single study that has enough data to back the idea that man is causing the globe to warm.

I could post several thousand, but what’s the point? Your mind is made up :shrug:

There isn't a single study that has accurately predicted anything in the past 40 years.

Ignoring the absurdity of this claim at face value, incidentally several of the claims in an inconvenient truth has already come to fruition

Earth, Geographic, and Climate Sciences : UMass Amherst

www.geo.umass.edu

Changing climate: 10 years after An Inconvenient Truth

In the 10 years since "An Inconvenient Truth" was released, climate researchers have made great progress in predicting how rising temperatures will affect sea level, weather patterns and polar ice.

www.sciencenews.org

There simply is not enough data. I remember the calls for a coming global ice age. I was not born yesterday.

If you’re looking for 100% consensus, then sure, but 97-98% is pretty compelling to me.

Also, you cannot say how warm the earth should be because that is unknown.

True! The idea that nature “should” be anything is inherently unscientific — it just “is” to the best of our knowledge

You can post all of the charts that you want but charts don't mean anything when the data behind them is made up based on false predictive analysis. I mean, I can post similiar stuff like this which debunks most of the basis data used to predict (badly predict) the global temperature over the past 15 years. https://electroverse.net/why-is-nobody-talking-about-greenland/

The difference is some hypotheses are peer-reviewed and can be reproduced while others aren’t... Taking that into account you’re suddenly looking at 100% consensus

 

[moproblems99]

If someone jumps off a cliff to escape a forest fire, did the fire kill them or did the impact with the ground kill them?

Two things:

1. It doesn't matter in this context because the person is dead either way.

2. The impact was factually what killed the person but the root cause was the fire because the person would not have jumped off the cliff otherwise.

#CommonSenseDoesntRequireCriticalThinking

 

[RandallFlagg]

Orwell had it right. Who are you fighting this year, Eastasia or Eurasia?

 

[moproblems99]

Thankfully, there are stupid people and predictions on each side to balance things out. However, much like today's......climate......we shouldn't use our differences in ideology to drive division but rather tackle the same problem from different sides.

From what I can tell, each side has already agreed that A LOT of people are going to have to move. So what are the odds that all of these have the means to just, you know, up and start over?

Should we help them? Or just say: fuck them it's all natural. You shouldn't have been born there and now, bad combo?

 

[rruff]

Those are solutions? Have you estimated how much land mass we will lose due to sea rise to afford those that need to move the option?

They are solutions to the "people will bake and die" narrative.

The issue with rising seas isn't loss of land, but rather the fact that low lying coastal areas are heavily developed and populated.

 

[moproblems99]

The issue with rising seas isn't loss of land, but rather the fact that low lying coastal areas are heavily developed and populated.

Yep. And a lot of that unpopulated land we use to grow food.

 

[rruff]

Yep. And a lot of that unpopulated land we use to grow food.

We'll get an increase in usable land (unfrozen), not a reduction. Nothing is certain, but a warmer earth will very likely be better for growing food as well due to longer growing seasons and higher rainfall. Issues will be local, not global.

 

[moproblems99]

We'll get an increase in usable land (unfrozen), not a reduction. Nothing is certain, but a warmer earth will very likely be better for growing food as well due to longer growing seasons and higher rainfall. Issues will be local, not global.

Always a possibility. Think of this:. We'll find some cool fossils and ancient aliens evidence too.

 

[RandallFlagg]

Thankfully, there are stupid people and predictions on each side to balance things out. However, much like today's......climate......we shouldn't use our differences in ideology to drive division but rather tackle the same problem from different sides.

From what I can tell, each side has already agreed that A LOT of people are going to have to move. So what are the odds that all of these have the means to just, you know, up and start over?

Should we help them? Or just say: fuck them it's all natural. You shouldn't have been born there and now, bad combo?

Maybe worry about more clear and present dangers? For example, about every 100 years the sun pops out a massive solar flare. The last one was in 1859. It was called the Carrington event. That event fried the telegraph systems at the time in the US and Europe.

If that happens anytime soon most of the people reading this post will wind up starving to death or worse. The fact it happens about every 100 years or so makes it relatively common.

"Were this event to occur today, the induced current would destroy, perhaps permanently, the American power grid system, shutting down power for years. Water, communications, food delivery, emergency systems, Internet, all supplied power by the grid would cease to function.
...
However, every 100 or so years the sun produces a solar super storm, releasing one or more giant, technology killing, CME’s, like those emitted in 1859. Our Earth is long overdue for the next event."

This isn't imaginary, CMEs happens every single year but the earth only gets hit about once every 100 years.

 

[freeagent]

Didn’t they say we have to do a better job of welcoming and integrating new comers? A billion people displaced due to climate change..? I am sure you are familiar with what I am referring to..

 

[moproblems99]

Maybe worry about more clear and present dangers? For example, about every 100 years the sun pops out a massive solar flare. The last one was in 1859. It was called the Carrington event. That event fried the telegraph systems at the time in the US and Europe.

If that happens anytime soon most of the people reading this post will wind up starving to death or worse. The fact it happens about every 100 years or so makes it relatively common.

FTR, I don't care about global warming. War is going to get us first.

I just also realize it is a threat that needs more consideration than many are giving it. However, it is understandable because war will get us first and needs to be prevented first.

 

[Space Lynx]

Maybe worry about more clear and present dangers? For example, about every 100 years the sun pops out a massive solar flare. The last one was in 1859. It was called the Carrington event. That event fried the telegraph systems at the time in the US and Europe.

If that happens anytime soon most of the people reading this post will wind up starving to death or worse. The fact it happens about every 100 years or so makes it relatively common.

"Were this event to occur today, the induced current would destroy, perhaps permanently, the American power grid system, shutting down power for years. Water, communications, food delivery, emergency systems, Internet, all supplied power by the grid would cease to function.
...
However, every 100 or so years the sun produces a solar super storm, releasing one or more giant, technology killing, CME’s, like those emitted in 1859. Our Earth is long overdue for the next event."

This isn't imaginary, CMEs happens every single year but the earth only gets hit about once every 100 years.

I have been an advocate for a long time for America to go back to traditional ways of paying bills before internet existed. For that very event that you just described, not to mention the countless billions it would say on cybersecurity. I know it will never happen, but eh.

My parents lived just fine paying their bills through snail mail.

 

[moproblems99]

I have been an advocate for a long time for America to go back to traditional ways of paying bills before internet existed. For that very event that you just described, not to mention the countless billions it would say on cybersecurity. I know it will never happen, but eh.

My parents lived just fine paying their bills through snail mail.

Your worried about paying bills after a solar flare disaster?

 

[R-T-B]

Two things:

1. It doesn't matter in this context because the person is dead either way.

2. The impact was factually what killed the person but the root cause was the fire because the person would not have jumped off the cliff otherwise.

#CommonSenseDoesntRequireCriticalThinking

This. Other than the hash tag, because aparently we needed some critical thinking to get here.

Maybe worry about more clear and present dangers? For example, about every 100 years the sun pops out a massive solar flare. The last one was in 1859. It was called the Carrington event. That event fried the telegraph systems at the time in the US and Europe.

Again, you are only telling half the facts here, in this case to inflate the odds of anything like that happening and misdirect the discussion.

Those events do indeed happen about every 100 years due to the cyclic nature of the sun. However, very seldom do they hit the Earth. The last one before the Carrington event is regarded to be in Ancient times (these events are known even without electronics because the Aurora patterns they produce are quite notable).

Actually, the last event with a similar magnitude to the Carrington event was in 2012, but missed the earth completely, as it usually does. This means we are likely safe for another 100, yet again, as the timer resets, so to speak.

Global warming on the other hand is a real and non-imminent (present) threat many people are actively experiencing.

FTR, I don't care about global warming. War is going to get us first.

At this rate you may be right, but those wars will likely be driven by resource-grabs CAUSED by global warming.

So again, we're jumping out of the nest, like the birds, but what really killed us?

 

[the54thvoid]

Here are a couple of examples that discuss evidence behind the theory:

Evidence - NASA Science

Takeaways The rate of change since the mid-20th century is unprecedented over millennia. Earth’s climate has changed throughout history. Just in the last 800,000 years, there have been eight cycles of ice ages and warmer periods, with the end of the last ice age about 11,700 years ago marking...

climate.nasa.gov

Climate change: evidence and causes | Royal Society

Supplementary information for the project 'Climate Change: Evidence and causes'.

royalsociety.org

Notably, the main driver is the known fact that CO2 is a greenhouse gas. It insulates the earth and traps heat. That's a known property of the gas. The amount of CO2 being exhausted into the atmosphere has accelerated (measured through core samples and physical monitoring for decades now) greatly beyond what is reasonably expected to be produced naturally, to 95% degree of certainty. Climate change is real, and the research by thousands of agencies across the globe directs the blame with 95% certainty to human activity.

The reason people doubt it is all down to Exxon. Their own research scientists pointed out the problem with CO2 decades ago. However, due to the profitability of the industry, their stance was to sow doubt. In effect, Exxon copied the tobacco industry in creating public disinformation, even while their own scientists were producing documents to suport man-made global warming.

Exxon Knew about Climate Change almost 40 years ago

A new investigation shows the oil company understood the science before it became a public issue and spent millions to promote misinformation

www.scientificamerican.com

https://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/attach/2015/07/The-Climate-Deception-Dossiers.pdf

Of note, the efforts of the API (American Petroleum Institute) were supported by the ultra-rich Koch family.

 

[Space Lynx]

Your worried about paying bills after a solar flare disaster?

Yep, because guess what, those people in 1859 survived and still had to keep on living didn't they? If the economy collapses because of its reliance on something that collapses of a solar flare... well... that's not a world I want to live in.

 

[the54thvoid]

In fairness, whether it's a problem caused by us or nature being nature, there are few places (if any) that guarantee safety.