Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Global Warming / Climate Change is Hoax pt 10

Global Warming / Climate Change is Hoax pt 10

Unread postby dissident » Sun 03 Dec 2017, 11:07:19

dohboi wrote:The upper ranges of estimates are more like something like 110% man made, since we should have been cooling a bit over the last hundred some years under natural cooling.


We have definitely broken the pattern of the last 3.3 million years. We are in an inter-glacial period and given the orbital dynamics we should be seeing a weak cooling trend instead of any warming trend. Thanks to the massive amount of carbon we are unleashing from both fossil and surface reservoirs, it appears that it will take several hundred thousand years for chemical weathering to remove the anthropogenic excess. That is, we are in the anthropocene.

http://climatemodels.uchicago.edu/geoca ... v_tail.pdf

http://denning.atmos.colostate.edu/ats7 ... Archer.pdf
User avatar
dissident
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5520
Joined: Sat 08 Apr 2006, 02:00:00

Re: Nobody can answer this simple question about Global Warm

Unread postby AdamB » Sun 03 Dec 2017, 11:32:22

mmasters wrote:On the planet, how much of global warming is a natural trend and how much of it is man made? I've asked this question to a number of climate change experts and nobody can provide a good answer to this simple question. Some think it is 90/10, some 70/30 and some 50/50.


It isn't a simple question. To get the answer to it, someone needs to have built a model that can backcast right through the change in temperature climbing out of the last glacial age. And account properly for the temperature changes from there into the Holocene, and then throughout the Holocene. Without that proven backcasting ability, you can't claim to know what the temperature should have been naturally, including coming out of the LIA.

It is far easier to do what ended up being done...just assume all warming is human caused.
Peak oil in 2020: And here is why: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 4631
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 16:10:26

Re: Nobody can answer this simple question about Global Warm

Unread postby GHung » Sun 03 Dec 2017, 11:47:33

"It is far easier to do what ended up being done...just assume all warming is human caused."

Not really. What is easier is to continue to wait for irrefutable proof that so many insist on having before they respond to the potential threat, which is largely what we've done. People will often react to educated guesses in proactive ways, but climate change/AGW has become so politicized, many people would continue denying it even if God came down, smacked them over the head and said; "YOU ARE FRYING THE ONLY PLANET YOUR CHILDREN WILL EVER HAVE. STOP!"
Blessed are the Meek, for they shall inherit nothing but their Souls. - Anonymous Ghung Person
User avatar
GHung
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2831
Joined: Tue 08 Sep 2009, 15:06:11
Location: Moksha, Nearvana

Re: Nobody can answer this simple question about Global Warm

Unread postby Plantagenet » Sun 03 Dec 2017, 12:26:26

baha wrote: CO2 causes warming, does that beat out the Sun? I doubt it.


We know CO2 in the atmosphere is changing now due to FF burning, and CO2 causes global warming. We can measure the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere very accurately, and then model the amount of warming increased CO2 should produce. That modeling matches what we see as the planet warms.

We also know the solar output isn't significantly changing. We can measure solar activity very precisely, and there are no changes other the sunspot cycle. There is some suggestion we are at a "low" in the sunspot cycle, but if anything that would produce cooling, not warming.

Trying to attribute current global warming to changes in the sun is magical thinking, since we know there aren't any changes occurring in the suns output that would cause warming..

Cheers!
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 22390
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: Nobody can answer this simple question about Global Warm

Unread postby Newfie » Sun 03 Dec 2017, 12:56:37

What does it matter?

If we are headed the way we are headed we should be doing what we can to reduce our contribution. Be it 50% or 90%.
User avatar
Newfie
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 12565
Joined: Thu 15 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Between Canada and Carribean

Re: Nobody can answer this simple question about Global Warm

Unread postby jedrider » Sun 03 Dec 2017, 13:24:28

baha wrote:Just a tiny change in the output of the Sun would cause an Ice Age. Just like a small change in the % of CO2 in the atmosphere will heat the planet...


I thought mankind has essentially DOUBLED the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. An equivalent change in the Sun's output would have us all cinder blocks already.
User avatar
jedrider
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1335
Joined: Thu 28 May 2009, 09:10:44

Re: Nobody can answer this simple question about Global Warm

Unread postby AdamB » Sun 03 Dec 2017, 14:32:35

GHung wrote:"It is far easier to do what ended up being done...just assume all warming is human caused."

Not really. What is easier is to continue to wait for irrefutable proof that so many insist on having before they respond to the potential threat, which is largely what we've done.


There are many "potential" threats. Not the least of which is how humans treat each other, cosmic collisions, gamma bursts, continental sized basalt flows, super volcanoes, human based pollution effects (which is really what CO2 emissions are), all sorts of things. I am quite happy to react to one, you might like another, peak oilers yet another.

None of these require irrefutable proof to act, and as we can see from the peak oilers, irrefutable proof isn't even ENOUGH for a faith based person to change their mind.

GHung wrote: People will often react to educated guesses in proactive ways, but climate change/AGW has become so politicized, many people would continue denying it even if God came down, smacked them over the head and said; "YOU ARE FRYING THE ONLY PLANET YOUR CHILDREN WILL EVER HAVE. STOP!"


Climate change has become politicized, I agree. And that is probably the worst thing that could ever happen to it, in terms of being taken seriously by a large percentage of the population.
Peak oil in 2020: And here is why: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 4631
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 16:10:26

Re: Nobody can answer this simple question about Global Warm

Unread postby onlooker » Sun 03 Dec 2017, 15:17:34

Well we know roughly the amount of CO2 we have spewed since the beginning of the Industrial age and we know roughly how much extra CO2 is in atmosphere since the baseline years of the advent of the Industrial age.
From that scientists can estimate the extra heat forcing the additional CO2 has had
So scientists say we are largely responsible for the extra warming and thus will be for the warming feedbacks it has triggered
"We are mortal beings doomed to die
User avatar
onlooker
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 10454
Joined: Sun 10 Nov 2013, 12:49:04
Location: NY, USA

Re: Nobody can answer this simple question about Global Warm

Unread postby GHung » Sun 03 Dec 2017, 15:52:52

onlooker wrote:Well we know roughly the amount of CO2 we have spewed since the beginning of the Industrial age and we know roughly how much extra CO2 is in atmosphere since the baseline years of the advent of the Industrial age.
From that scientists can estimate the extra heat forcing the additional CO2 has had
So scientists say we are largely responsible for the extra warming and thus will be for the warming feedbacks it has triggered


That one is easy. Simply invalidate the scientists. What good are people we don't understand anyway?
Blessed are the Meek, for they shall inherit nothing but their Souls. - Anonymous Ghung Person
User avatar
GHung
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2831
Joined: Tue 08 Sep 2009, 15:06:11
Location: Moksha, Nearvana

Re: Nobody can answer this simple question about Global Warm

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Sun 03 Dec 2017, 17:01:21

Let's try a little bit of perspective. Especially when it comes to what might, or might not be done, with respect to global warming. We'll look at global diarrhea. I know...be patient.

Deaths among children under 5 yo: about 1.5 million/yr. About 15% of deaths in that age group. So we're not talking about all global PREVENTABLE deaths for all age groups. Or all children under 5 from all preventable causes. Just a very small group. A group with an easily treatable condition. Not an expensive treatment...literally pennies unlike AIDS, malaria and other insect delivered diseases, general malnutrition, etc. No debate over its existence as there is with climate change.

So different expectations but lets say the sh*t really hits the fan by 2050 and climate change just hurts the population with dislocations and economic upheavals but actually starts filling a lot of body bags. By then about 50 million children under 5 will have died from and cheap and easily preventable condition. And that 50 million body count represents just a very, very small % of the total global death count from PREVENTABLE diseases. And a treatment that causes no one to alter their lifestyle on little bit. Or decreases economic activity at all.

So the assumption seems to be that if the world is completely convinced of climate change it will make huge life altering changes in its activities. And yet with virtually no comparative cost to save the lives of 50 million children under 5 yo nothing will be done by this same group of folks.

Perhaps instead of spending so much time arguing over climate change based upon such an assumption being true perhaps folks should be a tad more focused on how they expect folks to react if the "truth" is accepted by the vast majority. No one on the planet can say they don't believe in the children death stats presented...we have the dead bodies as evidence piling up everyday.

Somehow the picture of Nero fiddling while Rome burns come to mind.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11219
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: Nobody can answer this simple question about Global Warm

Unread postby Plantagenet » Sun 03 Dec 2017, 18:34:27

ROCKMAN wrote: comparative cost to save the lives of 50 million children under 5 yo ....


This is the same argument made by Bjorn Lomborg in his 2001 book "The Skeptical Environmentalist" and in subsequent books like "Cool It". Lomborg accepts the reality of global warming, but argues that it would be more cost effective to spend precious money alleviating diarrhea in little children and other similar things, rather then spending big bucks to try to stop global warming.

The fatal flaw in the argument that you and Lomborg are making is that the problems with global warming get worse and worse through time as more and more CO2 accumulates in the atmosphere. By the time you go out 50-100 years from now we're going to be looking at sea level rise flooding parts of every coastal city in the world, and drowning low lying parts many of the most densely populated delta areas in the world, like the Nile Delta and the Ganges Delta and the Yellow River Delta.

When it comes to being cost effective, you can't spend too much when you're talking about drowning every coastal city and every delta on earth and turning hundreds of millions of people into climate refugees.

Image
Cheers!
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 22390
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: Nobody can answer this simple question about Global Warm

Unread postby Tanada » Sun 03 Dec 2017, 21:52:02

jedrider wrote:I thought mankind has essentially DOUBLED the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. An equivalent change in the Sun's output would have us all cinder blocks already.



Not yet, so far we have increases the total CO2 content of the atmosphere by about 65% from baseline. At 2 ppmv per year increase rate we will need at least another 70 years to double the low pre-industrial estimate and 80 years from now to double the high pre-industrial estimate of CO2 already in the air.
I should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write, balance accounts, build a wall, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 15413
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 02:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: Nobody can answer this simple question about Global Warm

Unread postby dohboi » Mon 04 Dec 2017, 00:31:30

Soooo, it turns out that lots and lots of folks can answer not only 'this simple question,' but many many other questions about GW very well and with much support from current science.

So can we now stop bumping this stupid thread with its stupid, misleading title??

Thanks... :)
User avatar
dohboi
Harmless Drudge
Harmless Drudge
 
Posts: 18209
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Nobody can answer this simple question about Global Warm

Unread postby ralfy » Mon 04 Dec 2017, 05:55:30

Some more points to consider are the forcing factor that emissions have and ocean heat content.
http://sites.google.com/site/peakoilreports/
User avatar
ralfy
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4950
Joined: Sat 28 Mar 2009, 10:36:38
Location: The Wasteland

Re: Nobody can answer this simple question about Global Warm

Unread postby AdamB » Mon 04 Dec 2017, 10:34:15

dohboi wrote:Soooo, it turns out that lots and lots of folks can answer not only 'this simple question,' but many many other questions about GW very well and with much support from current science.

So can we now stop bumping this stupid thread with its stupid, misleading title??

Thanks... :)


Why would folks stop participating? You can't even get a decent conversation going about the real threats to humanity if you have a true believer of any ONE of the possible dooms we face in the house, because they want to shut down conversations that aren't about their favorite.

Here is the question for enthusiasts of only global warming theories....and it exposes how faith based they are when it comes to viewing the future of our species.

Let us examine two completely reasonable futures, from a "global warming uber alles" perspective.

Would this GWUA person choose, A) to have the entire world dedicated to saving us from a known and calculable known risk, a risk with precedent, a risk that would destroy the species in an eyeblink, but to save the species we would need to enslave nearly all of it, killing off a majority along the way due to the nature of the work and lack of resources for get us all to the end, while mining and extracting every resource the planet holds, and in the end, when the threat has been stopped, the species would be alive (even if more than half the members aren't), on a planet rendered nearly unrecognizable (but livable) in its successful attempt to save itself and its apex predator species, or B) the entire planet happily converts to Amish nirvana tomorrow afternoon, emitting no more CO2 than their breath, happily living together for some period of time...before A) happens and destroys the entire species.

There are dangers in this universe, and it is nothing but human hubris to think that anyone's particular favorite is THE highest priority problem. Holy cow people, you would think we would be smart enough to learn something from what happened to the dinosaurs.
Peak oil in 2020: And here is why: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 4631
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 16:10:26

Re: Nobody can answer this simple question about Global Warm

Unread postby AdamB » Mon 04 Dec 2017, 10:39:35

GHung wrote:
onlooker wrote:Well we know roughly the amount of CO2 we have spewed since the beginning of the Industrial age and we know roughly how much extra CO2 is in atmosphere since the baseline years of the advent of the Industrial age.
From that scientists can estimate the extra heat forcing the additional CO2 has had
So scientists say we are largely responsible for the extra warming and thus will be for the warming feedbacks it has triggered


That one is easy. Simply invalidate the scientists. What good are people we don't understand anyway?


The scientists are the ones who led to polarization in this regard...polarization first if you believe the words they wrote back in the 1970's (them scientists being so much smarter than regular folks, them dummies who needed to listen to them smart folks) and later politicization as they naturally fell into the us versus them meme that American politics has become.
Peak oil in 2020: And here is why: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 4631
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 16:10:26

Re: Nobody can answer this simple question about Global Warm

Unread postby Plantagenet » Mon 04 Dec 2017, 12:04:22

AdamB wrote:
The scientists are the ones who led to polarization in this regard...


Don't be silly. The scientists are simply reporting on real-world data and their interpretation of those scientific facts. Thats their job.

Science is inherently not political. Both the right and left try to politicize science but science itself has no political bias.

Image
Scientific data is humankind's attempt to understand the reality of the natural universe. Reality is not political.

Cheers!
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 22390
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: Nobody can answer this simple question about Global Warm

Unread postby onlooker » Mon 04 Dec 2017, 12:09:08

Well, I for one believe the scientists and science and not crackpot theories and canards put out by politized entities
"We are mortal beings doomed to die
User avatar
onlooker
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 10454
Joined: Sun 10 Nov 2013, 12:49:04
Location: NY, USA

Next

Return to Environment, Weather & Climate

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests