Grim reports on climate change say act now or be ready for catastrophe

[mogandave]

WOW !!   Now YOU’RE making up crap, just like your Alarmist pal “mogandave”.  
     Do you guys hang out together or something? Go to the same Socialist Warming Alarmist meetings perhaps?
     You see, that’s one of the things about the extreme right, the extreme left, and religious extremists also....They make shit up. They tell lies. 
    You’ve made a claim about me that is not true.
   So here is what you must now do:
    Copy and past a reply with my statement were I claimed things like the Siberian Traps Eruptions did not cause extinction events in the oceans. 
     I’ll wait right here. 
Other people following this thread must find this very interesting. We’re finding out just how socialist Gore Bull Warming/Climate Change Alarmists think. And we see that they are perfectly willing and have no problem with exaggerating and lying and deception in order to advance their “cause”. 

Wow, more name calling, really effective.

Please hold your breath while you’re waiting.

[Ahab]

Four years is all we have.

Before this it was the arctic will be ice free by 2014 during the summer.

Before that it was temperature will rise by so many decrees by such and such a year.

All temperature models have overpredicted the warming.

Just before global warming became the theory of choice we where being told that the actual threat was global cooling.

 

It reminds me of Charlie Brown of the "Peanuts cartoon" trying to kick the football while Lucy is holding it. He knows that every time he has tried to kick it before she has moved it, but maybe this time she won't. No one is going to "fix" this in four years and the world is not going to stop using fossil fuels anytime in my lifetime (I am 55). Enjoy your life, stop worrying about things you cannot change. If global warming turns out to be real, humans will adjust. The world has after all been warming for the last 10,000 or so years, and back then much of North America and Europe was covered by hundreds of feet of ice.

 

Not many people complaining that we have to do something to return to the conditions of the past.

[BritManToo]

7 hours ago, Kieran00001 said:

A real rise in temperature would not make cooler places a bit warmer, it will their make weather more extreme in general; stronger winds, heavier rain, thicker fog, longer droughts, bigger waves, deeper floods, etc.

 

And yet the Romans had vineyards in the UK.

 

Edited September 21, 2018 by BritManToo

[utalkin2me]

5 hours ago, Catoni said:

You’re correct. We’ve noticed that with the leftist/socialist Gore Bull Warming/Climate Change Alarmist activists....it’s all gloom and doom. A bit of warming coming out of the L.I.A. must be all bad. Nothing good. It must be a disaster. 

All bad effects. 

     And yet down through history, mankin....oops, I meant to say “people kind”...has always done best in warmer times....not colder times.

   (Holocene Climate Optimum, Minoan Warm Period, Roman Warm Period etc.)

I am one of those leftists, I do not think I am an alarmist however ?

 

That is the point I have been making though. First, I think we probably do not know exactly what will happen. But what we do know is flora and fauna thrive in wet, hot environments. Exactly the environments presumably being created with rising co2. So I would agree with you in that nobody seems to want to admit good could possibly come from climate change.

 

that is what your argument should morph into. Instead of denying the change, go with it and sell people on the possible biodiversity utopias that could potentially be developing as a result of the changes ?

[kannot]

16 hours ago, simoh1490 said:

Blah blah blah, you'd stake the future of mankind and the future of the planet on one scientist being right and several thousand others being wrong, you should rebadge yourself as The Contrarian!

wouldnt be the first time though,  many scientists spent a long  time looking for the luminiferous aether.

[kannot]

16 hours ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

What has that got to do with the future?

You can see the past but you cant see the future

[mauGR1]

27 minutes ago, kannot said:

You can see the past but you cant see the future

But, but..If you know the past, you can foresee the future. History repeats.

[DrTuner]

Could you guys add something like for/against in your posts? Hard to see who's on which side with all the froth flying around.

[DrTuner]

2 hours ago, utalkin2me said:

But what we do know is flora and fauna thrive in wet, hot environments. Exactly the environments presumably being created with rising co2.

Yes, I wonder how many have actually ever had or visited a greenhouse. It's like a turkish sauna in there. Tomatoes love it. I understand growers actually add co2.

[mauGR1]

7 minutes ago, DrTuner said:

Could you guys add something like for/against in your posts? Hard to see who's on which side with all the froth flying around.

I'm flying above the flying froth, all considered, it's very reasonable.

[Nyezhov]

13 minutes ago, DrTuner said:

Yes, I wonder how many have actually ever had or visited a greenhouse. It's like a turkish sauna in there. Tomatoes love it. I understand growers actually add co2.

I love Greenhouses. Green. Alaska and Colorado Green. 

 

And tomatos too.... ?

[Catoni]

37 minutes ago, DrTuner said:

Yes, I wonder how many have actually ever had or visited a greenhouse. It's like a turkish sauna in there. Tomatoes love it. I understand growers actually add co2.

I live in one of the largest greenhouse industry areas in the world, vegetables and flowers. CO2 generators are used to boost the level to between 800ppm to 1300 ppm, depending on the crop being grown. The tomatoes and peppers are especially awesome. People work eight hour shifts breathing that level CO2 with no apparent effects. Myself I spent a few hours in it, felt very refreshing.

I’ve read that office buildings can routinely reach about 800 ppm CO2 or more. 

[lannarebirth]

On 9/16/2018 at 5:27 PM, neeray said:

_{But but but. The Donald says it's all a hoax started by the Chinese.}

 

Which is ironic as the Chinese are the obvious culprits and m/l exempt, for many years from doing anything about the catastrophe they are causing. Meanwhile, in the locale of my US home the air has been cleaner each year for each of the past 35 years. 

[Kieran00001]

11 hours ago, Catoni said:

Coral was here four hundred million years ago. It’s here today. 

    Scientists are now finding out the Great Barrier Reef is recovering from some bleaching (a natural thing for coral) nicely. 

   Japanese scientists have found coral is better at adapting to changes than we thought. (No surprise....it’s been around for quite a long time.)

     Clams, oysters etc. have been around for a few hundred million years. They’ll still be here long after we’re all gone. 

    Sea level rise is not in a big hurry......

 

    The Arctic Ocean was supposed to be ice free in Summer months by now. How’s that coming along? 

    I’ve flown over the Arctic Ocean twice in 2013 (second flight was during the Summer. Cathay Pacific CX829 and CX826)and once in 2017 (during summer, China Eastern MU208 )

Ice pretty well shore to shore, as far as the eye can see for a corridor about 475 miles wide and a distance shore to shore of 2000 miles or so. Pretty amazing really. (I just love the great Boeing 777-300ER)

       You see, that’s the thing about bull crap predictions about the Arctic Ocean. Since the fall of the old Soviet Union and the opening up of the Polar Great Circle Routes, anyone who flies those routes from North America to Asia can see for themselves the truth of the Arctic Ocean. Certainly no chance of it being ice free during the Summer months any time soon. Sorry Al Gore and Leonardo DiCaprio 555555 ?

       That must be so very upsetting to the Alarmist left. 

  So much for Alarmist predictions. 

     Gore Bull Warming/Climate Change Alarmists are mostly brainwashed leftists/socialists using Climate Change as a tool in their war chest to bring down capitalism and build socialism/communism in its place. 

 

The fact that coral has always bounced back thousands of years after mass extinctions offers nothing for the current 9 million species dependent on coral worldwide, you are truly clutching at straws with that one.

 

What you have hilariously failed to consider with your "evidence" which appears to consist purel of you being able to see ice from a flight, is that you did not also do that in the past so you have no reference point from which to base your conclusion, and so actually you have no idea what changes have taken place.  So instead of taking your word for it that as long as there is some ice there everything must be normal, I am listening to the researchers, with the NSIDC, The University of Alaska, Fairbanks and the University of Illinois, who compiled and digitalized sea ice measurements from 14 historical sources. Those included hand-drawn ice-boundary maps, and documents like logbooks from the U.S. whaling fleet, records from the Danish Meteorological Institute and reports by U.S. Navy oceanographers, from 1850 through 1978.  Below is a graph made from that data, and as you can see, summer ice area back in 2011 was almost half of the average seen in the 1960's, an unprecedented change, and much more worrying is that since then we have seen lows of just 4 million km2, which is approaching a third of the size it was 100 years ago.

 

[Kieran00001]

5 hours ago, kannot said:

You can see the past but you cant see the future

 

In the past the changes happened over thousands of years allowing species time to adapt, currently one of the changes has occurred very quickly, co2 concentration, normally the average temperature and co2 correlate with each other, if that were to happen with the current level of co2 we would see a corresponding large temperature rise, if it rises at a similar rate to co2 concentration then it will be nothing like the changes we have seen in the past 65 million years, it will be a change like we saw when the dinosaurs went extinct.  So tell me, what is it that we have seen in the past that gives you reassurance?

[Catoni]

17 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

The fact that coral has always bounced back thousands of years after mass extinctions offers nothing for the current 9 million species dependent on coral worldwide, you are truly clutching at straws with that one.

 

What you have hilariously failed to consider with your "evidence" which appears to consist purel of you being able to see ice from a flight, is that you did not also do that in the past so you have no reference point from which to base your conclusion, and so actually you have no idea what changes have taken place.  So instead of taking your word for it that as long as there is some ice there everything must be normal, I am listening to the researchers, with the NSIDC, The University of Alaska, Fairbanks and the University of Illinois, who compiled and digitalized sea ice measurements from 14 historical sources. Those included hand-drawn ice-boundary maps, and documents like logbooks from the U.S. whaling fleet, records from the Danish Meteorological Institute and reports by U.S. Navy oceanographers, from 1850 through 1978.  Below is a graph made from that data, and as you can see, summer ice area back in 2011 was almost half of the average seen in the 1960's, an unprecedented change, and much more worrying is that since then we have seen lows of just 4 million km2, which is approaching a third of the size it was 100 years ago.

 

Uhm.... what do you call it when there is ice from the shores of Russia, all the way across the Arctic Ocean, and all the way across Hudson Bag ...except for a couple of miles of open water near the south shore of Hudson Bay....near the end of July, 2013?

     My “reference point” are the past Alarmist claims that we are supposed to be ice free in the Arctic Oceans during summers now. 

    Another reference point are some graphs in this revealing video:

    What do you call ice from shore to shore across the Arctic Ocean in June, 2017? 

   From 35,000 or 37,000 feet you can see a corridor about 470 mile wide for the whole distance of your flight across the Arctic Ocean. The times I flew....the skies were amazingly  clear. 

   Where is this “ice free” Arctic Ocean we are supposed to have now in the summer?

    Most Global Warming Alarmists are full of ____!!

Edited September 22, 2018 by Catoni
Addition

[Kieran00001]

7 hours ago, BritManToo said:

And yet the Romans had vineyards in the UK.

 

 

And yet? Wine grapes do better with wind.

[Kieran00001]

11 minutes ago, Catoni said:

Uhm.... what do you call it when there is ice from the shores of Russia, all the way across the Arctic Ocean, and all the way across Hudson Bag ...except for a couple of miles of open water near the south shore of Hudson Bay....near the end of July, 2013?

     My “reference point” are the past Alarmist claims that we are supposed to be ice free in the Arctic Oceans during summers now. 

    Another reference point are some graphs in this revealing video:

    What do you call ice from shore to shore across the Arctic Ocean in June, 2017? 

   From 35,000 or 37,000 feet you can see a corridor about 470 mile wide for the whole distance of your flight across the Arctic Ocean. The times I flew....the skies were amazingly  clear. 

   Where is this “ice free” Arctic Ocean we are supposed to have now in the summer?

    Most Global Warming Alarmists are full of ____!!

 

 

It is not about where it touches, it is about how big it is, the size of it, which as I just pointed out to you has halved in summer months, this is like primary school stuff, I am sorry but I just can't keep entertain you any more, I am all up for care in the community but there is so much one man can do, peace.

[Catoni]

28 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

In the past the changes happened over thousands of years allowing species time to adapt, currently one of the changes has occurred very quickly, co2 concentration, normally the average temperature and co2 correlate with each other, if that were to happen with the current level of co2 we would see a corresponding large temperature rise, if it rises at a similar rate to co2 concentration then it will be nothing like the changes we have seen in the past 65 million years, it will be a change like we saw when the dinosaurs went extinct.  So tell me, what is it that we have seen in the past that gives you reassurance?

Simple....the fact that in the past 600 million years, we have been this low in CO2 only once before. Compared to all the time in the past 600 million years, we are CO2 poor right now. 

   And we got as low as 180ppm .  Very very close, relatively, to a point of planet disaster. 

    Question for you...let’s see how much you know:

  What would happen if atmospheric CO2 were to fall below 150ppm ? ?

 

  Do you know the answer ? 

[Catoni]

16 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

 

It is not about where it touches, it is about how big it is, the size of it, which as I just pointed out to you has halved in summer months, this is like primary school stuff, I am sorry but I just can't keep entertain you any more, I am all up for care in the community but there is so much one man can do, peace.

5555 ?   “...how big it is, the size of it,..”

    Shore to shore....ice from the shore of Russia to shore of Canada and most of Hudson Bay. 

      Is that big enough for you?How’s that size for you, comrade ?

    Fact is, after listening to all the propaganda,  I was only expecting to see a few isolated icebergs floating in a vast empty sea .

  Well, so much for the Gore Bull Warming Alarmist Bull ____ !

Edited September 22, 2018 by Catoni
Addition

[Kieran00001]

8 minutes ago, Catoni said:

Simple....the fact that in the past 600 million years, we have been this low in CO2 only once before. Compared to all the time in the past 600 million years, we are CO2 poor right now. 

   And we got as low as 180ppm .  Very very close, relatively, to a point of planet disaster. 

    Question for you...let’s see how much you know:

  What would happen if atmospheric CO2 were to fall below 150ppm ? ?

 

  Do you know the answer ? 

 

What on earth relevance do you think that has?  In all of humankind history co2 has never been this high, that is what matters, now really this is the most childlike attempt to discredit science I have seen in a long time, so this is it.

[Catoni]

51 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

The fact that coral has always bounced back thousands of years after mass extinctions offers nothing for the current 9 million species dependent on coral worldwide, you are truly clutching at straws with that one.

 

What you have hilariously failed to consider with your "evidence" which appears to consist purel of you being able to see ice from a flight, is that you did not also do that in the past so you have no reference point from which to base your conclusion, and so actually you have no idea what changes have taken place.  So instead of taking your word for it that as long as there is some ice there everything must be normal, I am listening to the researchers, with the NSIDC, The University of Alaska, Fairbanks and the University of Illinois, who compiled and digitalized sea ice measurements from 14 historical sources. Those included hand-drawn ice-boundary maps, and documents like logbooks from the U.S. whaling fleet, records from the Danish Meteorological Institute and reports by U.S. Navy oceanographers, from 1850 through 1978.  Below is a graph made from that data, and as you can see, summer ice area back in 2011 was almost half of the average seen in the 1960's, an unprecedented change, and much more worrying is that since then we have seen lows of just 4 million km2, which is approaching a third of the size it was 100 years ago.

 

Hey comrade....love your graph.

   Especially love your starting point.  1870. 

       Only about 10 or 20 years from when the L.I.A. ended. 

  “Hey, let’s start our graph about 1870....that way it will show ice melt over the following one or two hundred years.”  (Which is EXACTLY what you should expect following 550 years of a colder horrible climate)

[Kieran00001]

1 minute ago, Catoni said:

Hey comrade....love your graph.

   Especially love your starting point.  1870. 

       Only about 10 or 20 years from when the L.I.A. ended. 

  “Hey, let’s start our graph about 1870....that way it will show ice melt over the following one or two hundred years.”  (Which is EXACTLY what you should expect following 550 years of a colder horrible climate)

 

Which is exactly the reason I can't continue to indulge you, a small child could see that the ice did not melt for the first 90 years on that graph, you have no ability to interpret data and just pretend it shows something that you imagine it might. 

[Catoni]

3 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

What on earth relevance do you think that has?  In all of humankind history co2 has never been this high, that is what matters, now really this is the most childlike attempt to discredit science I have seen in a long time, so this is it.

What significance is that? So what if CO2 hasn’t been this high in human history? 

     “Oh, oh......CO2 is 400 or 405ppm !!  IT’S THE END OF THE WORLD ! ! “

     Are you wearing your tin foil beanie ? ? 

    You carrying your sign around? “Repent! The End Is Near?” 

555555 ? 

[Catoni]

2 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

Which is exactly the reason I can't continue to indulge you, a small child could see that the ice did not melt for the first 90 years on that graph, you have no ability to interpret data and just pretend it shows something that you imagine it might. 

I have a better ability to interpret graphs than you do. I also know that you and your Alarmist brethren cherry pick your starting points and adjust data to show what you wish to show.  

     And when your predicted “tipping point” disasters don’t happen when you said they would happen, you then simply move the goal posts. 

    It’s all really becoming more and more boring over the years. 

     I can’t imagine how you don’t feel so embarrassed and foolish. 

  Very happy I’m not you, comrade.  ? 

[Catoni]

21 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

What on earth relevance do you think that has?  In all of humankind history co2 has never been this high, that is what matters, now really this is the most childlike attempt to discredit science I have seen in a long time, so this is it.

So you failed to answer my question.

     Dodge, avoid, ignore!

Is that your mantra ?

[Andrew108]

1. You deny human driven climate change. But accept that the climate is changing. Nothing can be done. It's all natural cycles etc.

2. You agree with 99% of climate scientists who say current climate change is due to human activity. You accept that under the current global economic system climate change is unstoppable.  Nothing has been done and nothing can be done.

In both cases the outcome is the same. Mass starvation. Mass migration. The worlds population squeezed into a narrower band of habitable land. Unpredictable weather with storms becoming stronger and droughts becoming longer.

Younger generation feel shafted by greedy aged population. Cynicism towards those in power. Apathy and nihilistic outlook. Realization that capitalism with its promise of finding happiness in the ownership of 'things' has been a failure. People no longer having security find themselves in persistent low-level states of fear triggered by exaggerated media stories. Distrust towards the 'other' and unwillingness to find happiness in relationships. Increased social isolation and addictive behaviour. No ability to build communities. Everyone becoming an expat - even in their own country.

This is the immediate future.

It will be interesting to see how the world is after the old climate change deniers die out. The hope is that the younger generations will move into powerful positions and make the necessary changes. My generation (50 plus) has completely failed.  

 

Edited September 22, 2018 by Andrew108

[VincentRJ]

It's such a pity this thread has degenerated into ad hominem attacks, which are the antithesis of the scientific methodology.

 

I provided a link to the latest IPCC technical summary  in post #144, where significant doubt is expressed, by government sponsored climate scientists, about any global increase in extreme weather events during the past thousand years, due to a lack of reliable evidence, yet that fact seems to have been completely ignored by the alarmist posters in this thread.

 

Please try to address the quality and validity of the arguments presented, otherwise nobody learns anything.

[mauGR1]

1 hour ago, Andrew108 said:

1. You deny human driven climate change. But accept that the climate is changing. Nothing can be done. It's all natural cycles etc.

2. You agree with 99% of climate scientists who say current climate change is due to human activity. You accept that under the current global economic system climate change is unstoppable.  Nothing has been done and nothing can be done.

In both cases the outcome is the same. Mass starvation. Mass migration. The worlds population squeezed into a narrower band of habitable land. Unpredictable weather with storms becoming stronger and droughts becoming longer.

Younger generation feel shafted by greedy aged population. Cynicism towards those in power. Apathy and nihilistic outlook. Realization that capitalism with its promise of finding happiness in the ownership of 'things' has been a failure. People no longer having security find themselves in persistent low-level states of fear triggered by exaggerated media stories. Distrust towards the 'other' and unwillingness to find happiness in relationships. Increased social isolation and addictive behaviour. No ability to build communities. Everyone becoming an expat - even in their own country.

This is the immediate future.

It will be interesting to see how the world is after the old climate change deniers die out. The hope is that the younger generations will move into powerful positions and make the necessary changes. My generation (50 plus) has completely failed.  

 

Nice one, but i have more faith in nature than in the younger generations.

[mauGR1]

4 minutes ago, VincentRJ said:

It's such a pity this thread has degenerated into ad hominem attacks, which are the antithesis of the scientific methodology.

 

I provided a link to the latest IPCC technical summary  in post #144, where significant doubt is expressed, by government sponsored climate scientists, about any global increase in extreme weather events during the past thousand years, due to a lack of reliable evidence, yet that fact seems to have been completely ignored by the alarmist posters in this thread.

 

Please try to address the quality and validity of the arguments presented, otherwise nobody learns anything.

I tend to agree with you, recently i read some middle-age chronicles about weather in middle Europe.

Those chronicles describe heavy snow in May or September, horrific wind storms which i never saw in my life, catastrophic floods and 1 year-long droughts...

A recent example is Krakatoa volcano explosion, 1893 if i remember well, it affected the whole world for many years, and you cannot blame humans for such events.