U.N. Secretary-General warns world 'not on track' to limiting temperature rise to 1.5 percent: TVNZ

[RickBradford]

2 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Well, if I misconstrued you comment it was because your first comment in the thread claimed that the global temperature was actually falling.

The global temperature has been falling, since 2016. What it will do in future is by definition uncertain.

 

Climate scientist Drew Shindell believes that in future, the world is unlikely to limit global temperature rises to below 1.5C.

 

Those are two separate ideas, which are not in conflict with each other.

 

You'll find it useful in life to learn to separate different ideas. It can give you a broader perspective on what is happening.

[OneEyedPie]

4 minutes ago, RickBradford said:

You'll find it useful in life to learn to separate different ideas. It can give you a broader perspective on what is happening.

Try sticking your head in a vice.  It's far less painful.  

[bristolboy]

23 minutes ago, RickBradford said:

The global temperature has been falling, since 2016. What it will do in future is by definition uncertain.

 

Climate scientist Drew Shindell believes that in future, the world is unlikely to limit global temperature rises to below 1.5C.

 

Those are two separate ideas, which are not in conflict with each other.

 

You'll find it useful in life to learn to separate different ideas. It can give you a broader perspective on what is happening.

Except of course, your claim is based on one scientist"s interpretation of data that not only has been shown to be based on faulty premises, but contradicts land based temperature readings as well. As was exhaustively demonstrated earlier. I guess it's the fault of all those extremists that people like you cherry pick to pose misleading and dishonest data.

And you still haven't provided a link to show the source of that graph you posted. What are you hiding?

Edited May 13, 2019 by bristolboy

[Jack Mountain]

Some farting vulcano's and/or a nuclear winter will solve the problem ...

[Tug]

14 hours ago, bristolboy said:

Actually, something called the free market system is doing just that. Already thanks to advances in renewable energy generation and storage coal is already obsolete. Gas is on the verge of suffering the same fate. What mainly stands in the way now are opponents of the capitalist system who support corrupt government efforts to favor fossil fuels.

I agree but we also have an intrenched gas oil lobby and lots of folks make there living in the field we need to navigate our way through that as well as we change over to renewables 

[Stargeezr]

So... Will India quit building the coal fired power plnts? Will a carbontax on their population help their air quality. How about China, Russia, the USA and other big polluting countries?

[teacherofwoe]

15 hours ago, Dek Somboon said:

Thank you! Denialist dummies should no longer be given a platform to spread their bullshit and the TVF moderator should have banned the poster’s nonsense!

 

18 hours ago, bristolboy said:

First off, everyone should not that as per usual the poster fails to include the source of his graph. I believe it comes from Dr. John Christy, who is an outlier climatologist on the question of global warmng.

This is typical of the subterfuge that denialists use. In fact, Christy's methods and consequent claims were shown to be faulty the most important single reason being that he didn't account of orbital decay in the satellites.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2017/may/11/more-errors-identified-in-contrarian-climate-scientists-temperature-estimates

 

What follows are summaries of 4 evaluations of global atmospheric warming that use not only satellite data but ground level data as well. Readers will note that they show the highest temperature recorded occurred in 2018. What makes that even more significant is that 2018 was not an El Nino year unlike 1998

 

 

https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate-guide/science/temp-records

 

http://berkeleyearth.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/GlobalAverage_2018.png

 

There's also this:

Satellite confirms key NASA temperature data: The planet is warming — and fast

 

A high-profile NASA temperature data set, which has pronounced the last five years the hottest on record and the globe a full degree Celsius warmer than in the late 1800s, has found new backing from independent satellite records — suggesting the findings are on a sound footing, scientists reported Tuesday.

If anything, the researchers found, the pace of climate change could be somewhat more severe than previously acknowledged, at least in the fastest warming part of the world — its highest latitudes.

“We may actually have been underestimating how much warmer [the Arctic’s] been getting,” said Gavin Schmidt, who directs NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, which keeps the temperature data, and who was a co-author of the new study released in Environmental Research Letters.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2019/04/17/satellite-confirms-key-nasa-temperature-data-planet-is-warming-fast/?utm_term=.91c557700b36

 

I love this graph. Start recording temperatures at the end of an ice age and hey presto... the temperature goes up. Who'd have thought? If you take the same graph and go back to the middle ages, you will see that it was hotter then than it is now. Have a look at graphs that go back millions of years and you will see a wavy line pattern of temperature changes which are natural to this planet. Or you can limit yourself to what The Club of Rome are pushing. 

[bristolboy]

2 hours ago, teacherofwoe said:

 

I love this graph. Start recording temperatures at the end of an ice age and hey presto... the temperature goes up. Who'd have thought? If you take the same graph and go back to the middle ages, you will see that it was hotter then than it is now. Have a look at graphs that go back millions of years and you will see a wavy line pattern of temperature changes which are natural to this planet. Or you can limit yourself to what The Club of Rome are pushing. 

Haven't time to deal with all the falsehoods and distortions here. Let's just say you should familiarize yourself with the concept of "rate of change".

[bristolboy]

14 hours ago, RickBradford said:

The global temperature has been falling, since 2016. What it will do in future is by definition uncertain.

 

Climate scientist Drew Shindell believes that in future, the world is unlikely to limit global temperature rises to below 1.5C.

 

Those are two separate ideas, which are not in conflict with each other.

 

You'll find it useful in life to learn to separate different ideas. It can give you a broader perspective on what is happening.

Really? Then how do you explain that in the past 365 days there have been 259 high max temperature records set and only 48 low max temperature records set? What do you think the odds against that being purely a coincidence are? Massive, obviously That's a ration of about 5 to 1. Historically unprecedented for the 20th and 21st centuries.

https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cdo-web/datatools/records

[thaicurious]

I've found the following site to have excellent info on climate change / global warming

https://skepticalscience.com/

Example of a current post there

https://skepticalscience.com/fox-news-us-hotbed-denial-kids-cure.html
"A new 23-country survey...found that America has the highest percentage of climate denial among first-world countries....

...In evaluating why...it’s important to consider its demographics....just 42 percent of conservative Republicans accepted that global warming is happening..."

Years back they did a series of well explained youtubes called denial101x

 

For me global warming boils down to hope while working in the right direction. Obviously the world can't just stop as that would cause untold pain. But there might be future fixes like manufactured carbon sequestration, so best to reduce as much damage-making now while working on solutions.

By population sizes alone, increasing industrialization of India and China blows away what further damage the USA might do, but abandoning sound environmental policy whether by denialism or plain ol' greed is beyond unconscionable.

Edited May 14, 2019 by thaicurious

[thaibeachlovers]

On ‎5‎/‎13‎/‎2019 at 9:54 PM, bristolboy said:

"Stop lying."

That's rich coming from someone responsible for post #4.

He said,

In truth, temperatures are irrelevant, because nothing is going to be done anyway.

and that's probably exactly what is going to happen. No lies there.

[thaibeachlovers]

On ‎5‎/‎14‎/‎2019 at 11:02 AM, Tug said:

I agree but we also have an intrenched gas oil lobby and lots of folks make there living in the field we need to navigate our way through that as well as we change over to renewables 

As long as oil companies make more money selling oil nothing will change. When they can make more money with other methods of power production and transport motivation they will stop selling oil except to make plastic.

All the demonstrations in the world and angry posts on TVF will make not one iota of difference.

[bristolboy]

5 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

He said,

In truth, temperatures are irrelevant, because nothing is going to be done anyway.

and that's probably exactly what is going to happen. No lies there.

First off I was addressing his use of a dubious graph that showed global temperatures declining. A graph the source of he has refused to even identify or link to.

And your statement clearly reflects a certain confusion on your part.

Do I have to explain to you what a mess an illogical mess you've managed to create? It's kind of impressive in a dismal way.

[bristolboy]

4 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

As long as oil companies make more money selling oil nothing will change. When they can make more money with other methods of power production and transport motivation they will stop selling oil except to make plastic.

All the demonstrations in the world and angry posts on TVF will make not one iota of difference.

Well, to give you credit,  unlike some,you're not blaming the all powerful green lobby for bullying the fossil fuel industry,

[thaibeachlovers]

11 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

First off I was addressing his use of a dubious graph that showed global temperatures declining. A graph the source of he has refused to even identify or link to.

And your statement clearly reflects a certain confusion on your part.

Do I have to explain to you what a mess an illogical mess you've managed to create? It's kind of impressive in a dismal way.

LOL. I can't take credit for creating anything, good or bad. All I can do is post my opinion, and people can agree or not, according to their druthers.

I'd have to be far more clever than I am to actually create anything here or elsewhere.

However, having spent most of my life living and working in several countries, and working mostly in large organisations with many thousands of employees, I do credit myself with having some insight, no matter how slight, into how well humanity functions, or as seems apparent to me, not functioning well at all.

[user46546545]

He picked the right place to deliver that crock of BS - he would have a lot of willing ears down there to listen to his unfounded rhetoric - The entire climate change hoax has been transformed into a big thriving business down there and they treat Al Gore like a God. 

[bristolboy]

10 minutes ago, IHTE said:

He picked the right place to deliver that crock of BS - he would have a lot of willing ears down there to listen to his unfounded rhetoric - The entire climate change hoax has been transformed into a big thriving business down there and they treat Al Gore like a God. 

Here's how many hot and cold temperatures records have been set in the last 365 days. Do you notice a discrepancy?

https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cdo-web/datatools/records

[teacherofwoe]

19 hours ago, bristolboy said:

Here's how many hot and cold temperatures records have been set in the last 365 days. Do you notice a discrepancy?

https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cdo-web/datatools/records

According to this, 2019 so far has been significantly cooler than 2018.

[geoffbezoz]

On 5/13/2019 at 10:38 AM, Dek Somboon said:

Thank you! Denialist dummies should no longer be given a platform to spread their bullshit and the TVF moderator should have banned the poster’s nonsense!

I think the  same way about Brexiteers nonsense but TVF wouldn't ban their tripe either so  just have to put up with it and just hope one day the world leaders see sense .

Edited May 16, 2019 by geoffbezoz

[bristolboy]

3 hours ago, teacherofwoe said:

According to this, 2019 so far has been significantly cooler than 2018.

That's because 68 percent all land above sea level is located north of the equator. And these are all time records. So just wait until summer. But if you want a fuller picture here a summary of daily records and monthly records.

[RickBradford]

5 hours ago, geoffbezoz said:

On 5/13/2019 at 5:38 PM, Dek Somboon said:

Thank you! Denialist dummies should no longer be given a platform to spread their bullshit and the TVF moderator should have banned the poster’s nonsense!

I think the  same way about Brexiteers nonsense but TVF wouldn't ban their tripe either so  just have to put up with it and just hope one day the world leaders see sense .

Edited 5 hours ago by geoffbezoz

Yes, it's amazing that people with undesirable views on the climate, or Brexit, are not being immediately silenced, and then involuntarily contained in Social Protection Centres for psychiatric evaluation and eventual re-education.

[bristolboy]

12 minutes ago, RickBradford said:

Yes, it's amazing that people with undesirable views on the climate, or Brexit, are not being immediately silenced, and then involuntarily contained in Social Protection Centres for psychiatric evaluation and eventual re-education.

Personally I believe flat-earthers of all kinds should be allowed full access to the media.

[RickBradford]

1 minute ago, bristolboy said:

Personally I believe flat-earthers of all kinds should be allowed full access to the media.

There's only one kind of flat earther. People who believe the earth is flat.

 

Mis-using the term to describe anyone who disagrees with you on any topic would be both childish and counter-productive.

[bristolboy]

Just now, RickBradford said:

There's only one kind of flat earther. People who believe the earth is flat.

 

Mis-using the term to describe anyone who disagrees with you on any topic would be both childish and counter-productive.

I wouldn't use the term on anyone who disagrees with me on any topic. Just those who disagree with the overwhelming scientific consensus and post "evidence" without citing its source.

[RickBradford]

27 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

I wouldn't use the term on anyone who disagrees with me on any topic. Just those who disagree with the overwhelming scientific consensus and post "evidence" without citing its source.

Oh, well, that's something. 

 

Most activists spray the term around whenever they can't think of anything sensible to say. That is to say, rather often. Al Gore did it, Rajendra Pachauri did it, the Vatican did it, and Greta Thunberg would have done it if she'd been programmed to. Perhaps former UK prime minister Gordon Brown said it best:

 

"With only days to go before Copenhagen we mustn't be distracted by the behind-the-times, anti-science, flat-earth climate sceptics."

 

It's an asinine comparison, and counter-productive.

[bristolboy]

7 minutes ago, RickBradford said:

Oh, well, that's something. 

 

Most activists spray the term around whenever they can't think of anything sensible to say. That is to say, rather often. Al Gore did it, Rajendra Pachauri did it, the Vatican did it, and Greta Thunberg would have done it if she'd been programmed to. Perhaps former UK prime minister Gordon Brown said it best:

 

"With only days to go before Copenhagen we mustn't be distracted by the behind-the-times, anti-science, flat-earth climate sceptics."

 

It's an asinine comparison, and counter-productive.

I won't say most climate change denialists engage in hyperbolic and hysterical vilification of activists. But clearly there are some.

[RickBradford]

16 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

I won't say most climate change denialists engage in hyperbolic and hysterical vilification of activists. But clearly there are some.

I won't say that all climate change activists engage in hyperbolic and hysterical vilification of climate skeptics. But clearly many of them do, the word "denialist" being an absolute give-away.

Edited May 16, 2019 by RickBradford
Clarify

[bristolboy]

1 hour ago, RickBradford said:

I won't say that all climate change activists engage in hyperbolic and hysterical vilification of climate skeptics. But clearly many of them do, the word "denialist" being an absolute give-away.

But you would say "most":

"Most activists spray the term around whenever they can't think of anything sensible to say. That is to say, rather often."

[teacherofwoe]

18 hours ago, bristolboy said:

That's because 68 percent all land above sea level is located north of the equator. And these are all time records. So just wait until summer. But if you want a fuller picture here a summary of daily records and monthly records.

All time records are less than 200 years old. Global temperature measurements started in 1850. That was at the end of the last ice age, so of course temperatures will rise until the next cooling period. How can you comprehend the weather system of the planet without looking at at least hundreds of thousands of years of data from ice cores and trees etc? All the hard facts are out there, see for yourself. 

[rabas]

On 5/15/2019 at 4:34 PM, bristolboy said:

Here's how many hot and cold temperatures records have been set in the last 365 days. Do you notice a discrepancy?

https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cdo-web/datatools/records

I'm certainly not anti but I am pro-truth,  not always the same as pro-facts. The science question here is (and I do not know the answer) This number of MAXs comes from how many readings? How many locations? Rate of readings. E.g., how many global stations are reporting, how often do they report etc. It's likely a big number. If one station hits 3 highs in one year how is it reported? 3 Max or 1? Then the infamous question "How high?".  A global relative excursion from normalcy might be more indicative.   But need to be a bit myopic to not see the world's weather is getting more wobbly.