Sydney is flooded, again, as climate crisis becomes new normal for Australia's most populous state

[Atlantis]

4 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

You've made the claim, now support it with links. I'm particularly keen to see a warming period which even approximates the time span in which we are seeing the average and spot temperatures rise as they are now.

What do you mean? Please be more specific with your link request. You want annual data from millions of years ago (um.....) or thousands of years ago? You want to see a graph of global average temperatures just prior to the Holocene? On what level of granular detail - i.e. what do you want on the x-axis?
 

[placeholder]

2 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

I believe in the science, I'm just not buying the fear mongering or going to panic, at the very very slow rate of temp & seas rising.  As if there is anything I can do to prevent it, more than I've already done.

 

Feel free to join me, and lower your 'footprint', then you can actually talk to me, about how much you care, and what you're doing.

Well, please share with us some examples of the fear mongering and panic coming from the IPCC's latest reports.

 

As for personal claims about from an anonymous poster about what they are doing to lower their carbon footprint, or requests from anonymours others to prove the same, it is to laugh. 

[ozimoron]

3 minutes ago, Atlantis said:

What do you mean? Please be more specific with your link request. You want annual data from millions of years ago (um.....) or thousands of years ago? You want to see a graph of global average temperatures just prior to the Holocene? On what level of granular detail - i.e. what do you want on the x-axis?
 

any link that supports your claim that there have been comparable periods of rapid temperature rise will do.

[Atlantis]

'BP' means Before Present.
 

https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/earth-and-planetary-sciences/younger-dryas
 

[placeholder]

38 minutes ago, Atlantis said:

You're reading far too much into it. I am not attempting to disparage an entire scientific field. Perhaps I shouldn't presume everyone else on this thread has focused on earlier posts in the same way that I have. Just a recap from above

"The current spike in temperature is unprecedented for millions of years." - If you know your stuff and if you want to give the benefit of the doubt to this wording, then yes, it is correct. The apparent yearly increase in average temperatures is unprecedented, if you zoom right in. The change in atmospheric CO2 concentrations due to human industrial and agricultural activity certainly is.

However, as recent ago as 11,000-12,000 years ago, the change in temperature during the Younger Dryas was many many magnitudes larger than the relative blip we are seeing now. Not surprisingly, it was the end of the ice age and beginning of the Holocene. But this was over decades and centuries rather than years and decades, so on average, the rate of temperature increase might / may / was probably less.

We can't get such granular data for that period compared to the modern readings from multiple locations around the world. So during the couple of centuries when global temperatures rose 15-20 degrees Celsius, was there definitively no period of 10, 20 years that saw a sharper rise in temperatures that we are recording now? I'm sure the poster above with a relevant climatology background will post links to refute this in part or whole if I am wrong.

Now, that was 11-12 thousand years ago. Apply it to rock-based data from millions of years ago, and try to zoom in and tell me with any degree of certainty that there has not been a few decades of rapid temperature change.

Is that better.

 

As for abrupt climate change...it may well be that there are hidden such instances. 

But what are the odds that a rise in temperature predicted by climatologists actually came to pass and conformed to such predictions? The predictions of the Japanese scientist who recently received the Nobel for his work have turned out to be astonishingly accurate. As have most of the predictions of the early models created by climatologists.

Edited July 19, 2022 by placeholder

[Atlantis]

Wikipedia is less dense of a read, but this image below won't let you zoom in much

[Atlantis]

3 minutes ago, placeholder said:

I'm guessing you think my comments were directed at you. Unless you're the Jekyll to Khunla's Hyde, you've got that wrong.

As for abrupt climate change...it may well be that there are hidden such instances. But if so, they are very rare.

But what are the odds that a rise in temperature predicted by climatologists actually came to pass and conformed to such predictions? The predictions of the Japanese scientist who recently received the Nobel for his work have turned out to be astonishingly accurate. As have most of the predictions of the early models created by climatologists.

No I didn't see your post when I hit sent. I can see why it caused confusion as you mentioned 'climatology' and I actually used part of your quote when responding to another poster. I've updated the post now.

[ozimoron]

9 minutes ago, Atlantis said:

'BP' means Before Present.
 

https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/earth-and-planetary-sciences/younger-dryas
 

What's that? There's no mention in that link of rising temperatures over decades. The YD was a period of cooler weather.

[ozimoron]

9 minutes ago, Atlantis said:

Wikipedia is less dense of a read, but this image below won't let you zoom in much

This is a chart showing a temperature change of 10 degrees over 10,000 years. How is that relevant to the rapid rise in temperatures we are experiencing now? That chart only proves the very gradual changes of temperature due to natural variability, very much unlike what we are seeing now as a result of human induced global warming. That's the point of recent climate change, the rate of change is unprecedented in the time homo sapiens has been around.

[KhunLA]

18 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Well, please share with us some examples of the fear mongering and panic coming from the IPCC's latest reports.

 

As for personal claims about from an anonymous poster about what they are doing to lower their carbon footprint, or requests from anonymours others to prove the same, it is to laugh. 

Nice deflection.  Still flying international ?  Still driving that fossil fuel car ?  Have you gone or plan on going solar ?  Instead of electric from oil, coal.

 

Either part of the solution ... or the problem.   You decide.

[ozimoron]

39 minutes ago, Atlantis said:

@ozimoron

You're reading far too much into it. I am not attempting to disparage an entire scientific field. Perhaps I shouldn't presume everyone else on this thread has focused on earlier posts in the same way that I have. Just a recap from above

"The current spike in temperature is unprecedented for millions of years." - If you know your stuff and if you want to give the benefit of the doubt to this wording, then yes, it is correct. The apparent yearly increase in average temperatures is unprecedented, if you zoom right in. The change in atmospheric CO2 concentrations due to human industrial and agricultural activity certainly is.

However, as recent ago as 11,000-12,000 years ago, the change in temperature during the Younger Dryas was many many magnitudes larger than the relative blip we are seeing now. Not surprisingly, it was the end of the ice age and beginning of the Holocene. But this was over decades and centuries rather than years and decades, so on average, the rate of temperature increase might / may / was probably less.

We can't get such granular data for that period compared to the modern readings from multiple locations around the world. So during the couple of centuries when global temperatures rose 15-20 degrees Celsius, was there definitively no period of 10, 20 years that saw a sharper rise in temperatures that we are recording now? I'm sure the poster above with a relevant climatology background will post links to refute this in part or whole if I am wrong.

Now, that was 11-12 thousand years ago. Apply it to rock-based data from millions of years ago, and try to zoom in and tell me with any degree of certainty that there has not been a few decades of rapid temperature change.

Is that better.

No, the YD was a period of cooling, not rising temperatures. The Earth's atmosphere is known to have cooled rapidly from time to time due to volcanic eruptions and the like but not rapid warming phases. They aren't equivalent.

[placeholder]

3 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Nice deflection.  Still flying international ?  Still driving that fossil fuel car ?  Have you gone or plan on going solar ?  Instead of electric from oil, coal.

 

Either part of the solution ... or the problem.   You decide.

What do you know about my personal life and what I do? What don't you understand about the fact that we are all anonymous here and our claims can't be objectively verified? Please spare us any more of your virtue-signaling.

[ozimoron]

2 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Nice deflection.  Still flying international ?  Still driving that fossil fuel car ?  Have you gone or plan on going solar ?  Instead of electric from oil, coal.

 

Either part of the solution ... or the problem.   You decide.

There's nothing individuals can do that will make any difference to climate. On the other hand, collectively we can make a huge difference but that requires international cooperation to solve an international problem. Your micro view of the world is shared by climate change deniers who point out that Australia contributes less than 2% of the world's CO2 so why should we do anything? Belittling people who fly to imply that they aren't serious about climate change is missing the point. You have made it a recurring theme.

[KhunLA]

14 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

There's nothing individuals can do that will make any difference to climate. 

Wow ... you seriously just said that.  Knocking on 8 billion people on the planet, and there's nothing we can do.

 

Have less children

Drive less, walk and or bike more

Use less electric, especially if produced from oil & coal.

EVs, scooter, ebike, motorcycle, car/truck

Solar - small system, large system ... ANY system

Holiday locally, drive that EV to where ever.

 

Nothing we can do.  8 billion people, and nothing we can do.

Mind boggling. 

 

First thing to do, is stop telling everyone about climate change, and do something...

... anything to slow it down.  If you care, or just keep talking, that's helping a lot.

 

International cooperation ... putting your faith in govts ... and I thought you were intelligent at times.   There goes that thought.

 

So we'll just sit and wait for guidance from the folks, that basically are creating this mess.  International cooperation & govts ... you apparently haven't been paying attention.   As those people don't care, never did, never will.  

 

People waiting for someone else to do something, is why things are the way they are.  What ever happen to thinking and doing by and for yourself.  This isn't rocket science.

 

Think you both made it to my ignore list ... 

Have a nice night ... BYE BYE

[Atlantis]

42 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

What's that? There's no mention in that link of rising temperatures over decades. The YD was a period of cooler weather.

In the northern hemisphere yes. Of greater relevance: what do you think happened at the end of the YD to get us back to non ice-age temperatures? Sharply rising temperatures. And you're being deliberately evasive if you want to pretend you missed charts like this:

 

Those very steep rises and (falls) were not over 'thousands of years'. Must the article explicitly mention warming over decades (when this is the not its main focus) in order for you to use the accompanying data?

[ozimoron]

1 minute ago, Atlantis said:

In the northern hemisphere yes. Of greater relevance: what do you think happened at the end of the YD to get us back to non ice-age temperatures? Sharply rising temperatures. And you're being deliberately evasive if you want to pretend you missed charts like this:

 

Those very steep rises and (falls) were not over 'thousands of years'. Must the article explicitly mention warming over decades (when this is the not its main focus) in order for you to use the accompanying data?

Modern global warming is occurring over less than 100 years. Your chart doesn't show warming changes that rapid. Are you trying to suggest that global warming is just natural cycles of warming and cooling? What natural changes could explain the warming in the last century? The YD had explanations of natural causes. The current warming is running counter to the natural cycles as has been demonstrated in links provided.

[Atlantis]

39 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

This is a chart showing a temperature change of 10 degrees over 10,000 years. How is that relevant to the rapid rise in temperatures we are experiencing now? That chart only proves the very gradual changes of temperature due to natural variability, very much unlike what we are seeing now as a result of human induced global warming. That's the point of recent climate change, the rate of change is unprecedented in the time homo sapiens has been around.

Now you're being deliberately sneaky. I myself mentioned the 'over 10,000 year' bit was not the focus. Here, i'll spoon-feed it to you:

The red circled data represents decades / couple of centuries. And the data itself are averages from proxy measurements. What's the recent sharp rise again? Just over 1 degree Celsius (probably) over a century and a bit?

Try and actually zoom in, and then open your mind. Finally, remind yourself what the initial point of disagreement was - attempting to compare modern (instrumental) data to proxies and estimates from millions of years ago and the obvious inherent uncertainty.

[ozimoron]

2 minutes ago, Atlantis said:

Now you're being deliberately sneaky. I myself mentioned the 'over 10,000 year' bit was not the focus. Here, i'll spoon-feed it to you:

The red circled data represents decades / couple of centuries. And the data itself are averages from proxy measurements. What's the recent sharp rise again? Just over 1 degree Celsius (probably) over a century and a bit?

Try and actually zoom in, and then open your mind. Finally, remind yourself what the initial point of disagreement was - attempting to compare modern (instrumental) data to proxies and estimates from millions of years ago and the obvious inherent uncertainty.

Nobody was comparing modern temperature data with proxies. You were busy suggesting that the proxies didn't exist. You have not yet established that global temperatures have increased at anything approximating the current rises at anytime in the past.

[Atlantis]

Before you make claims about cause and effect, it is important you actually realize that the word 'unprecedented' for which I have already given the poster the full benefit of doubt, may not be as unprecedented as you think when you look back in deep history. Once you acknowledge this (and maybe even understand (!) why I initially said "reliable" and "relevant"), it might then be worthwhile to talk about the evidence of human contribution.

[ozimoron]

2 minutes ago, Atlantis said:

Before you make claims about cause and effect, it is important you actually realize that the word 'unprecedented' for which I have already given the poster the full benefit of doubt, may not be as unprecedented as you think when you look back in deep history. Once you acknowledge this (and maybe even understand (!) why I initially said "reliable" and "relevant"), it might then be worthwhile to talk about the evidence of human contribution.

a continued dearth of relevant links to support your arguments is all I see.

[Atlantis]

Just now, ozimoron said:

Nobody was comparing modern temperature data with proxies. You were busy suggesting that the proxies didn't exist. You have not yet established that global temperatures have increased at anything approximating the current rises at anytime in the past.

I'm sorry, but I assumed you had eyes. My bad.

"You were busy suggesting that the proxies didn't exist." - How. How was I doing this when I demonstrated I was fully aware of climate proxies in a post way before I interacted with you. Explain.

Here's another self-evident refutation of this charge: I added the words 'reliable' and 'relevant'. I clearly think a thing must exist if I query the thing's reliability and relevance to context of our discussion. Get it?

Next!

[Atlantis]

1 minute ago, ozimoron said:

a continued dearth of relevant links to support your arguments is all I see.

I mean I can continue posting links, even with carefully labelled / annotated graphics. But apparently you can't see them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geologic_temperature_record#/media/File:All_palaeotemps.svg

[Atlantis]

2 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

a continued dearth of relevant links to support your arguments is all I see.

I mean I circled the relevant data using a red circle despite your attempts to talk about the general trend. So back to the topic: now that we've established that as recent as circa 12,000 years ago, there could have been sharp rises in data comparable to the 1-1.25 degree rise over the past century....it is now up to you to explain to everyone how certain you are that millions (tens of millions, hundreds of millions) of years did not bear witness to anything of comparable magnitude.

What I posted shouldn't be controversial at all.

[ozimoron]

5 minutes ago, Atlantis said:

I'm sorry, but I assumed you had eyes. My bad.

"You were busy suggesting that the proxies didn't exist." - How. How was I doing this when I demonstrated I was fully aware of climate proxies in a post way before I interacted with you. Explain.

Here's another self-evident refutation of this charge: I added the words 'reliable' and 'relevant'. I clearly think a thing must exist if I query the thing's reliability and relevance to context of our discussion. Get it?

Next!

You denied that there were temperature records going back millions of years and yet now claim to have known about temperature proxies all along.

[ozimoron]

1 minute ago, Atlantis said:

I mean I circled the relevant data using a red circle despite your attempts to talk about the general trend. So back to the topic: now that we've established that as recent as circa 12,000 years ago, there could have been sharp rises in data comparable to the 1-1.25 degree rise over the past century....it is now up to you to explain to everyone how certain you are that millions (tens of millions, hundreds of millions) of years did not bear witness to anything of comparable magnitude.

What I posted shouldn't be controversial at all.

Was that temperature change world wide? How large was it and what was the temperature change over any period of 50 years?

[Atlantis]

5 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

You denied that there were temperature records going back millions of years and yet now claim to have known about temperature proxies all along.

I did no such thing. Stop lying, it's pointless. Just click on page 1 and read what everyone wrote. It's there for all to see.

At this point, it's obvious you're taking this way too personally and are scrambling for a way to step down. It's okay. It's not personal. We're talking about 1 and a bit degrees over a century. It's okay to accept this may have happened before. Chill.

[placeholder]

4 minutes ago, Atlantis said:

I mean I circled the relevant data using a red circle despite your attempts to talk about the general trend. So back to the topic: now that we've established that as recent as circa 12,000 years ago, there could have been sharp rises in data comparable to the 1-1.25 degree rise over the past century....it is now up to you to explain to everyone how certain you are that millions (tens of millions, hundreds of millions) of years did not bear witness to anything of comparable magnitude.

What I posted shouldn't be controversial at all.

The thing is, ice ages are known for having sharp rises and falls in temperatures. So comparing climatological phenomena that takes place during ice ages at their most intense to the current situation doesn't shed much light.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/06/170619125822.htm#:~:text=age temperature jumps-,New study reveals carbon dioxide 'tipping point' that triggered,abrupt warming during glacial periods&text=Summary%3A,during the ice age periods.

 

[ozimoron]

6 hours ago, Atlantis said:

It is indeed a good refresher in how climate proxies work. Tree rings are another good tool for more recent history.

However, unlike you, I wouldn't presume that I knew much more than the other poster when he accurately queried whether we have reliable and relevant data going back millions of years.

 

3 minutes ago, Atlantis said:

I did no such thing. Stop lying, it's pointless. Just click on page 1 and read what everyone wrote. It's there for all to see.

At this point, it's obvious you're taking this way too personally and are scrambling for a way to step down. It's okay. It's not personal. We're talking about 1 and a bit degrees over a century. It's okay to accept this may have happened before. Chill.

These statements are contradictory. Don't accuse me of lying.

[Atlantis]

@placeholder

I wasn't even trying to suggest it does shed any light on any human impact. This should have been clear to him and others when I distinctly mentioned the unprecedented levels of CO2 from human activity.

Merely trying to communicate to another poster the objective existence of such proxy data is apparently very challenging when severe stubbornness is involved.
 

[ozimoron]

5 minutes ago, Atlantis said:

Recap of the important points:

Rate of rise in CO2 concentrations - unprecedented
Rate of rise in global temperatures - likely not unprecedented

 

Good night everyone - including those in Oz. And stop fighting ! Not while I'm offline.
Beside, given the average age of users on here, you'll all be 6 feet under if/when our planet becomes uninhabitable.

The magnitude and rate of warming over the last 150 years far surpasses the magnitude and rate of changes at any other time over the last 24,000 years

 

https://www.washington.edu/news/2021/11/10/new-method-shows-todays-warming-unprecedented-over-past-24000-years/