honcho Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 10 hours ago, koolkarl said: Once it hits 2 degrees, the human race will follow the dinosaurs into oblivion. The oil companies keep buying the politicians and soon their money won't do them much good. fear mongering bs..... wouldnt trust the media who vomit this bile till the masses are so scared they will comply with the next lockdown.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soi3eddie Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 21 hours ago, Social Media said: The world has experienced its first year-long breach of the key 1.5°C warming limit, marking a significant milestone in the fight against climate change, according to the EU's climate service. Since the landmark Paris agreement in 2015, global leaders have pledged to limit the long-term temperature rise to 1.5°C, recognizing its importance in mitigating the most severe impacts of climate change. However, the recent breach, where global warming surpassed 1.5°C for an entire year, signifies a concerning trend that brings the world closer to surpassing this critical threshold on a long-term basis. How did they think they were going to change the climate? By taxing everyone more? <deleted> wits! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
califdann Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 Didn't see an actual temperature listed. Maybe just me, but it would be nice to know exactly what "they" considered to be the average or norm that has been exceeded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thaicurious Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 6 hours ago, uttradit said: You were told 30 years ago about co2. Why are you still using cars, planes and gadgets? Because you don't think it's a big deal. So it's snake oil. Not sure how you conclude that just because technology hasn't yet entirely turned cleaner faster worldwide that this might mean the science incorrect or that the efforts to change course disingenuous, but I imagine your processes must be fascinating. Stopping the world in its tracks more than obviously would cause severe hardship, if not world ending wars, so we ease into change. That doesn't mean easing into change denies the problem that requires solving asap in order to not cause greater catastrophe later. You do the best you can and hope you don't screw up too much. And you do the best you can to reduce as much future suffering without causing too much current suffering. This is pretty basic stuff. To what you impatiently perceive as delay--how's that for diplomacy!--science looks at the evidence but then then still requires consensus of the various scientific disciplines--that's the wonderful thing about science; it is self-scrutinizing--which we've really only had since 2013ish. But even after that, you need political consensus and compliance and not just within each country, but worldwide. And even after that, you need enough of the populations to understand the science to support the politics to apply the science to work towards fixing the problem. You can read and listen to more on that here... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_consensus_on_climate_change#:~:text=In 2013%2C a study which,happening and is human-caused. "In 2013, a study which found that out of over 4,000 peer-reviewed papers on climate science published since 1990, 97% agree, explicitly or implicitly, that global warming is happening and is human-caused" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WAqR9mLJrcE see also https://skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus.htm see also https://history.aip.org/climate/summary.htm see also https://history.aip.org/climate/summary.htm "By 2010 impacts long predicted were turning up, sooner than many had expected — acidification of the oceans, unprecedented deadly heat waves, record-breaking floods and droughts, heat-related changes in the survival of sensitive species. An important new field of research developed as some scientists turned from calculating future impacts to showing how global warming was harming people right now…. The scientists who had been predicting for decades that the world would become significantly warmer were now obviously correct. Essentially all scientists along with most science journalists, business leaders, and the world public accepted the consensus. But in the U.S., and to a lesser extent Canada, Australia, and Russia — nations with powerful fossil fuel industries — important political figures continued to scoff at the evidence…. Meanwhile government subsidies for wind, solar power and electric cars had paid off, driving down the costs with remarkable speed. Western Europe began to reduce its fossil-fuel emissions, followed by the United States. World-wide, however, emissions climbed more rapidly than ever, with China and other developing nations taking the lead…." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yellowtail Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 16 minutes ago, thaicurious said: Not sure how you conclude that just because technology hasn't yet entirely turned cleaner faster worldwide that this might mean the science incorrect or that the efforts to change course disingenuous, but I imagine your processes must be fascinating. Stopping the world in its tracks more than obviously would cause severe hardship, if not world ending wars, so we ease into change. That doesn't mean easing into change denies the problem that requires solving asap in order to not cause greater catastrophe later. You do the best you can and hope you don't screw up too much. And you do the best you can to reduce as much future suffering without causing too much current suffering. This is pretty basic stuff. To what you impatiently perceive as delay--how's that for diplomacy!--science looks at the evidence but then then still requires consensus of the various scientific disciplines--that's the wonderful thing about science; it is self-scrutinizing--which we've really only had since 2013ish. But even after that, you need political consensus and compliance and not just within each country, but worldwide. And even after that, you need enough of the populations to understand the science to support the politics to apply the science to work towards fixing the problem. You can read and listen to more on that here... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_consensus_on_climate_change#:~:text=In 2013%2C a study which,happening and is human-caused. "In 2013, a study which found that out of over 4,000 peer-reviewed papers on climate science published since 1990, 97% agree, explicitly or implicitly, that global warming is happening and is human-caused" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WAqR9mLJrcE see also https://skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus.htm see also https://history.aip.org/climate/summary.htm see also https://history.aip.org/climate/summary.htm "By 2010 impacts long predicted were turning up, sooner than many had expected — acidification of the oceans, unprecedented deadly heat waves, record-breaking floods and droughts, heat-related changes in the survival of sensitive species. An important new field of research developed as some scientists turned from calculating future impacts to showing how global warming was harming people right now…. The scientists who had been predicting for decades that the world would become significantly warmer were now obviously correct. Essentially all scientists along with most science journalists, business leaders, and the world public accepted the consensus. But in the U.S., and to a lesser extent Canada, Australia, and Russia — nations with powerful fossil fuel industries — important political figures continued to scoff at the evidence…. Meanwhile government subsidies for wind, solar power and electric cars had paid off, driving down the costs with remarkable speed. Western Europe began to reduce its fossil-fuel emissions, followed by the United States. World-wide, however, emissions climbed more rapidly than ever, with China and other developing nations taking the lead…." Yeah, the old 97% lie gets dragged out again. No doubt Sir Linksalot will be along to "prove" it's actually 99% of all the people getting rich off the science support it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yellowtail Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 7 hours ago, uttradit said: You were told 30 years ago about co2. Why are you still using cars, planes and gadgets? Because you don't think it's a big deal. So it's snake oil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
placeholder Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 17 hours ago, johng said: Bear in mind when they talk about removing carbon from the world...Human beings are carbon. If carbon dioxide is so bad why do they use raised levels in greenhouses and produce much higher crop yields ? How is it that C02 levels where at least 5 times higher in the age of Dinosaurs than today's levels temperatures were roughly 5°C–10°C higher than today, and sea levels were 50–100 meters higher ? man made ? nope. What they are talking about is about lowering the rate of increase of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere in the short and medium run and ultimately reducing it. No one except possibly the delusional are talking about removing carbon from the world. How did you come up with this nonsense? It's not a matter of CO2 being bad or good. It's beneficial in greenhouses and indispensable in Coca-Cola. And while more may be better for some agricultural crops, not for all of them. And its effects aren't confined to agriculture, are they? Well, I'll say this for your final comment. You acknowledge the connection between higher CO2 levels and higher temperate and sea level. But you seem to believe that because natural causes led to this rise in the past, it can't be human caused now. That's demonstrably false. 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johng Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 7 hours ago, placeholder said: No one except possibly the delusional are talking about removing carbon from the world. How did you come up with this nonsense? Third time trying to reply to this so I'll be brief. https://github.com/frontierclimate/carbon-removal-source-materials/blob/main/Project Applications/2022 Fall/[Kodama Systems] Frontier Carbon Removal Purchase Application.pdf 7 hours ago, placeholder said: because natural causes led to this rise in the past, it can't be human caused now. That's demonstrably false. How is it false it happened before in the past and I believe its happening again now,but the policies to rectify it will be more adverse than a slight rise in temperature and Co2 https://www.monash.edu/medicine/news/latest/2021-articles/worlds-largest-study-of-global-climate-related-mortality-links-5-million-deaths-a-year-to-abnormal-temperatures ANNUAL DEATHS DUE TO COLD TEMPS BY REGION: Africa – 1.18 million Asia – 2.4 million Europe – 657,000 South America – 116,000 UK – 44,600 US – 154,800 China – 967,000 India – 655,400 Australia – 14,200 ANNUAL DEATHS DUE TO HIGH TEMPS BY REGION Africa – 25,550 Asia – 224,000 Europe – 178,700 South America – 25,250 UK – 8000 US – 18,750 China – 71,300 India – 83,700 Australia – 2300 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danderman123 Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 (edited) 18 hours ago, honcho said: fear mongering bs..... wouldnt trust the media who vomit this bile till the masses are so scared they will comply with the next lockdown.... What amount of media reporting on this issue is fear mongering, and how much is just stating facts? If the planet warms more, what difference does it make what the media reports? Edited February 10 by Danderman123 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danderman123 Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 2 hours ago, johng said: Third time trying to reply to this so I'll be brief. https://github.com/frontierclimate/carbon-removal-source-materials/blob/main/Project Applications/2022 Fall/[Kodama Systems] Frontier Carbon Removal Purchase Application.pdf How is it false it happened before in the past and I believe its happening again now You seem to not understand that things can be affected by natural forces and also human factors. For example: your house. Natural forces (sunlight) illuminate your house in daytime. Human factors (you turning on the lights) illuminate your house at night. IF some joker on the internet claimed that since in the day, your house has light, at night, it might have light again without human factors, because it was illuminated earlier - you would think they are poorly informed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danderman123 Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 13 hours ago, califdann said: Didn't see an actual temperature listed. Maybe just me, but it would be nice to know exactly what "they" considered to be the average or norm that has been exceeded. The usual yardstick is 1950 global temperature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danderman123 Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 17 hours ago, soi3eddie said: How did they think they were going to change the climate? By taxing everyone more? <deleted> wits! Mitigation of global warming requires enough people to understand the problem. And the old coots who resist change to die off from old age. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
placeholder Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 2 hours ago, johng said: Third time trying to reply to this so I'll be brief. https://github.com/frontierclimate/carbon-removal-source-materials/blob/main/Project Applications/2022 Fall/[Kodama Systems] Frontier Carbon Removal Purchase Application.pdf How is it false it happened before in the past and I believe its happening again now,but the policies to rectify it will be more adverse than a slight rise in temperature and Co2 https://www.monash.edu/medicine/news/latest/2021-articles/worlds-largest-study-of-global-climate-related-mortality-links-5-million-deaths-a-year-to-abnormal-temperatures ANNUAL DEATHS DUE TO COLD TEMPS BY REGION: Africa – 1.18 million Asia – 2.4 million Europe – 657,000 South America – 116,000 UK – 44,600 US – 154,800 China – 967,000 India – 655,400 Australia – 14,200 ANNUAL DEATHS DUE TO HIGH TEMPS BY REGION Africa – 25,550 Asia – 224,000 Europe – 178,700 South America – 25,250 UK – 8000 US – 18,750 China – 71,300 India – 83,700 Australia – 2300 I'm assuming your first link is to some system that removes CO2 from the air (the link connects to nothing). I don't see how it can be about removing it from the world unless it's sending it to outer space. And I still have no idea why you mentioned that human beings contain carbon. I didn't say your dinosaur link was false. In fact it affirms the relationship between CO2 and global temperatures. But what you don't seem to understand is the concept of rates. It took millions of years for the climate to get that hot. The rate of temperature increase is much faster now thanks to the release of CO2 into the atmosphere due to human activities. As for deaths caused by heat vs cold. First off, that addresses pathology. Increased droughts and increasing natural disasters don't enter into that tally. What's more, that list doesn't include deaths from chronic kidney disease (CKDu) which is rising rapidly as heat rises. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yellowtail Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 1 hour ago, Danderman123 said: What amount of media reporting on this issue is fear mongering, and how much is just stating facts? What proportion of what the media reports are facts? 1 hour ago, Danderman123 said: If the planet warms more, what difference does it make what the media reports? More than what? What the media reports will have no impact on warming, but it has significant impact on how people react to the warming, good and bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thaicurious Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 12 hours ago, placeholder said: ...you seem to believe that because natural causes led to this rise in the past, it can't be human caused now. That's demonstrably false. + 4 hours ago, johng said: ...How is it false = What does past climate change tell us about global warming? (skepticalscience.com) "Climate Myth... Climate's changed before Climate is always changing. We have had ice ages and warmer periods when alligators were found in Spitzbergen. Ice ages have occurred in a hundred thousand year cycle for the last 700 thousand years, and there have been previous periods that appear to have been warmer than the present despite CO2 levels being lower than they are now. More recently, we have had the medieval warm period and the little ice age.... (Climate Realty...) The total rate of global warming observed since the industrial revolution can only be explained by the observed excess of CO2 in the atmosphere. The excess of CO2 can only be explained via human sources. Let us first examine the post-industrial revolution warming and some of the telltale signs that humans are responsible. The human fingerprint How can we be sure that humanity’s release of greenhouse gases are to blame for the observed rise in global temperature? First, let’s look at evidence showing that greenhouse gases are causing the current warming. Then we will explore how we know that the recent increase in greenhouse gases is due to human activity. Greenhouse gases like CO2 are understood quite well, so we can make predictions about what we should observe. When CO2 is added to the atmosphere..." 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thaicurious Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 On 2/9/2024 at 3:27 AM, johng said: Bear in mind when they talk about removing carbon from the world...Human beings are carbon. If carbon dioxide is so bad why do they use raised levels in greenhouses and produce much higher crop yields ? see also What does past climate change tell us about global warming? (skepticalscience.com) 2 hours ago, placeholder said: I'm assuming your first link is to some system that removes CO2 from the air (the link connects to nothing). I don't see how it can be about removing it from the world unless it's sending it to outer space. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danderman123 Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 1 hour ago, Yellowtail said: What proportion of what the media reports are facts? More than what? What the media reports will have no impact on warming, but it has significant impact on how people react to the warming, good and bad. The lies from FOX News certainly have an impact on gullible peoples' understanding of atmospheric physics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yellowtail Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 29 minutes ago, Danderman123 said: The lies from FOX News certainly have an impact on gullible peoples' understanding of atmospheric physics. You got like that watching FOX? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danderman123 Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 34 minutes ago, Yellowtail said: You got like that watching FOX? No, I get that from people who watch FOX and then repeat FOX lies here. Plus, some gems like: "If global warming is real, how come we still have winter?". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
placeholder Posted February 10 Share Posted February 10 23 hours ago, califdann said: Didn't see an actual temperature listed. Maybe just me, but it would be nice to know exactly what "they" considered to be the average or norm that has been exceeded. From the article: "The period from February 2023 to January 2024 saw a warming of 1.52°C, as reported by the EU's Copernicus Climate Change Service, underscoring the urgency for immediate action to curb emissions and address climate change." 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yellowtail Posted February 11 Share Posted February 11 3 hours ago, placeholder said: From the article: "The period from February 2023 to January 2024 saw a warming of 1.52°C, as reported by the EU's Copernicus Climate Change Service, underscoring the urgency for immediate action to curb emissions and address climate change." At 1.52 C a year, we're all dead in ten years anyway, so what's the point? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thaicurious Posted February 11 Share Posted February 11 4 hours ago, placeholder said: From the article: "The period from February 2023 to January 2024 saw a warming of 1.52°C, as reported by the EU's Copernicus Climate Change Service, underscoring the urgency for immediate action to curb emissions and address climate change." The following is still in study, so we don't know quite what it means yet, but minimally seems to underscore the seriousness of the situation https://apnews.com/article/climate-change-warming-sponges-caribbean-391ee1bb3dabb0496f0f2848849418b6 "A handful of centuries-old sponges from deep in the Caribbean are causing some scientists to think human-caused climate change began sooner and has heated the world more than they thought. They calculate that the world has already gone past the internationally approved target of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) since pre-industrial times, hitting 1.7 degrees (3.1 degrees Fahrenheit) as of 2020. They analyzed six of the long-lived sponges — simple animals that filter water — for growth records that document changes in water temperature, acidity and carbon dioxide levels in the air, according to a study in Monday’s journal Nature Climate Change." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
placeholder Posted February 11 Share Posted February 11 9 minutes ago, thaicurious said: The following is still in study, so we don't know quite what it means yet, but minimally seems to underscore the seriousness of the situation https://apnews.com/article/climate-change-warming-sponges-caribbean-391ee1bb3dabb0496f0f2848849418b6 "A handful of centuries-old sponges from deep in the Caribbean are causing some scientists to think human-caused climate change began sooner and has heated the world more than they thought. They calculate that the world has already gone past the internationally approved target of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) since pre-industrial times, hitting 1.7 degrees (3.1 degrees Fahrenheit) as of 2020. They analyzed six of the long-lived sponges — simple animals that filter water — for growth records that document changes in water temperature, acidity and carbon dioxide levels in the air, according to a study in Monday’s journal Nature Climate Change." You want some more encouraging news? Physics-based early warning signal shows that AMOC is on tipping course https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.adk1189 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thaicurious Posted February 11 Share Posted February 11 3 minutes ago, placeholder said: You want some more encouraging news? Physics-based early warning signal shows that AMOC is on tipping course https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.adk1189 Yeah, I was raised by US Coast Guard Aux very active members so have been in the Gulfstream between Florida and the Bahamas often and over many years so well aware of those circulation issues. My understanding is that it is not yet proven if is just a slowdown or a warning of a tipping point, but certainly the whole idea of all the fresh water ice melt is scary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JCauto Posted February 11 Share Posted February 11 On 2/9/2024 at 4:24 PM, Yellowtail said: The bottom has now doubt fell out of the beachfront property market no doubt. Actually, the insurance companies have fallen out of the protection of the beachfront property market, making them now far more risky. "Recently, insurance companies have stopped offering coverage in states like Florida, California, and Louisiana, which are susceptible to natural disasters and high reconstruction costs. In July 2023, Farmers Insurance went so far as to inform the state of Florida of its decision to exit the state entirely. This reduction in insurance options has limited choices for homeowners and businesses in these areas." https://www.insurancebusinessmag.com/us/news/catastrophe/coastal-properties-at-risk-of-becoming-uninsurable--report-464532.aspx Do you know who else understands that anthropomorphic climate change is already here and are already undertaking the changes within their structure and planning as a result? That would be the US military. "The planet's changing climate has a significant effect on Defense Department missions, plans and installations. DOD is elevating climate change as a national security priority, integrating climate considerations into policies, strategies and partner engagements." https://www.defense.gov/spotlights/tackling-the-climate-crisis/ And of course, you understand that the oil companies were aware of anthropomorphic climate change as early as the 1970s, right? https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2023/01/harvard-led-analysis-finds-exxonmobil-internal-research-accurately-predicted-climate-change/ So any further questions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JCauto Posted February 11 Share Posted February 11 On 2/9/2024 at 11:07 PM, Liverpool Lou said: Even if there were thousands of years of temperature records, which is what this OP relates to, thousands of years is nothing compared to the billions of years that the earth has existed. So what we're talking about are long-term climate records that relate to the period of time that modern humans have been around. What occurred previous to the modern era is less interesting because there were massive differences in the plant and animal world between those times. The main point of global warming/catastrophic climate change is that it is anthropomorphic rather than the result of natural consequences due to geology, meteorites or other causes. Statistics provide us with the tools that enable us to accurately estimate how temperatures changed globally over the last 2,000 years or longer. These statistics have been used since the 1970s to project the likely impacts on global temperatures and those projections have in most cases been demonstrated to be conservative. That means the predictions were that the warming would happen slower than it is, which is of course more alarming. And the temperature record is very clear - the planet is warming rapidly and there are major consequences as a result of this additional energy being in the atmosphere. This is why they're thinking of adding a new category to the Hurricane classes since the existing ones don't capture the strength of the newer ones. https://www.sciencealert.com/rise-in-storm-intensity-prompts-calls-for-a-whole-new-category-of-hurricane The issue is not so much that we don't have records from long ago, as it is that the records we do have paint a very clear picture since the statistical records and analyses are conclusive and match with a range of observations from many different fields. While many attempt to cherrypick data to make it appear that this is not clear science, the evidence is overwhelming and the economic consequences have demonstrated that the Climate Change Denialists are whistling Dixie. By economic consequences, I mean that anyone having conclusive evidence that global warming is either not happening or is a result of natural causes or cyclical changes outside of the impacts of humankind would be showered with so much money and given the world's largest microphone to broadcast the news everywhere. There's a reason they're on the fringe and not being taken seriously by anyone serious. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metisdead Posted February 11 Share Posted February 11 Oops, Scientists May Have Miscalculated Our Global Warming Timeline The Paris Climate Accords in 2015 set an ambitious (and necessary) goal of keeping global temperatures at 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial temps. But a new study says we might’ve blown past that threshold several years ago. A new study from University Western Australia Oceans Institute studied long-lived Caribbean sclerosponges and created an ocean temperature timeline dating back to the 1700s. While the study claims that we surpassed 1.5 degrees Celsius in 2020, other scientists question if data from just one part of the world is enough to capture the immense thermal complexity of our oceans. https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/environment/a46678623/climate-change-sea-sponges/ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danderman123 Posted February 11 Share Posted February 11 9 hours ago, Yellowtail said: At 1.52 C a year, we're all dead in ten years anyway, so what's the point? You don't seem to have a position on Global Warming, other than trolling. Any reasonable person would understand that a short term spike in global temperature does not mean that we are 10 years away from oblivion. Next year, temperatures may decline. It's the long term warming trend that is the problem. Your trolling just makes you look like you are compensating for having failed Science class in high school. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danderman123 Posted February 11 Share Posted February 11 10 minutes ago, metisdead said: Oops, Scientists May Have Miscalculated Our Global Warming Timeline The Paris Climate Accords in 2015 set an ambitious (and necessary) goal of keeping global temperatures at 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial temps. But a new study says we might’ve blown past that threshold several years ago. A new study from University Western Australia Oceans Institute studied long-lived Caribbean sclerosponges and created an ocean temperature timeline dating back to the 1700s. The article references a single dataset from a single location. Need more data from different locations to confirm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danderman123 Posted February 11 Share Posted February 11 On 2/9/2024 at 1:10 PM, Liverpool Lou said: Why? +2° didn't cause the oblivion of the dinosaurs! You misread the post. The point is that our civilization would be severely impacted if global temperatures increased by 2 degrees. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now