Global climate debate-the facts

Discussion in 'Environment & Conservation' started by sawyer, Jan 17, 2017.

  1. dadoalex

    dadoalex Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2012
    Messages:
    10,622
    Likes Received:
    2,046
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And the western US is on fire thanks to the heat. But your point is?
     
  2. Deckel

    Deckel Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2014
    Messages:
    17,608
    Likes Received:
    2,043
    Trophy Points:
    113
    My point is July 4, 2017 saw the coldest July temperature ever recorded in the northern hemisphere.
     
  3. Bear513

    Bear513 Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2012
    Messages:
    7,576
    Likes Received:
    2,389
    Trophy Points:
    113

    Why I have to debate your silly claims that the last three years were warmest on record when we all know NASA came back and they were only 38% sure about 2014?

    Or your other silly claim we must stop drilling or fracking for oil?

    What will you use to make your electric clown cars out of food? Plastics from food doesn't really work out to good..

    Or what will you use for grease on your electric clown cars , whale grease?


    .
     
    Last edited: Jul 10, 2017
  4. dadoalex

    dadoalex Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2012
    Messages:
    10,622
    Likes Received:
    2,046
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's called local weather as opposed to global climate and is as relevant as the record highs in Arizona, that is not at all.

    Surely 30 years into this you understand at least that small factoid?
     
  5. dadoalex

    dadoalex Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2012
    Messages:
    10,622
    Likes Received:
    2,046
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You don't have to debate anything or even attend a remedial English class.

    When or if you actually respond to my post it can discussed. Till then you're just an undereducated koolaid drinker.
     
  6. Deckel

    Deckel Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2014
    Messages:
    17,608
    Likes Received:
    2,043
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Except it isn't local weather. It is the Greenland Ice Sheet that is often the focus of global alarmist such as yourself.
     
  7. dixon76710

    dixon76710 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    58,376
    Likes Received:
    4,437
    Trophy Points:
    113
  8. dixon76710

    dixon76710 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    58,376
    Likes Received:
    4,437
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Interesting chart. Shows the temperature adjustments to the raw data collected from surface temperature measurements.

    [​IMG]

    The increase in temperature is almost all due to the adjustments to the raw data. That's why when they instead use satellite measurements of temperature, even if they put it alongside the pre satellite, adjusted data, weve had no warming in 20 years. They cant justify these convenient adjustments to the satellite data.
     
  9. Deckel

    Deckel Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2014
    Messages:
    17,608
    Likes Received:
    2,043
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Wonder how long it will be until the resident alarmists realize a giant chunk of Antarctica broke off today....
     
  10. dixon76710

    dixon76710 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    58,376
    Likes Received:
    4,437
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Im sure they will be soon declaring this to be proof of AGW when in fact

    Calving is a natural occurrence but scientists have been exploring if climate change may have played a role in expediting the rift.
    The team of researchers have not yet found "any link to human-induced climate change," Martin O'Leary, a Swansea University glaciologist and member of the MIDAS project team, said in a statement.
    http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/12/world/larsen-c-antarctica/index.html
     
    Deckel likes this.
  11. dadoalex

    dadoalex Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2012
    Messages:
    10,622
    Likes Received:
    2,046
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Do you man the ice sheet that has been verified to be melting due to man-made climate change?

    A high or low temperature in any location is local weather.

    Sorry for your confusion.
     
  12. Deckel

    Deckel Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2014
    Messages:
    17,608
    Likes Received:
    2,043
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I mean the ice shelf that is putting on more ice in 2017, the alleged hottest year evah!!
     
  13. politicalcenter

    politicalcenter Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2011
    Messages:
    11,100
    Likes Received:
    6,786
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    It is fake news because the information was released by scientist and everyone knows they are wrong. It is probably photoshoped.
     
  14. dadoalex

    dadoalex Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2012
    Messages:
    10,622
    Likes Received:
    2,046
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Did you mean to say that this year's melt is slower than in the previous several years?

    That's what we call local weather. Again, sorry for your confusion.
     
  15. Deckel

    Deckel Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2014
    Messages:
    17,608
    Likes Received:
    2,043
    Trophy Points:
    113
    They are British scientists who attribute it to changing predominant wind patterns and not that Granny drives an 86 Buick and Big Oil brings her her soap operas so it is Granny's fault we are all going to die.
     
  16. Deckel

    Deckel Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2014
    Messages:
    17,608
    Likes Received:
    2,043
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It isn't melting. It is gaining ice. I am not sure why more ice registers as more melting in your mind. I guess it is because hottest ever is climate but coldest ever is weather. Fortunately for society, not a freaking thing you people can do about it, not that any of you really try to personally do anything other than sit in your basement and demand others do things.
     
  17. GrayMan

    GrayMan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2010
    Messages:
    8,357
    Likes Received:
    3,512
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The north pole is melting but the south pole is freezing. Why the north and south arent doing the same thing....? Could be due to shifting ocean currents or maybe due to ununiform radioactive decay in the earths mantle. We would need more neutrino detectors to determine that. ...The decay could even be a driver of deeper ocean currents.
     
  18. politicalcenter

    politicalcenter Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2011
    Messages:
    11,100
    Likes Received:
    6,786
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    They have to be lying. After all they are scientist.
     
  19. Deckel

    Deckel Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2014
    Messages:
    17,608
    Likes Received:
    2,043
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The arctic and antarctic have never behaved the same throughout climate history, but the northern hemisphere snow extent is up. It has been trending up since LBJ was President but I am sure that is just weather too.

    Snow-Cover_No.-Hemisphere.png
     
  20. Deckel

    Deckel Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2014
    Messages:
    17,608
    Likes Received:
    2,043
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No they are fudging the models. Most of the 20th century's warming occurred early when CO2 was 40% lower, so we gotta smooth that little fact out of our pretty alarmist graphs. Hell Soon's research showing that CO2 follows warming instead of causing it has to be hidden entirely because then we can't model anything and get within the ballpark of our theory Exxon is killing the planet. Gotta ignore that the Greenland Ice Core samples show it has been warmer since humans walked the earth and before the industrial revolution--smooth smooth. We must also ignore that the daily energy associated with man made CO2 emissions are 1/100th of 1% of the sun's daily energy contribution to the atmosphere. Just to make it easier, we have to run our pretty graphs from the peak of the little ice age so the slope stays dramatically pointed up when we correlate with CO2 emissions to declare CO2 is the clear cause.
     
    drluggit likes this.
  21. politicalcenter

    politicalcenter Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2011
    Messages:
    11,100
    Likes Received:
    6,786
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    If scientist fudge the numbers that means they are lying. So if I were you I wouldn't quote people I considered liars. See how that works?
     
  22. drluggit

    drluggit Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2016
    Messages:
    30,971
    Likes Received:
    28,434
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Circular for sure. The failure of that logic then is that not all scientists belong to the group who are themselves self admitted liar, are they? So, conveniently, there is the entire group of non self described liars from which we can choose. See how that works?? :roflol:
     
  23. mamooth

    mamooth Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    6,415
    Likes Received:
    2,182
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Of course snow cover should trend up. Warmer air holds more water vapor, so there will be more snow.

    Remember, precipitation is not temperature, so it's terrible logic to declare that a change in precipitation means a change in temperature.
     
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2017
  24. mamooth

    mamooth Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    6,415
    Likes Received:
    2,182
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    That conspiracy theory has no basis in fact. But then, if you didn't have conspiracy theories, you'd have nothing.

    You may factor it out, but the scientists point out it was from a more active sun.

    Soon is a propagandist who gets paid very well to make up bad science. And the "CO2 follows warming thing" is debunked. Try to keep up.

    So, you pull out a cherrpicking fallacy, and then complain that the honest people won't use a cherrypicking fallacy.

    Only off by factor of 10, so for a denier, that's accurate. And then you ignore the common sense logic that trapping more heat makes the temperature increase.

    And you end with another made up conspiracy theory. Yep, you're a denier.
     
  25. mamooth

    mamooth Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    6,415
    Likes Received:
    2,182
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Cherrpicking fallacy. It shows a small subset of the adjustments. The total adjustments make the warming look _smaller_. Most deniers don't know that, because their cult leaders like to keep them ignorant.

    Being that the adjustments make the warming look smaller, that conspiracy theory makes no sense.

    Also totally wrong. Even the UAH satellite model shows strong warmign, and that has a crazy strong cool bias. The more accurate RSS satellite model, the balloon measurements and the surface measurements all show even stronger warming.

    Satellite measurements, of course, stink compared to surface measurements.Satellites don't even measure temperature directly. They measure microwave output from across the whole atmosphere, then they plug it into a model. That's right, satellite temperature data isn't data, it's model output, one that has all kinds of fudge factors built into it.

    Satellite data is far more twiddled and adjusted than surface data, which uses amazing devices called "thermometers" to measure temperature directly at the surface. Common sense says that if you want to know temperature at the surface, the best way to get it is to measure temperature at the surface.

    The RSS satellite model shows just as much warming as the surface data. Only the known bad UAH data shows less. And even though it's known to be bad, deniers use it almost exclusively, solely because it shows them what they want to see. Deniers have a pre-determined conclusion, and they reject any data that doesn't fit it.
     

Share This Page