Solving climate crisis will require a total transformation of global energy

Discussion in 'Environment & Conservation' started by skepticalmike, May 19, 2021.

  1. Zorro

    Zorro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    76,435
    Likes Received:
    51,248
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Are you unfamiliar with search engines?

    "As of 2018 the largest supplier of coal to China is Indonesia followed by Australia."[34]
     
  2. Chrizton

    Chrizton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2020
    Messages:
    7,707
    Likes Received:
    3,785
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We should pursue reducing consumption instead of bending over backwards to continue to consume in greater and greater quantities.
     
    politicalcenter, Cosmo and Bowerbird like this.
  3. Jack Hays

    Jack Hays Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2020
    Messages:
    27,379
    Likes Received:
    17,375
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Why? Increasing consumption is what lifts people out of poverty, and enables higher living standards for everyone.
     
  4. Bowerbird

    Bowerbird Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2009
    Messages:
    91,877
    Likes Received:
    73,632
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    Consumption of what?
     
    Cosmo likes this.
  5. flyboy56

    flyboy56 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2013
    Messages:
    15,342
    Likes Received:
    5,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I see you have a tough time with rhetorical questions. Since you want to play how much coal does the US send to China?
     
    Last edited: Jul 20, 2021
    Cosmo and Bowerbird like this.
  6. flyboy56

    flyboy56 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2013
    Messages:
    15,342
    Likes Received:
    5,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I didn't ask you to answer for me.
     
    Cosmo and Bowerbird like this.
  7. Sunsettommy

    Sunsettommy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2017
    Messages:
    1,679
    Likes Received:
    1,436
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I gave you the answer, your question was treated correctly, now look it up!

    You like to play little games, many here are seeing it, do you understand what immaturity is?
     
  8. Sunsettommy

    Sunsettommy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2017
    Messages:
    1,679
    Likes Received:
    1,436
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Bwahahahahahahaha!!!

    It was Zorro, you asked in the first place, in response to HIS post.

    Post 99 is YOURS, go look and see who you were replying to.
     
    Jack Hays likes this.
  9. flyboy56

    flyboy56 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2013
    Messages:
    15,342
    Likes Received:
    5,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Talk about acting like a child.
     
  10. Sunsettommy

    Sunsettommy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2017
    Messages:
    1,679
    Likes Received:
    1,436
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You made a hilarious mistake, that is why I laughed.

    Meanwhile you ignored his and my answer, talk about you inability to carry on a debate......
     
    Jack Hays likes this.
  11. Distraff

    Distraff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2011
    Messages:
    10,833
    Likes Received:
    4,092
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We all keep waiting for that cooling phase to begin. Yet it never does. Maybe it has something to do with all those heat trapping gasses we keep pumping out.
     
  12. Sunsettommy

    Sunsettommy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2017
    Messages:
    1,679
    Likes Received:
    1,436
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Gasses do not trap heat, that is a common error science illiterates make.

    Global Cooling started in 2014, which is 7 1/2 years long.

    [​IMG]

    LINK
     
    gfm7175 and Jack Hays like this.
  13. Distraff

    Distraff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2011
    Messages:
    10,833
    Likes Received:
    4,092
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Maybe you should look at more than just one dataset and look at a larger time range rather than a small cherrypicked one.
    [​IMG]
     
  14. Sunsettommy

    Sunsettommy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2017
    Messages:
    1,679
    Likes Received:
    1,436
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Ha ha, you can't even try to be honest here, FIRST you say:

    Then I reply by showing it has been cooling for over 7 years now, which you didn't dispute. A possible new cooling phase has begun with a forecast for a lot more La-Nina coming this fall and winter which favors cooling.

    Then you post a chart that has nothing to do with what I said, again, you didn't disprove the last 7.5 years of cooling at all.

    Your cherrypick claim isn't even valid either because you are ignoring WHY I posted the 7 1/2 year cooling trend in the fist place.

    :lol:
     
    gfm7175 and Jack Hays like this.
  15. Distraff

    Distraff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2011
    Messages:
    10,833
    Likes Received:
    4,092
    Trophy Points:
    113
    7 years isn't enough to establish a trend. In fact the graph you showed, is basically flat. This is basically what you are doing:
    upload_2021-7-20_22-2-52.png
     
  16. Sunsettommy

    Sunsettommy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2017
    Messages:
    1,679
    Likes Received:
    1,436
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Ha ha,

    Thank you for admitting you can't disprove what I posted, all you are doing is complaining it isn't long enough and that I am cherry picking, that doesn't help.

    Yet what I posted was ACCURATE which you made that clear, by not challenging the accurate 7 1/2 years of cooling which is REAL, that is why you are being dishonest trying to deflect it away with irrelevant statements.

    ======

    The escalator silliness was smashed years ago, they fail to explain WHY there were sudden jumps in temperature in the first place, this was rectified by Bob Tisdale:

    Bob Tisdale- Climate Observations

    SkepticalScience Needs to Update their Escalator

    Posted on May 28, 2014 by Bob Tisdale

    Excerpt:

    The SkepticalScience animation The Escalator has been around for a couple of years, and it has appeared in dozens of their posts and in blog posts by other carbon dioxide-obsessed alarmists. Their intent with The Escalator animation was to show that the instrument temperature record includes many short-term absences of global warming, while, in their minds, manmade greenhouse gases caused the long-term trend of global warming. With Kevin Trenberth now saying strong El Niño events caused global warming to occur in steps, SkepticalScience needs to revise their escalator animation. The steps are not only how skeptics view global warming…one of the leading ENSO and global warming researchers is now presenting global warming in El Niño-caused big jumps, and he also has written in at least two peer-reviewed papers that El Niños are fueled by sunlight.

    So here’s my suggested replacement for SkepticalScience’s The Escalator. For lack of a better title, we’ll call it…


    THE TRENBERTH GLOBAL WARMING STAIRCASE

    LINK

    and this take down of unskeptical science

    SkepticalScience Misrepresents Their Animation “The Escalator”

    Posted on November 23, 2012 by Bob Tisdale

    Excerpt:

    Apparently, one of the proudest achievements of the website SkepticalScience is their “Down the Up Escalator” gif animation. They prominently display it in their right sidebar. The intent of the animation is to show that global temperature anomalies can flatten or cool over decadal or shorter periods while warming over the long term. The first version was created using the Berkley Earth Surface Temperature (BEST) land surface air temperature dataset. That, of course, made SkepticalScience appear two-faced, because the papers associated with the BEST dataset had not yet appeared in any peer-reviewed scientific journals and SkepticalScience downplays any research efforts that haven’t been peer reviewed.

    ONE OF THE TRENDS IN THE REVISED ESCALATOR IS MISREPRESENTED

    LINK

    ======

    The funny part is even their own "staircase animation hurts them because it makes clear that it is EL-Nino causing those big warming jump

    [​IMG]

    LINK
     
    Jack Hays likes this.
  17. Distraff

    Distraff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2011
    Messages:
    10,833
    Likes Received:
    4,092
    Trophy Points:
    113
    In a normal climate, there are short-term upward and downward climate shifts. This results in the temperature acting like a repeating cycle. An El Nino causes an increase, the La Nina brings it back down. I'm just using google images here, it looks like this:
    [​IMG]

    However, when you have a small long-term upward forcing like CO2, you will see an upward trend. This upward trend will make the up periods more extreme, and make the down periods less extreme or even almost flat like this:
    [​IMG]

    So it is true that the sharp increases in temperature were due to short-term events like El Ninos. But the reason they were so sharp is due to CO2, and the reason the La Nina didn't completely undo this increase is because of CO2.
     
  18. Jack Hays

    Jack Hays Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2020
    Messages:
    27,379
    Likes Received:
    17,375
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Subsequent posts in this thread highlight your error.
     
    Sunsettommy likes this.
  19. Sunsettommy

    Sunsettommy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2017
    Messages:
    1,679
    Likes Received:
    1,436
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You make clear you have no refutation of my fact based posts, thank you for the silent admission.
     
    gfm7175 and Jack Hays like this.
  20. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    11,398
    Likes Received:
    3,010
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Let's see who is really looking at one dataset, shall we?
    :lol: Those "five" datasets are all calibrated to agree with GISS, which has repeatedly been retroactively altered to agree with the CO2-controls-temperature hypothesis. So you really have just one fake dataset. And the notion that instrument readings from more than 150 years ago are continuously comparable to modern ones is absurd.
     
    gfm7175 and Sunsettommy like this.
  21. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    11,398
    Likes Received:
    3,010
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's just false. It has been cooling since 2016. Arctic sea ice bottomed in 2012.
    Or maybe the earth has returned naturally to more normal Holocene temperatures following the coldest 500-year period in the last 10,000 years, thanks purely to the 20th century having the highest sustained solar activity in several thousand years. And maybe man-made global warming is confined to the systematic alteration of global temperature data to create a spurious warming trend that matches atmospheric CO2. Maybe floods and droughts and heat waves and cold snaps have been happening since the earth formed, and not just since people started using fossil fuels. Maybe the tiny bit of warming CO2 causes is actually beneficial, on top of its fertilization effect. Maybe anti-CO2 hysteria backed by climate model pseudoscience is just objectively wrong, and common sense backed by actual atmospheric physics is just objectively right. Wouldn't that be something?
     
  22. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    11,398
    Likes Received:
    3,010
    Trophy Points:
    113
    But no long-term ones? Oh, wait a minute, that's right: the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age have been got rid of. Next on the list to be disappeared: the Holocene Optimum and the Ice Age itself...?
    But one that is overshadowed by the large long-term upward forcing resulting from several decades of the highest sustained solar activity in several thousand years.
    This upward trend will make the up periods more extreme, and make the down periods less extreme or even almost flat like this:
    [​IMG]

    So it is true that the sharp increases in temperature were due to short-term events like El Ninos. But the reason they were so sharp is due to sustained high solar activity, and the reason the La Nina didn't completely undo this increase is because of sustained high solar activity.
     
    Sunsettommy and Jack Hays like this.
  23. Jack Hays

    Jack Hays Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2020
    Messages:
    27,379
    Likes Received:
    17,375
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
  24. Distraff

    Distraff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2011
    Messages:
    10,833
    Likes Received:
    4,092
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Obviously there are different long-term trends with different causes. Scientists believe the medieval warm period was caused by the sun warming, and reduced volcanic activity. Scientists believe that the current warming period is caused by an increase in the greenhouse gas effect. Greenhouse gasses are the only things that have changed enough to cause the warming we have seen.

    Solar activity has been basically flat, in fact its cooled a bit on average.
    [​IMG]
     
  25. Distraff

    Distraff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2011
    Messages:
    10,833
    Likes Received:
    4,092
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You need to look at trends over several decades, not just 4 years. If your time period is too short then its too easily thrown off by short-term things like the solar cycle, ocean cycles, and occasional volcanic events.

    I'm open to you explaining the exact cause of this natural return, that is also accepted by experts in climate science.

    That would have to be a conspiracy by thousands of educational, research organizations, and government agencies across dozens of governments, and of course require that thousands of scientists be complicit. I think the moon landing hoax is more likely.

    Its really about how much we have been getting vs what we were getting before. You have to take an honest look at the data to figure that out.

    Most of the warming isn't caused by the initial driver. Usually there is an initial driver like the sun warming a bit, but this is followed by positive feedbacks that cause a lot more warming.
     

Share This Page