Shocker: study finds global warming may be net beneficial for the global economy

Discussion in 'Environment & Conservation' started by excalibur26, Feb 9, 2020.

Tags:
  1. notme

    notme Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    42,019
    Likes Received:
    5,395
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Temperature goes sky high with those CO2 levels you speak off. The current eco system can not cope with that.
     
  2. dbldrew

    dbldrew Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2013
    Messages:
    1,813
    Likes Received:
    1,015
    Trophy Points:
    113
    thats just fear mongering BS with nothing to back it up..
     
  3. notme

    notme Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    42,019
    Likes Received:
    5,395
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Them species are new for us, but didn't just happen during our life time.
     
  4. MolonLabe2009

    MolonLabe2009 Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2009
    Messages:
    33,092
    Likes Received:
    15,284
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And new species are evolving as we speak.
     
  5. notme

    notme Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    42,019
    Likes Received:
    5,395
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It's widely known that specific species flourish in very specific climates. It's just a total troll trip to disregard that.
     
  6. notme

    notme Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    42,019
    Likes Received:
    5,395
    Trophy Points:
    113
  7. MolonLabe2009

    MolonLabe2009 Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2009
    Messages:
    33,092
    Likes Received:
    15,284
    Trophy Points:
    113
  8. Distraff

    Distraff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2011
    Messages:
    10,833
    Likes Received:
    4,092
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Not all the data in 1943 is accurate and there wasn't even much data back then. Most of it was measurements for the US, Europe, and Greenland and wasn't even global. Raw data by itself is actually pretty useless. For example, a temperature reading alone can't be used to calculate average global temperature, because just the time of day it was taken has a huge impact. It has to be adjusted for things like time of day, time of year, heat island effect, and many many more factors. And we keep improving how we adjust and average data thanks to new research and increasing computing power.

    CO2 doesn't cause mass extinctions. CO2 is a heating amplifier. When the sun gets hotter over several million years, this will heat the planet. A warmer planet releases CO2 from its oceans and ice, and that CO2 will warm the planet even more. That further warming will release yet more CO2. The effects of warming are:
    Higher sea levels. Lots of people will be moving.
    Changing climate all over the globe which impacts local plants, animals, and industries.
    More deserts and dryer land. Think California and the Great Planes. Basically anywhere that isn't Canada, Russia, or Greenland.
    Less water and food productions in places that are dryer.
    Stronger floods and hurricanes.
    More diseases since heat brings bugs.
     
    EarthSky likes this.
  9. Distraff

    Distraff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2011
    Messages:
    10,833
    Likes Received:
    4,092
    Trophy Points:
    113
    How many studies have you read?

    How do they produce the random numbers? Do they just start typing random numbers into excel sheets?
     
  10. dbldrew

    dbldrew Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2013
    Messages:
    1,813
    Likes Received:
    1,015
    Trophy Points:
    113
    so the data was fine using the same measuring techniques from 1880-1933 and 1935-1988 and 1990-1999 so please tell me exactly what happened in 1934 and 1989? and why was the other 117 years of data left alone? it was the exact same measuring techniques so why just 34 and 89?
    spoilers: changing just those 2 years gives the upward warming trend you are looking for..

    careful this is very close to "climate denier" talk
    I'm assuming that if you are not putting much faith in actual accurate thermometer readings because the lack of enough areas around the world taking the readings.. then you are even putting less faith in the accuracy of ice core readings correct?
    Careful how you answer.. you might be labeled a heretic by your fellow warmers lol
     
    Last edited: Feb 14, 2020
  11. Natty Bumpo

    Natty Bumpo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2012
    Messages:
    41,217
    Likes Received:
    14,706
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Screen Shot 2020-02-14 at 8.50.27 AM.png
    [​IMG]

    Hyper-partisan ideological claptrap props up feeble crackpot notions such as anthropogenic climate change being a Chinese hoax, but, given the irrefutable data confirming the deleterious consequences of pooping into the heavens with impunity that some champion, the "Would you believe...?" fall back is no longer mindless denial, but "Of course it's happening, but it's good for you!" Inundating coastal cities creates new waterfront property, and increased severe weather events will have folks enthusing, "Surf's up, Dude!"

    Screen Shot 2020-02-14 at 8.50.03 AM.png

    [​IMG]
    "Whoa! Being able to hang ten all over town saves on gas, Bro!"


    [​IMG]

    "And bathing is so much more convenient now!"
     
    EarthSky likes this.
  12. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I've addressed your arguments. They are invalid. You need to provide evidence or experimentation to support the claims you keep making. You've been given evidence and experiments in support of my argument. You remain refuted until you can provide them.
     
  13. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    white flag noted and accepted
     
  14. Distraff

    Distraff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2011
    Messages:
    10,833
    Likes Received:
    4,092
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I really don't know what study you are talking about. You might be able to find the research publication that published the improved numbers and read it to find your answer.
     
  15. Surfer Joe

    Surfer Joe Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2008
    Messages:
    24,288
    Likes Received:
    15,354
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Lol..What the idiot authors have done is ignore the elephant in the room.
    If you think that the refugee situation is bad now, wait until millions are displaced by rising seas and move into your area. The political, economic, environmental and health issues that will result are inconceivable to them. That has to be one of the stupidest studies ever made. Reminds me of that fool Fukuyama.
     
    EarthSky likes this.
  16. dbldrew

    dbldrew Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2013
    Messages:
    1,813
    Likes Received:
    1,015
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I posted a giff of the 2 NASA temperature charts and how they changed the old temperature records to show an upward trend. You and Legal tried to justify the changes and I responded on the absurdity of it.. I'm not sure why you're confused
     
  17. Distraff

    Distraff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2011
    Messages:
    10,833
    Likes Received:
    4,092
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So you haven't even read the study or the research behind the numbers, or and second-hand sources that have. You just think that since the result of the data is different with a more modern study, that is proof of fraud? Do you have any evidence for this claim?
     
  18. notme

    notme Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2013
    Messages:
    42,019
    Likes Received:
    5,395
    Trophy Points:
    113
  19. MolonLabe2009

    MolonLabe2009 Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2009
    Messages:
    33,092
    Likes Received:
    15,284
    Trophy Points:
    113
    In the graph to the right.

    You do know how to interpret graphs, don't ya?
     
  20. Surfer Joe

    Surfer Joe Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2008
    Messages:
    24,288
    Likes Received:
    15,354
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'm looking forward to it. One consolation for living in a world of reactionaries trying to drag us back to the stone ages. Anti-vaxxers, flat-earthers, people still making excuses for trump. It's a sad day in the neighborhood.
     
  21. Natty Bumpo

    Natty Bumpo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2012
    Messages:
    41,217
    Likes Received:
    14,706
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Even the most fanatical of ideologues in denial will have to defer to science.

    Self-interest is the determinant and is dictating the response.

    Capitalist interests cannot afford to blithely ignore the reality just because it doesn't fit their dogma:
    To the extent the urgency is not confronted in timely fashion, a high price will be paid.
     
    EarthSky likes this.
  22. dbldrew

    dbldrew Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2013
    Messages:
    1,813
    Likes Received:
    1,015
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No I have read plenty second hand sources on it, it's how I originally found out about the fraud.

    Here is a real simple question, why was there no numbers changed for any of the other years? Why only 34 and 89?
     
  23. gfm7175

    gfm7175 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2018
    Messages:
    9,492
    Likes Received:
    4,828
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Numerous.

    They claim that certain numbers represent things which they don't actually represent. (In other words, they will claim, for example, that a temperature reading in Madison, WI also applies to nearby Waunakee, WI (when it doesn't even apply to Madison, WI as a whole, let alone anywhere else). Thus, they are simply pulling numbers out of their ass for Waunakee). To say it yet another way, these twits do not follow the rules of Statistical Mathematics.
     
    dbldrew likes this.
  24. gfm7175

    gfm7175 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2018
    Messages:
    9,492
    Likes Received:
    4,828
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Yup, that's NASA for ya. They just want to scare you into joining their fundamentalist style religion (the Church of Global Warming). They want you to deny logic, science, and mathematics.
     
    dbldrew likes this.
  25. gfm7175

    gfm7175 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2018
    Messages:
    9,492
    Likes Received:
    4,828
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You can't "improve" temperature readings after the fact. You can't cook the data. A very fundamental rule to Statistical Mathematics is that ONLY raw data can be used.

    These people are just fudging numbers around to fit the magickal "upward trend" result that they desire. They just want to scare people into joining their religion. It's all smoke and mirrors.
     
    dbldrew likes this.

Share This Page