• Hello, please take a minute to check out our awesome content, contributed by the wonderful members of our community. We hope you'll add your own thoughts and opinions by making a free account!

Learning Global Warming facts and fiction

Status
Not open for further replies.
BHS1975 said:
Could be from the weakening of the jet due to less temp differential between the poles and mid latitudes. no surprise really. We've been getting these bowling ball lows for a while now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Could be? Could be from the PV sitting in Siberia to Ak which is a recipe for the eastern US to Europe to get ridged which will always lead to a cutoff somewhere. We have been in this new regime for a while now where ridges are favored in the eastern US and a trough in the pac/western us which goes against what was climo for a long time. Is it GW related or a decadal oscillation? Not sure there is a lot of chicken/egg there.
 
BHS1975 said:
I can't believe folks are still in denial. Idiots. How can you warm up the planet and not have consequences? We sure are seeing them now big time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
How can you cool the planet and not have consequences as well? The biggest consequence I see from the warmth will be spending policies that we can't afford. If we are serious about stopping climate change then we need to put ourselves in a position to afford to do it. We are certainly not doing that.
 
Global warming alarmists tend to believe that the climate record began somewhere in the late 1800s. I'm not sure why it's difficult to believe in a cyclical nature to the climate, spanning hundreds or thousands of years.

Man is no doubt having some sort of impact. But the extent of that as well as the eventual impacts and outcomes are pure speculation. I defy anyone to tell me with certainty that the "record" events that we are able to record today, with today's technology, are absolute records throughout the entire historical climate record of the planet.

And while we're thinking about it, I can't help but notice how all of the catastrophic planetary outcomes continue to get delayed. We have to cut out fossils fuels by 1995, or it will be too late. We have to cut out fossil fuels by 2000, or it will be too late. We have to cut out fossils fuels by 2010, or it will be too late. We have to cut out fossil fuels by 2020, or it will be too late. We have to cut out fossils fuels by 2023, or it will be too late.

It feels an awful lot like we're being heavily propagandized.
 
Rain Cold said:
Global warming alarmists tend to believe that the climate record began somewhere in the late 1800s. I'm not sure why it's difficult to believe in a cyclical nature to the climate, spanning hundreds or thousands of years.

Man is no doubt having some sort of impact. But the extent of that as well as the eventual impacts and outcomes are pure speculation. I defy anyone to tell me with certainty that the "record" events that we are able to record today, with today's technology, are absolute records throughout the entire historical climate record of the planet.

And while we're thinking about it, I can't help but notice how all of the catastrophic planetary outcomes continue to get delayed. We have to cut out fossils fuels by 1995, or it will be too late. We have to cut out fossil fuels by 2000, or it will be too late. We have to cut out fossils fuels by 2010, or it will be too late. We have to cut out fossil fuels by 2020, or it will be too late. We have to cut out fossils fuels by 2023, or it will be too late.

It feels an awful lot like we're being heavily propagandized.
Click to expand...
It's hard for people to see the truth when they're so heavily mentally invested.
 
BHS1975 said:
There's no arguing at this point as AGW is very obvious now with tons of data to back it up. They are beating a dead horse at this point and anyone in denial is just stupid.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Ok, so that's twice. Boy, you really know how to argue your points; I guess that settles it. Anyone who doesn't see it your way is a denier and stupid and who wants to be those; so they better come around to your view.

MichaelJ said:
I have found that when people have lost the arguement, their last resort is calling people names. Another trick they like to pull is moving the goal posts when the old ones no longer support them
Click to expand...

You nailed it. And I think the goalpost issue is one that sincere people should take a hard look at. GXwx talks about this with the "alarmists," who have really served to cast more doubt on the theory than convert people. All we have heard for 30 years is how this was going to be underwater by 2000, or that was going to be melted by 2010, or this would happen by 2020; and NONE of those doomsday scenarios came even close. So instead of reevaluating and amending the theory we push it down the road; "Ok, by 2050 this is really going to happen and by 2100 this will definitely happen and we're past the point of no return."

Why don't they use common sense and say , "Hey let's take better care of our planet, be better stewards cause what we're doing might have an effect. Take some personal responsibility." Oh wait; that's right, common sense and personal responsibility don't involve the left, the media, the entertainment industry, or the government - silly me.
 
Iceagewhereartthou said:
Ok, so that's twice. Boy, you really know how to argue your points; I guess that settles it. Anyone who doesn't see it your way is a denier and stupid and who wants to be those; so they better come around to your view.



You nailed it. And I think the goalpost issue is one that sincere people should take a hard look at. GXwx talks about this with the "alarmists," who have really served to cast more doubt on the theory than convert people. All we have heard for 30 years is how this was going to be underwater by 2000, or that was going to be melted by 2010, or this would happen by 2020; and NONE of those doomsday scenarios came even close. So instead of reevaluating and amending the theory we push it down the road; "Ok, by 2050 this is really going to happen and by 2100 this will definitely happen and we're past the point of no return."

Why don't they use common sense and say , "Hey let's take better care of our planet, be better stewards cause what we're doing might have an effect. Take some personal responsibility." Oh wait; that's right, common sense and personal responsibility don't involve the left, the media, the entertainment industry, or the government - silly me.
Click to expand...

Remember when "Climate change", "Global Warming" or what ever it'll be called in the next few years said that Global warming was going to lead to more droughts and the Great Lakes were going to dry up?

Now the great lakes are still above the long term avg and "Climate change" leads to "Rain Bombs" now....

They still forget the internet exists some times.

https://archive.thinkprogress.org/t...s-fresh-water-is-dwindling-away-e9efe2c72891/

Increasingly, scientists believe that climate change is driving the warming waters and setting up a new regime in the Great Lakes that may lead to lower lake levels and a permanently altered shoreline.
...

“The 1998 El Niño gave us a taste of what we can expect to see on the Great Lakes in a changing climate,” said Don Scavia, Co-Director of the Great Lakes Integrated Sciences and Assessments (GLISA). “The El Niño-driven warmer temperatures are a surrogate for what the future climate might be. The lower lake levels during that time may be a signal of what might be happening under longer term climate change.”

In other words, last winter’s record low lake levels are a glimpse of what a warmer climate in the region would do to the lakes — a glimpse that so far has lasted 15 years, set off by one hot summer.
Click to expand...

And here's the Army Corps of Engineers Great Lakes Water Level Data.

https://www.lre.usace.army.mil/Miss...n/Great-Lakes-Information-2/Water-Level-Data/

1633623845861.png

1633624102866.png
 
Rain Cold said:
Global warming alarmists tend to believe that the climate record began somewhere in the late 1800s. I'm not sure why it's difficult to believe in a cyclical nature to the climate, spanning hundreds or thousands of years.

Man is no doubt having some sort of impact. But the extent of that as well as the eventual impacts and outcomes are pure speculation. I defy anyone to tell me with certainty that the "record" events that we are able to record today, with today's technology, are absolute records throughout the entire historical climate record of the planet.

And while we're thinking about it, I can't help but notice how all of the catastrophic planetary outcomes continue to get delayed. We have to cut out fossils fuels by 1995, or it will be too late. We have to cut out fossil fuels by 2000, or it will be too late. We have to cut out fossils fuels by 2010, or it will be too late. We have to cut out fossil fuels by 2020, or it will be too late. We have to cut out fossils fuels by 2023, or it will be too late.

It feels an awful lot like we're being heavily propagandized.
Click to expand...

I was just about to post something about how the amount of records we have are a tiny snapshot in time of the history of this planet. What about when Antarctica didn't have ice, or the tropical fossils found in Alaska? Or this, is it so horrible that we have a longer growing season in Canada. The really stupid people in all of this are the ones who follow rhetoric from one political party religiously, blindly, and ignorantly. No one denies that the earth hasn't warmed slightly over the past several years records have been kept, but the notion that we need to spend all these new tax dollars, and join these virtue signaling treaties is absolute horseshit on a stick. I'm honestly embarrassed at how people easily manipulated now, especially young people.
 
J.C. said:
I was just about to post something about how the amount of records we have are a tiny snapshot in time of the history of this planet. What about when Antarctica didn't have ice, or the tropical fossils found in Alaska? Or this, is it so horrible that we have a longer growing season in Canada. The really stupid people in all of this are the ones who follow rhetoric from one political party religiously, blindly, and ignorantly. No one denies that the earth hasn't warmed slightly over the past several years records have been kept, but the notion that we need to spend all these new tax dollars, and join these virtue signaling treaties is absolute horseshit on a stick. I'm honestly embarrassed at how people easily manipulated now, especially young people.
Click to expand...

Slightly? Try 1C since 1750. That's huge for such a short time span which would take 1000s of years naturally without our intervention.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Bham 99 said:
How do you know It would take thousands of years?
Click to expand...

Because it takes a ton of forcing to warm the whole planet that fast like with a doubling of CO2 for example which would take a long time naturally even with massive eruptions like during the PETM which was from a massive release of CO2 from volcanism but at a 10th of the rate we are doing now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
BHS1975 said:
Because it takes a ton of forcing to warm the whole planet that fast like with a doubling of CO2 for example which would take a long time naturally even with massive eruptions like during the PETM which was from a massive release of CO2 from volcanism but at a 10th of the rate we are doing now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
What year will the world come to an end now, you know if we don't take all these drastic measures? I want to be ready
 
J.C. said:
I was just about to post something about how the amount of records we have are a tiny snapshot in time of the history of this planet. What about when Antarctica didn't have ice, or the tropical fossils found in Alaska? Or this, is it so horrible that we have a longer growing season in Canada. The really stupid people in all of this are the ones who follow rhetoric from one political party religiously, blindly, and ignorantly. No one denies that the earth hasn't warmed slightly over the past several years records have been kept, but the notion that we need to spend all these new tax dollars, and join these virtue signaling treaties is absolute horseshit on a stick. I'm honestly embarrassed at how people easily manipulated now, especially young people.
Click to expand...
It's just more doomer mentality. You can even see it in other world events. Same basic principle. We're all doomed, unless we let the government fix it. Only they can.
 
Okay let's see, we have warmed 1 degree Celsius in almost 280 years since 1750? Anybody know what was happening around the 1600-1850 time period? Bueller, Bueller, Bueller? In the not too distant past, Greenland was, well, Green, but all those centuries it took that to happen can not be attributed to fossil fuels, am I right?
 
MichaelJ said:
Okay let's see, we have warmed 1 degree Celsius in almost 280 years since 1750? Anybody know what was happening around the 1600-1850 time period? Bueller, Bueller, Bueller? In the not too distant past, Greenland was, well, Green, but all those centuries it took that to happen can not be attributed to fossil fuels, am I right?
Click to expand...

Wasn't there a grand solar minimum around this time with a mini ice age? The Colonies were also losing their patience with England.
 
MichaelJ said:
Okay let's see, we have warmed 1 degree Celsius in almost 280 years since 1750? Anybody know what was happening around the 1600-1850 time period? Bueller, Bueller, Bueller? In the not too distant past, Greenland was, well, Green, but all those centuries it took that to happen can not be attributed to fossil fuels, am I right?
Click to expand...

Here's your "little ice age" and "medieval warm period" in comparison. Quit using the same tired old arguments.


1bf1df8f5c05b6d7b1eef5cb50a4557a.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
MichaelJ said:
Okay let's see, we have warmed 1 degree Celsius in almost 280 years since 1750? Anybody know what was happening around the 1600-1850 time period? Bueller, Bueller, Bueller? In the not too distant past, Greenland was, well, Green, but all those centuries it took that to happen can not be attributed to fossil fuels, am I right?
Click to expand...
Greenland at its time of discovery had forests . Actual forests along its southern coast. No such thing exists today
 
Lickwx said:
Greenland at its time of discovery had forests . Actual forests along its southern coast. No such thing exists today
Click to expand...

Wrong.

Questions and answers - Greenland Trees

Here we answer questions you may have about the where, when, what and why of Greenland Trees. More questions? Please do not hesitate to contact us directly.
greenlandtrees.org greenlandtrees.org


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
BHS1975 said:
Wrong.

Questions and answers - Greenland Trees

Here we answer questions you may have about the where, when, what and why of Greenland Trees. More questions? Please do not hesitate to contact us directly.
greenlandtrees.org greenlandtrees.org


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
There are no forests and all tree planting is recent and man made . Growing a tree is not the same as a forest lmao.
 
Lickwx said:
There are no forests and all tree planting is recent and man made . Growing a tree is not the same as a forest lmao.
Click to expand...

Yo it said there where 300000 trees. Is that not enough for a forest?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Lickwx said:
M-a-n m-a-d-e forest. It took MAN planting a forest …. pre discovery it was there NATURALLY. It then succumbed to little ice age conditions !
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter as they are doing well due to the warming and wetter climate.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
BHS1975 said:
Doesn't matter as they are doing well due to the warming and wetter climate.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
I think the point is they also did well in the past due to warmth/wetter conditions, then it got cold and maybe now it's getting warm again. You know there aren't really too many people that flat out deny the climate isn't a little warmer now it's just not all of us think it's the first time ever, in all the millions of years the earth has been here. Nor do most of us think that this time will ultimately lead to death of all mankind.
 
Lickwx said:
So we gon ignore they did well and thrived before man as well? Not in distant past either ?
Click to expand...

That was a regional "warm period" and not global like now and 1000s of years in the future not a couple hundred.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
metwannabe said:
I think the point is they also did well in the past due to warmth/wetter conditions, then it got cold and maybe now it's getting warm again. You know there aren't really too many people that flat out deny the climate isn't a little warmer now it's just not all of us think it's the first time ever, in all the millions of years the earth has been here. Nor do most of us think that this time will ultimately lead to death of all mankind.
Click to expand...

I don't think it will kill mankind but it could collapse modern civilization if we don't get it under control.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Oh and sure the climate does change over long time spans and we where heading to the next ice age right on schedule but we slammed on the breaks and punched it in reverse. If we somehow draw the carbon down to preindustrial it will start right back on that same path as the way life on Earth is setup now CO2 will sit around the same ~200 ppm level barring some massive infusion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Oh and I think there are many many other planets a lot like Earth in the universe just for the fact that life is very tenacious and will just keep coming back after being wiped out over and over.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
As a matter of fact there is one only 39 light years away in the Zeta Reticuli system with an advanced civilization way way ahead of us.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
BHS1975 said:
I don't think it will kill mankind but it could collapse modern civilization if we don't get it under control.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
And who's gonna ride in on their benevolent white horse and fix it for us lowly dumb and ignorant creatures? The Government? Uncle joe and AOC? And just how are AOC, Bernie, and their like going to fix climate change? Stop the US from burning all Fossil Fuels by implementing carbon taxes till we're all poor? What good is that going to do when China is just jugging away at ever increasing amounts?

1633699237615.png
 
smast16 said:
And who's gonna ride in on their benevolent white horse and fix it for us lowly dumb and ignorant creatures? The Government? Uncle joe and AOC? And just how are AOC, Bernie, and their like going to fix climate change? Stop the US from burning all Fossil Fuels by implementing carbon taxes till we're all poor? What good is that going to do when China is just jugging away at ever increasing amounts?

View attachment 92338
Click to expand...

Yeah that's a problem. We will suffer the consequences.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
BHS1975 said:
As a matter of fact there is one only 39 light years away in the Zeta Reticuli system with an advanced civilization way way ahead of us.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

It's the 4th planet out from Zeta Reticuli 2 which is very similar to the Sun but about 2 billion years older.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
smast16 said:
So, do you have any solutions, or do you just like to sit around and yell "CLiMaTe DeNiErS!" all day and think that's the solution?
Click to expand...

Yeah go all electric and renewable and plant tons of trees and draw down carbon and pump it in the ground in areas where it will be locked up in mineral deposits. It's a tall order but has to be done.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top