• 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.
ForsythSnow said:
The "creates plant food" argument is a bit ignorant when you consider the fact we're constantly clear cutting and deforesting at rapid rates. However half the oxygen still comes from the oceans from microbes, so depending on how well they adapt to sea changes depends on how our oxygen level will be over time. Regardless, we still have the greenhouse effect and we should work on reducing it in what ways we can.
Click to expand...
Nah we will be fine . 20 years from now we will forget this was a thing and be on to the next supposed civilization ending disaster .
 
Chazwin said:
I agree completely. I for one do believe there is man made right now, though I do question just based on historical trends in climate, how much of it is man made. I really feel that there would be fewer deniers on this if some people didn’t try to link every single extreme weather event directly to climate change.
Click to expand...
This is my issue with the whole thing. Are we warming? Yes look no further than the averages. Is every single event attributable to GW? I don't think it's always 1:1. Flooding, heat, cold, drought, hurricanes all still occurred before GW and will continue to occur. Now I know someone is going to say well they are worse now, but are they? We have increased the amount of weather monitoring stations by incredible percentages over the last 1-3 decades, satellites are better now, hell most of us have a PWS in our backyard. My ultimate question becomes how many extreme events were missed previously that are captured now? If someone can prove to me it was 0 then I'll believe it until then there's always that lingering question of did this happen before
 
SD said:
This is my issue with the whole thing. Are we warming? Yes look no further than the averages. Is every single event attributable to GW? I don't think it's always 1:1. Flooding, heat, cold, drought, hurricanes all still occurred before GW and will continue to occur. Now I know someone is going to say well they are worse now, but are they? We have increased the amount of weather monitoring stations by incredible percentages over the last 1-3 decades, satellites are better now, hell most of us have a PWS in our backyard. My ultimate question becomes how many extreme events were missed previously that are captured now? If someone can prove to me it was 0 then I'll believe it until then there's always that lingering question of did this happen before
Click to expand...
That is totally what I get hung up on too.
 
SD said:
This is my issue with the whole thing. Are we warming? Yes look no further than the averages. Is every single event attributable to GW? I don't think it's always 1:1. Flooding, heat, cold, drought, hurricanes all still occurred before GW and will continue to occur. Now I know someone is going to say well they are worse now, but are they? We have increased the amount of weather monitoring stations by incredible percentages over the last 1-3 decades, satellites are better now, hell most of us have a PWS in our backyard. My ultimate question becomes how many extreme events were missed previously that are captured now? If someone can prove to me it was 0 then I'll believe it until then there's always that lingering question of did this happen before
Click to expand...
Exactly…we’re not even a full century into getting climate data for all areas of the planet. So for me it’s hard to say that all of the warming is man made and it’s and even more naive to say that all extreme weather events are a direct result.
 
SD said:
This is my issue with the whole thing. Are we warming? Yes look no further than the averages. Is every single event attributable to GW? I don't think it's always 1:1. Flooding, heat, cold, drought, hurricanes all still occurred before GW and will continue to occur. Now I know someone is going to say well they are worse now, but are they? We have increased the amount of weather monitoring stations by incredible percentages over the last 1-3 decades, satellites are better now, hell most of us have a PWS in our backyard. My ultimate question becomes how many extreme events were missed previously that are captured now? If someone can prove to me it was 0 then I'll believe it until then there's always that lingering question of did this happen before
Click to expand...
Extreme flooding, huge fires, extreme heat, extreme glacier melt is in the news weekly. This was not the case in the early 2000s. Just because we didn't have as many stations in the past does't mean it's not happening.
 
BHS1975 said:
Extreme flooding, huge fires, extreme heat, extreme glacier melt is in the news weekly. This was not the case in the early 2000s. Just because we didn't have as many stations in the past does't mean it's not happening.
Click to expand...
This is simply circumstantial evidence and doesn't prove anything one way or the other.
 
Chazwin said:
Exactly…we’re not even a full century into getting climate data for all areas of the planet. So for me it’s hard to say that all of the warming is man made and it’s and even more naive to say that all extreme weather events are a direct result.
Click to expand...
Have you heard of the butterfly effect? The huge increase in GHG is having a huge effect on weather patterns. Mainly slowing everything down and popping these giant ridges just like a river does when it slows to a crawl on a flat plain due to less temp differential between the poles and equator.
 
BHS1975 said:
Have you heard of the butterfly effect? The huge increase in GHG is having a huge effect on weather patterns. Mainly slowing everything down and popping these giant ridges just like a river does when it slows to a crawl on a flat plain due to less temp differential between the poles and equator.
Click to expand...
Cycles….. you’re welcome.
 
BHS1975 said:
Extreme flooding, huge fires, extreme heat, extreme glacier melt is in the news weekly. This was not the case in the early 2000s. Just because we didn't have as many stations in the past does't mean it's not happening.
Click to expand...
Yes but go back to actual weather records and you will see that there was always that going on with regular consistency. We see these get so much more attention now than because of the social media age.
 
BHS1975 said:
Extreme flooding, huge fires, extreme heat, extreme glacier melt is in the news weekly. This was not the case in the early 2000s. Just because we didn't have as many stations in the past does't mean it's not happening.
Click to expand...
I'm sure the dust bowl of the 1930s would beg to differ
 
Not sure how this is hard to understand.....humans are taking sequestered CO2 out of the earth and burning it releasing CO2 into the atmosphere.....to the tune of 35-40 gigatons a year. This is causing a rather dramatic increase in CO2, again no surprise the output by humans exceeds the ability of the earth to sequester all the excess CO2.

We know the radiative forcing values of CO2, again that is hard science, so if humans are releasing a lot of CO2, and we see that reflected in the ppm of CO2 in the air, and we know that increasing CO2 causes warming then I fail to see why anyone doubts that humans are greatly contributing to the warming.

emissions_vs_concentrations_1751-2021_madeJun2022.gif


Exactly how much impact we are having is debatable, but its certainly more than none....this article makes a strong argument for 36%-45% or so of the current warming being attributed to human activity....

www.epa.gov

Climate Change Indicators: Climate Forcing | US EPA

This indicator measures the “radiative forcing” or heating effect caused by greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.
www.epa.gov www.epa.gov

  • In 2019, the Annual Greenhouse Gas Index was 1.45, which represents a 45-percent increase in radiative forcing (a net warming influence) since 1990 (see Figure 1).
  • Of the greenhouse gases shown in Figure 1, carbon dioxide accounts for by far the largest share of radiative forcing since 1990, and its contribution continues to grow at a steady rate. Carbon dioxide alone would account for a 36-percent increase in radiative forcing since 1990.
 
Happy to see conversation starting back up on this. Seeing puddles of water in the center of Greenland is eerie. Could be cyclical of course, but nevertheless rare to see.

My vehicle went from a Jeep Wrangler to Ford Fiesta. Like MJ said, have to start with the man in the mirror. Playing "Devil's Advocate" here, but I still want to see conversation on it.
 
Avalanche said:
Happy to see conversation starting back up on this. Seeing puddles of water in the center of Greenland is eerie. Could be cyclical of course, but nevertheless rare to see.

My vehicle went from a Jeep Wrangler to Ford Fiesta. Like MJ said, have to start with the man in the mirror. Playing "Devil's Advocate" here, but I still want to see conversation on it.
Click to expand...
It's like 3 degrees, max, in central Greenland. Where do you see liquid water in the center of Greenland? Also, surface mass of snow and ice is slightly above average and expected to start growing as we get into August. Temps on the latest GFS show much colder temps in Greenland in the next 10 days.
 
weatherfide said:
It's like 3 degrees, max, in central Greenland. Where do you see liquid water in the center of Greenland? Also, surface mass of snow and ice is slightly above average and expected to start growing as we get into August. Temps on the latest GFS show much colder temps in Greenland in the next 10 days.
Click to expand...
This is exactly why I want conversation on this. I saw a publication that showed Greenland ice melting in Summit Camp and regions in central Greenland, claiming this is the last frontier to save us from GW, and they had pics of lakes in Greenland that were solid before. I have a hard time knowing what is accurately being portrayed in media sources and what are outright lies. Thanks for sharing what you share on here!!!
 
weatherfide said:
It's like 3 degrees, max, in central Greenland. Where do you see liquid water in the center of Greenland? Also, surface mass of snow and ice is slightly above average and expected to start growing as we get into August. Temps on the latest GFS show much colder temps in Greenland in the next 10 days.
Click to expand...
-1.9C was recently recorded at the summit which is unprecedented.
 
I see climatologists use the phrase "every year mets forecast more and more hurricanes" as an argument for AGW.

To me, I dont care what gets forecasted, I care what's verified. Are we actually getting more numerous hurricanes, flooding, etc.
 
Downeastnc said:


Interesting look at how much impact we are having....

Click to expand...

The ice cores are based on a huge assumption that the world's bio-economy was the same then as now, and is forever unchanging. That assumption can not be proven and must be accepted on faith. Belief systems based on faith are religions. All of this global climate garbage is an extension of this anti-human religion. We still know very little about climate and long term effects of increasing CO2. But because what we do know is that it is more beneficial to have higher concentrations of CO2 in the lower atmosphere for plant growth, and that it is a low quality greenhouse gas, I don't see any urgency to shift from energy dense, cheap fuel for human growth and prosperity.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top