Climate continues to change.

[OldJourno]

maybe you should read a little bit now and then

https://www.ecowatch.com/10-years-o...on-our-water-land-and-climate-1891114363.html

Speaking of reading just a bit, I invite you to post 2195 in this very same thread and predictions made 10 years ago by climate change guru Jim Hansen that lower Manhattan would be under water in 2018.
And that the Arctic would be ice free in 2018.
It was already too late, according to breathless reporting by the AP back then, we were past the tipping point.
Since the science is settled, I wonder who here has talked to one of those settled science guys like Bill Nye to find out when lower Manhattan will officially be under water and when the Arctic will officially be ice free next year.

 

[Hypoxia]

Lower Manhattan was underwater during a storm surge a couple years back IIRC. When melting glaciers raise sea level a few feet it's bye-bye subways and building foundations. But if you don't believe that, take a basement apartment near Battery Park.

 

[trysail]

https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2017/12/climate-national-security.jpg


​

 

[Richard_P_Feynman]

https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2017/12/climate-national-security.jpg


​

Is that supposed to be clever?

 

[trysail]

What do you think the r-squared is on this ?

.01 ?
.05 ?
...or is it flat-out zero?



http://www.climate4you.com/images/MSU%20UAH%20GlobalMonthlyTempSince1979%20AndCO2.gif


​

 

[thør]

How To Survive Climate Change.

 

[Richard_P_Feynman]

What do you think the r-squared is on this ?

.01 ?
.05 ?
...or is it flat-out zero?



http://www.climate4you.com/images/MSU%20UAH%20GlobalMonthlyTempSince1979%20AndCO2.gif


​

You still haven't told us why you cherry pick that particular data set.

 

[Hypoxia]

Is that supposed to be clever?

Cleaver is as cleaver does. Er, I mean clever.

The ocean is obviously too big to shoot. Better nuke it instead. Wait, Kim has promised to do that! We'd better hurry up and nuke it first. Mustn't lag, now. Can't fall behind in the nuke-the-ocean race. That's as bad as a missile gap.

Why haven't Nazis in their secret Antarctic base yet nuked strategic glaciers to unleash the destruction of the world's coastal regions? Fucking incompetents!

 

[phrodeau]

Speaking of reading just a bit, I invite you to post 2195 in this very same thread and predictions made 10 years ago by climate change guru Jim Hansen that lower Manhattan would be under water in 2018.
And that the Arctic would be ice free in 2018.
It was already too late, according to breathless reporting by the AP back then, we were past the tipping point.
Since the science is settled, I wonder here has talked to one of those settled science guys like Bill Nye to find out when lower Manhattan will officially be under water and when the Arctic will officially be ice free next year.

Oh, the so-called science blog that offers no direct quote about either of your examples. Have you read it?

 

[richard_daily]

Is that supposed to be clever?

Tryfail probably joined in the "shoot Hurricane Irma" effort.

 

[dolf]

People who deny climate change need shooting in the face.

The climate has always changed. We've swung between ice ages and tropical periods, and various other crazy climates, since the earth was formed. It's not suddenly become rigid since humanity invented monitoring.

The only possible debate is over the major cause of the changes, whether humanity impacts them, and what direction and rate we're looking at in the future.

Trying to argue that it's not changing is a politically based stance, denying reality for the sake of your ideals. Stop trying to prove that it's not changing. It's silly and childish.

Yes, I've posted this before.

 

[OldJourno]

Lower Manhattan was underwater during a storm surge a couple years back IIRC. When melting glaciers raise sea level a few feet it's bye-bye subways and building foundations. But if you don't believe that, take a basement apartment near Battery Park.

So if storm surge can do it, it's probably not that big a deal for climate change to put lower Manhattan under water. Is that what you're saying?
And no comment on that bum prediction from Hansen about the Arctic being ice free next year?

 

[thør]

People who deny climate change need shooting in the face.

The climate has always changed. We've swung between ice ages and tropical periods, and various other crazy climates, since the earth was formed. It's not suddenly become rigid since humanity invented monitoring.

The only possible debate is over the major cause of the changes, whether humanity impacts them, and what direction and rate we're looking at in the future.

Trying to argue that it's not changing is a politically based stance, denying reality for the sake of your ideals. Stop trying to prove that it's not changing. It's silly and childish.

Yes, I've posted this before.

Ding, ding, ding!

We have a winner.

 

[phrodeau]

So if storm surge can do it, it's probably not that big a deal for climate change to put lower Manhattan under water. Is that what you're saying?
And no comment on that bum prediction from Hansen about the Arctic being ice free next year?

What makes it a bum prediction? Can you see the future? Do you have any actual data to prove your assertion?

Where is that prediction anyways? Show us the statement by the guy where he says this.

 

[dolf]

Ding, ding, ding!

We have a winner.

*Curtsies*

I'll add that if you study climate and science, even on a basic level, you'll realise pretty damn fast that it's more complicated than anything else you've ever looked into. What they know now, the developments in monitoring, etc, has increased drastically in recent years. It's amazing shit, though not my cup of tea. I prefer my science a little less... boggling.

 

[thør]

*Curtsies*

I'll add that if you study climate and science, even on a basic level, you'll realise pretty damn fast that it's more complicated than anything else you've ever looked into. What they know now, the developments in monitoring, etc, has increased drastically in recent years. It's amazing shit, though not my cup of tea. I prefer my science a little less... boggling.

Indeed.

 

[Luk]

People who deny climate change need shooting in the face.

The climate has always changed. We've swung between ice ages and tropical periods, and various other crazy climates, since the earth was formed. It's not suddenly become rigid since humanity invented monitoring.

The only possible debate is over the major cause of the changes, whether humanity impacts them, and what direction and rate we're looking at in the future.

Trying to argue that it's not changing is a politically based stance, denying reality for the sake of your ideals. Stop trying to prove that it's not changing. It's silly and childish.

Yes, I've posted this before.

Sane people have always stated this. Why is it on the Lit people try to argue against this - it's asinine.

 

[Hypoxia]

So if storm surge can do it, it's probably not that big a deal for climate change to put lower Manhattan under water. Is that what you're saying?

Now you're catching on. Melting icecaps DO raise sea levels and WILL continue to inundate coastal areas, with more energetic storms driving yet further damage to human communities. Cities must move inland and uphill, or drown.

And no comment on that bum prediction from Hansen about the Arctic being ice free next year?

Okay, so I looked. My comment: One guy's views cited in an anti-hard-science blog does not represent a consensus of climatologists. And even eminent researcher get things wrong. Brilliant chemist Linus Pauling screwed the pooch on Vitamin C, alas. Moral: test your assumptions.

A few guys in the 1980's postulated imminent Global Cooling but that hypothesis was quickly shot down. Interestingly, one predicted effect of the current heat-the-hydrosphere trend is disruption of oceanic currents, leading to a fast-onset ice age. It's happened before.

 

[jaF0]

They say it's worse now than before. So how about that time when it got so warm that the glaciers receded and left the Great Lakes?

 

[Hypoxia]

They say it's worse now than before. So how about that time when it got so warm that the glaciers receded and left the Great Lakes?

Humans weren't pumping out massive quantities of CO2 then and measurably heating the hydrosphere, as we have in the last couple centuries.

Ah, but there HAVE been ancient episodes... Much methane is trapped under the surface of tundra. The collapse of such enclosures, releasing MUCH methane, is implicated in some rapid heating and melting incidents. Some such massive enclosures in Siberia now threaten similar releases. A few have popped lately. Can you say, "tipping point"??

 

[Que]

*Curtsies*

I'll add that if you study climate and science, even on a basic level, you'll realise pretty damn fast that it's more complicated than anything else you've ever looked into. What they know now, the developments in monitoring, etc, has increased drastically in recent years. It's amazing shit, though not my cup of tea. I prefer my science a little less... boggling.

"Alas." They have been "testing their assumptions." Thus far all, of their assumptions are demonstratively wrong. There are no climate models that have worked even when you plugged in historical data much less going forward. Obviously, there are variables that are not understood and are not accounted for.

Good news though, is that the science is settled, Hey?

 

[trysail]

Humans weren't pumping out massive quantities of CO2 then and measurably heating the hydrosphere, as we have in the last couple centuries.

Ah, but there HAVE been ancient episodes... Much methane is trapped under the surface of tundra. The collapse of such enclosures, releasing MUCH methane, is implicated in some rapid heating and melting incidents. Some such massive enclosures in Siberia now threaten similar releases. A few have popped lately. Can you say, "tipping point"??

Can you say "climate sensitivity?"

Can you say "attribution?"

Can you say "natural variability?"

Can you say "evidence?"

​

 

[trysail]

Draw your own conclusions.



Bin Laden Called For Americans To Rise Up Over Climate Change
by Jonathan Landay
March 1, 2016

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Osama bin Laden wrote a letter calling on the American people to help President Barack Obama fight “catastrophic” climate change and “save humanity”, in the latest evidence of his worries about environmental issues, newly released documents show... ​

​

 

[Luk]

Draw your own conclusions.
​

No.

How about for once you engage us in some thought-provoking effort by you or even your own take on the graphs and charts that you post? Praps a bit of critical thinking on your part?​

 

[phrodeau]

"Alas." They have been "testing their assumptions." Thus far all, of their assumptions are demonstratively wrong. There are no climate models that have worked even when you plugged in historical data much less going forward. Obviously, there are variables that are not understood and are not accounted for.

Good news though, is that the science is settled, Hey?

This is the ideal thread for demonstrating exactly what is “demonstratively wrong” with all those climate models.

Bet you aren’t able to do it.