Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Douglas Rhiner
Mountain climber
Truckee , CA
|
|
|
Feb 10, 2011 - 11:05am PT
|
CC reading…
Uh, words, words, words, uh..huh, words, words, climate change is blasphemous, words, words, words, huh hu hu, words……. ( no disrespect meant to either Beavis or Butthead )
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 10, 2011 - 11:15am PT
|
If anyone tells you the IPCC have already accounted for this in their climate models, they have obviously not read the body of the scientific work.
Well CC, looks like AC was pretty quick to prove you very wrong. But still, you have all those links on which you based your opinion. Interesting, no?
This begs a couple of questions:
1) Are you going to fess up that you were wrong?
2) More importantly, are you going to re-examine from where you get your information and why they promote false "facts"?
My hunch is that you will answer "No" to both of these questions.
|
|
blahblah
Gym climber
Boulder
|
|
|
Feb 10, 2011 - 12:04pm PT
|
All because of their religion. I see no great distinction between GOP Mullahs and their Crusade Enemies in Iran and elsewhere. They are all cut from the same cloth.
LOL--well if you ever see a girl being publicly stoned to death in the US for being raped, or death sentence (or any penalty at all) for "blasphemy," or even for US religious leaders calling for that, maybe you'll be on to something.
|
|
storer
Trad climber
Golden, Colorado
|
|
|
Feb 10, 2011 - 12:34pm PT
|
Please look at these two plots:
As you sit there are you really going to tell me this is a chance coincidence?
|
|
corniss chopper
climber
not my real name
|
|
|
Feb 10, 2011 - 02:01pm PT
|
It says I'm right. Read it again Warmists.
Sadly you Warmists cannot wrap your minds around the fact that historically
CO2 lags temperature change. Something the IPCC continually downplays just like natural climate change for obvious reasons: no one will give them money to fight a natural process.
|
|
Chiloe
Trad climber
Lee, NH
|
|
|
Feb 10, 2011 - 06:01pm PT
|
CC, somebody's selling nonsense and you've bought a whole bunch. It doesn't seem to re-sell too well here.
Milankovitch cycles have a period of 21,000 years. That can't begin to explain rapid change over the past 40 years, or even century-scale changes like the Medieval Warm Period and Little Ice Age.
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 10, 2011 - 06:13pm PT
|
Milankovitch cycles - very interesting. Also interesting that the IPCC doesn't include them as factors in their computer models or their famous reports.
If anyone tells you the IPCC have already accounted for this in their climate models, they have obviously not read the body of the scientific work. -- corniss chopper
CC, take a look:
From the IPCC site:
The Milankovitch theory proposes that ice ages are triggered by minima in summer insolation near 65°N, enabling winter snowfall to persist all year and therefore accumulate to build NH glacial ice sheets. For example, the onset of the last ice age, about 116 ± 1 ka (Stirling et al., 1998), corresponds to a 65°N mid-June insolation about 40 W m–2 lower than today (Box 6.1, Figure 1).
Box 6.1 Figure 1
Studies of the link between orbital parameters and past climate changes include spectral analysis of palaeoclimatic records and the identification of orbital periodicities; precise dating of specific climatic transitions; and modelling of the climate response to orbital forcing, which highlights the role of climatic and biogeochemical feedbacks. Sections 6.4 and 6.5 describe some aspects of the state-of-the-art understanding of the relationships between orbital forcing, climate feedbacks and past climate changes.
Looks to me like they are factoring into account the Milankovitch theory (how the changing of Earth's orbit around the Sun) in their analysis of climate change.
So corniss chopper, please explain to me how you come to say "It says I'm right. Read it again Warmists," when clearly you are dead wrong about the IPCC factoring in this effect.
|
|
the Fet
climber
Tu-Tok-A-Nu-La
|
|
|
Feb 10, 2011 - 06:49pm PT
|
You guys are talking to CC like he could actually hear you through the walls of his rectum.
|
|
storer
Trad climber
Golden, Colorado
|
|
|
Feb 10, 2011 - 08:15pm PT
|
Did anyone actually peruse the two plots I offered? Note that I did not mention global warming (this might come in a later post)I only show the carbon dioxide concentration and its rate of its addition to the atmosphere by human activity. So please forget all the discussion at this time about temperature cycles. Just look carefully at the CO2 data.
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 10, 2011 - 10:32pm PT
|
You guys are talking to CC like he could actually hear you through the walls of his rectum.
Hahahahahahahahahaha ...
Thanks for the reality check.
|
|
corniss chopper
climber
not my real name
|
|
|
Feb 10, 2011 - 11:02pm PT
|
I'll claim this round as another easy win.
The standard sophomoric obscenities just means your side lost the debate again.
First, the facts. We’ve only possessed the ability to precisely measure the
temperature with thermometers since the early 1800s, which interestingly
coincides with the end of the Little Ice Age and the beginning of the
Industrial Revolution. Since then the temperature on the planet has only
warmed .7 degrees Celsius (or slightly more than a degree Fahrenheit), with
most of that warming occurring before 1940. In fact, according to the
National Climatic Data Center, the warmest decade on record was the 1930s,
with twenty-two of the now 50 states recording their highest temperature
ever during those years. Thirty-eight states recorded their all-time highs
before 1960. Likewise the hottest year on record was 1934. Even Jim
Hansen’s NASA unit has been forced to acknowledge this.
http://www.theclimategatebook.com/why-2010-was-not-the-hottest-year-ever/
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Feb 11, 2011 - 10:48am PT
|
What do they "think" ?
They don't.
|
|
TGT
Social climber
So Cal
|
|
|
Feb 11, 2011 - 11:17am PT
|
As it happens, the project's initial findings, published last month, show no evidence of an intensifying weather trend. "In the climate models, the extremes get more extreme as we move into a doubled CO2 world in 100 years," atmospheric scientist Gilbert Compo, one of the researchers on the project, tells me from his office at the University of Colorado, Boulder. "So we were surprised that none of the three major indices of climate variability that we used show a trend of increased circulation going back to 1871."
In other words, researchers have yet to find evidence of more-extreme weather patterns over the period, contrary to what the models predict. "There's no data-driven answer yet to the question of how human activity has affected extreme weather," adds Roger Pielke Jr., another University of Colorado climate researcher.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704422204576130300992126630.html
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 11, 2011 - 11:42am PT
|
I'll claim this round as another easy win.
By completely changing the subject.
First, the facts.
Hahahahahahaha....
Yes, the "facts" are you were talking about the Milankovitch cycles. Now you switched to something totally different.
A Total Loser you are for doing such, corniss chopper.
|
|
Roger Breedlove
climber
Cleveland Heights, Ohio
|
|
|
Feb 11, 2011 - 04:31pm PT
|
I recently read the book, "Why the West Rules...for Now" by Ian Morris. Good book. It is a history of civilization focused on comparing the West, writ large, and China. However, with this scale, whole periods of history only get a paragraph or two. I knew next to nothing about Chinese history and nothing about the Steppe Highway that connected China to Eastern Europe. It is very interesting reading.
The reason I post it here is that climate change and its impact on agriculture has been a substantial driver of what we call changes in civilization over the 20,000 years Morris covers.
"History is not one damn thing after another, it is a single grand and relentless process of adaptations to the world that always generate new problems (in the form of disease, famine, climate change, migration and state failure) that call for further adaptations. And each breakthrough came not as a result of tinkering but as a result of desperate times, calling for desperate measures."
An interesting bit is how climate change can trigger the other four horses of the apocalypse.
For my part, I am preparing for global warming: I am buying real estate in Cleveland: far from the rising sea; next to vast quantities of clean drinking water; nestled between the raging cold of Canada and the fierce heat of middle America. We recently agree with all Great Lakes States and Canadian Providences that the Great Lakes water must stay in the Great Lakes Basin. We are prepared to build high fences to protect our borders from illegals from flooded coastal areas and the formally sunny, smug, Southwest. We are instituting character tests for folks who want to immigrate: Have you told Cleveland jokes in public? Do you root for The Heat or the Steelers?
Property prices are rising. We cannot wait. We continue to create clean electrical power from out of state coal.
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 11, 2011 - 06:00pm PT
|
What is interesting is that rise in human-made CO2 levels coincides with the rise and use of fossil fuels [d'Oh!] and that as Peak Oil (the decrease in yearly oil production) starts to take hold, our ability to emit the same levels of CO2 from burning those fuels will decrease accordingly.
The off-the-charts rise in population was literally fueled by our ability to use oil as a cheap and energy-rich fuel source. Our ability to macro-farm the land also relies heavily on the use of petroleum for both the fertilizers and the pesticides (nat'l gas).
The Age of Oil will be but a blip of a few hundred years on Earth's time-scale.
|
|
corniss chopper
climber
not my real name
|
|
|
Feb 11, 2011 - 06:38pm PT
|
k-man - well said. There's no reason to put a damper on our little game of
civilization until the punchbowl is empty.
Those who are motivated will find a way to keep it going without fossil fuel
energy sources.
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 11, 2011 - 07:36pm PT
|
CC, do you mean technology or God will save us?
Either way, the fact is that without oil, our standard of living will certainly change. Couple that with some of the other items mentioned in this thread and it points to a time when our leaders should take serious action about our energy requirements and how we can best use a dwindling resource to help us gain independence.
AC, this Noam Chomsky piece is truly amazing:
http://www.readersupportednews.org/video/4-video/4901-noam-chomsky-peak-oil-and-a-changing-climate
Thanks for posting that (although the cut doesn't really talk about peak oil or climate change).
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 11, 2011 - 07:46pm PT
|
True that AC, & that is the big mystery to me.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!