Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Elcapinyoazz
Social climber
Joshua Tree
|
|
Hey Chief, how's TennerCee treatin' you?
|
|
Splater
climber
Grey Matter
|
|
The NAS says nothing of the kind, in fact quite the opposite.
Your reading comprehension has not improved in 4.5 years and 5461 posts by you on this subject.
Talk about seeing only what you want to see.
It says quite clearly that the long term effects will be FAR WORSE if we don't limit emissions. The longer we wait, the worse it will be. Ice melting and Sea level rise continue long after CO2 levels out.
In this case, a little intuition might help. It took hundreds of millions of years to form fossil fuels. Burning them is quick. Returning the carbon to a sink is not so fast. Read up on the lifespan of CO2 in the atmosphere.
You should already know this if you had made much attempt to actually understand the science of CO2 as a greenhouse gas. There are numerous places such as the IPCC AR5 report where you can read about how the time course of global warming response. Look at the long term graphs in Chapter 12 Long-term Climate Change: Projections, Commitments and Irreversibility http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/wg1/WG1AR5_Chapter12_FINAL.pdf
Start with 12.1 figure 1. Only RCP2.6 levels out before 2100, which has an ultimate CO2 level of about 450ppm, not much higher than today.
Even RCP4.5 continues increasing impacts until 2300. 550 ppm is approx a doubling of historic levels.
Fig 12.3 is another good one.
Starting around page 1100 are the even longer term effects.
Check out Figures 12.40 to 12.45
It has taken us roughly 100 years to set this course in motion and to upset the CO2 balance from 280 to 400 ppm. If it takes a few decades to complete action to keep impacts at a liveable level, there is still some additional long term warming even after that. If we level out at 500 some effects will still keep increasing until 2150. If we level out at 1000 ppm it will take much longer. Don't forget that some graphs are the response to CO2 doubling just for comparison, not just for that particular scenario. But without global action we won't stop at even 550ppm.
|
|
wilbeer
Mountain climber
Terence Wilson greeneck alleghenys,ny,
|
|
Nobody,including me ,are "inciting fear" as you say .
Those are the facts .Recorded history.
You may go on all you want about ,"EVER".
Yes, IT WAS HOTTER BEFORE.
Before human life,or any life,YES.
How would you know?Mr. anti-science.
How WE know is something you should read up on.
Geology.
Just the facts and read it.
Now you are a FACT DENIER.Good for you.
|
|
wilbeer
Mountain climber
Terence Wilson greeneck alleghenys,ny,
|
|
Here it comes.
|
|
wilbeer
Mountain climber
Terence Wilson greeneck alleghenys,ny,
|
|
With 2014 almost concluded, the chances now top 99 percent that it will beat out 1934 as the hottest year ever recorded in California, according to records going back to 1895. At this point, to fall short of the mark, the state “would have to have a December that’s basically colder than anything we’ve had in California,” Iniguez continued. “Which isn’t going to happen.”
Read Much?
AH YES,THE DELETE .
Totally Gutless .
|
|
raymond phule
climber
|
|
Lol, it is always fun when someone disprove his claims in his own posts.
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
The Chief:The proper verbiage indicated by NOAA was...
"ZERO Warming the past 16 years"
LOL, close to zero, not zero, idiot.
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
The article indicated it was in recorded history, dumbass.
With 2014 almost concluded, the chances now top 99 percent that it will beat out 1934 as the hottest year ever RECORDED in California
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
Sketch joins in with The Chief to showcase their reading comprehension issues.
With 2014 almost concluded, the chances now top 99 percent that it will beat out 1934 as the hottest year ever recorded in California, according to records going back to 1895.
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
Maybe this will help The Chief:
ever recorded in California, according to records going back to 1895.
ever recorded in California, according to records going back to 1895.
ever recorded in California, according to records going back to 1895.
ever recorded in California, according to records going back to 1895.
ever recorded in California, according to records going back to 1895.
ever recorded in California, according to records going back to 1895.
ever recorded in California, according to records going back to 1895.
ever recorded in California, according to records going back to 1895.
ever recorded in California, according to records going back to 1895.
ever recorded in California, according to records going back to 1895.
ever recorded in California, according to records going back to 1895.
ever recorded in California, according to records going back to 1895.
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
Three days ago the same Federal Forecasters stated differently.
No they didn't.
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
Try reading for comprehension, Chief.
That forecast was updated October 9.
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
We'll just have to see what federal source SFgate was referring too, Chief.
Glad you know know that El-Nino has not been declared, like you claimed.
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
It's ok with you if they update their forecast, right Chief?
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
EVER RECORDED!
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
LOL, so therefore they must mean since earth was formed.
|
|
monolith
climber
SF bay area
|
|
Yep, Chief, they updated their forecast that had been in effect for some time.
Is that ok with you?
Forecasters have also dropped earlier projections that the weather pattern could be of moderate strength or greater. Consensus now is that it will be weak.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!