Global warming discussion IV

Status
Not open for further replies.
Think about it for a second.

I believe Reddit and maybe The Guardian have banned climate denial posts because the people who post will never stop posting misinformation.

How hard would it be if you had money washing around to spend on denial of climate science to pay a few unemployed guys who live in their mom's basement and spend half their day on 8chan to spend the other half of their day posting crud wherever the science is discussed?

Maybe the question needs a new thread - Should climate denial be allowed?

All that's required is a bar that means only approved science can be quoted. I'm going to take a wild guess and say that would require the thread to be set to moderated status and allow no further science discussion/s.
 
The next two years could be the hottest on record globally, says research from the UK's Met Office.
It warns big changes could be under way in the climate system with greenhouse gases increasing the impact of natural trends.
The research shows that a major El Nino event is in play in the Pacific, which is expected to heat the world overall.
But it also reveals that summers in Europe might get cooler for a while as the rest of the globe warms.
The scientists confirm that in 2015 the Earth's average surface temperature is running at, or near, record levels (0.68C above the 1961-1990 average).
Click to expand...

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-34226178

••••

Bit of good news.... Tony "what climate change?" Abbot is gone as Australia PM and looking like Canada will get rid of Harper finally.
 
The Atheist said:
Think about it for a second.
Click to expand...
Which you'll never get back.

I believe Reddit and maybe The Guardian have banned climate denial posts because the people who post will never stop posting misinformation.
Click to expand...
You can always put Haig on Ignore. I'm pretty sure he has.

How hard would it be if you had money washing around to spend on denial of climate science to pay a few unemployed guys who live in their mom's basement and spend half their day on 8chan to spend the other half of their day posting crud wherever the science is discussed?
Click to expand...
If by 8chan you mean recreational drugs, I can do both at the same time. Like right now, for which I'm paid nothing. I must look into this opportunity.

Maybe the question needs a new thread - Should climate denial be allowed?
Click to expand...
Way to generate traffic.

All that's required is a bar that means only approved science can be quoted. I'm going to take a wild guess and say that would require the thread to be set to moderated status and allow no further science discussion/s.
Click to expand...
Too dull.
 
CapelDodger said:
You can always put Haig on Ignore. I'm pretty sure he has.
Click to expand...

No need at all. I'm perfectly capable of scrolling past posts I have no interest in.
Haig isn't one of them anyway - I find him hilarious.

CapelDodger said:
If by 8chan you mean recreational drugs, I can do both at the same time. Like right now, for which I'm paid nothing. I must look into this opportunity.
Click to expand...

It's not a drug, and I strongly recommend not checking it out without a plastic bucket standing by.

CapelDodger said:
Way to generate traffic.
Click to expand...

Except it doesn't.

It generates posts, which generates traffic from people involved in the thread, but I'd contend it stops people from outside reading because it's a cluster-****.

CapelDodger said:
Too dull.
Click to expand...

But a lot more informative.

Anyway, I'll leave it there because I am in danger of being off-topic again.

Haig, please post some more "science".
 
Maybe carries some weight....good idea - perhaps a bit late.

David Attenborough backs huge Apollo-style clean energy research plan
Naturalist says 10-year public research and development programme, that would emulate race to put men on the moon, could halt climate change
Click to expand...

http://www.theguardian.com/environm...-backs-huge-apollo-clean-energy-research-plan

It would be interesting to model a wind down of carbon levels ( I'm talking not reduction in CO2 growth but a reduction in current CO2 levels from 400 to perhaps 300 ) over say 30 years and see what physical consequences might arise.
 
Urk



There are three months left in 2015, and it’s all but certain this year will go down as the world’s hottest on record. Oh, and 2016 is likely to follow suit.
A 1-2 punch from NASA and the U.K. Met Office, two of the world’s leading climate institutions, show how much the heat is on for planet. On the NASA side, data published earlier this week show this past August was the second-hottest on record and that it was 1.5°F above the monthly average. And barring a sudden run of cool months to end the year, that leaves 2015 on track to be the hottest on record, ousting 2014.
But cooler-than-normal temperatures are unlikely, thanks in large part to El Niño, the climate phenomenon on the tip of everyone’s tongue. The warm waters across the central and eastern tropical Pacific are boosting global temperatures, which is on top of the long-term warming driven by human greenhouse gas emissions.
Click to expand...

http://wxshift.com/news/record-hot-2015-all-but-certain-2016-may-follow-suit
 
Last edited:
NOAA's state of the climate report for August.

The combined average temperature over global land and ocean surfaces for August 2015 was 0.88°C (1.58°F) above the 20th century average of 15.6°C (60.1°F) and the highest August in the 136-year record. This value surpassed the previous record set in 2014 by 0.09°C (0.16°F).
Click to expand...


A record warm June, July, and August resulted in the highest global land and ocean average temperature for June–August at 0.85°C (1.53°F) above the 20th century average, surpassing the previous record set in 2014 by 0.11°C (0.20°F).
Click to expand...
 
Am I understanding Pixel42's quote correctly in that this temperature anomaly for this August was approximately 10 times higher than the previous record (i.e. +0.88 vs +0.09)?

If I am is this big jump significant at all, or is it just due to normal variability, because an increase of nearly a degree for this measurement seems like a big danger sign to me?
 
DarthFishy said:
Am I understanding Pixel42's quote correctly in that this temperature anomaly for this August was approximately 10 times higher than the previous record (i.e. +0.88 vs +0.09)?
Click to expand...
It's 0.88 above the 20th century average. It's 0.09 above the previous record high (set last year). That is an unusually high anomaly, but it's not the highest:

Top 10 Monthly Temperature Departures from Average

August 2015 tied with January 2007 as the third warmest monthly temperature departure, behind February 2015 and March 2015. Out of 1628 monthly records, five months of 2015 are among the top 10 monthly temperature departures.
Click to expand...

2015 as a whole looks likely to exceed last year's record high by about a tenth of a degree. That's quite a lot more than the amount by which a new record high usually exceeds the previous one. For example last year's record high exceeded the previous one (set in 2005 and 2010) by 0.04 degrees C, so this year's would be more than double that.

All other things being equal you would expect the record highs to be set in El Nino years, as that's when the natural variability peaks.
 
This might not be the most appropriate place to post this, but: Investigation Finds Exxon Ignored Its Own Early Climate Change Warnings

Despite its efforts for nearly two decades to raise doubts about the science of climate change, newly discovered company documents show that as early as 1977, Exxon research scientists warned company executives that carbon dioxide was increasing in the atmosphere and that the burning of fossil fuels was to blame.
Click to expand...
 
Elf Grinder 3000 said:
http://www.breitbart.com/big-journa...ossil-fuels-tomorrow-guess-happen-sea-levels/


According to this article if all the fossil fuels are burned it will take 200 years for the water to rise 1 meter
Click to expand...

That's why you should get your information from people who are actually honest...

We're already in line for that much sea level rise in the next 100 years and 6+ m over the next couple hundred. I don't think anyones done a real analyses on how fast it would rise burning ALL fossil fuels reserves but even a significant fraction of the coal reserves would put us well above 6 degrees warming and trigger rapid melting of Antarctica. I'd expect the ~5m /100 years of the last de-glaciation to be on the low side for something like that.
 
Elf Grinder 3000 said:
I have an undergraduate degree in one of the sciences as well as mathematics
Click to expand...

An undergraduate degree in computer science with a minor in mathematics merely assures exposure to the processes of science, it does not guarantee that an individual so qualified is appropriately applying those processes to their opinions and considerations.

This is a science thread, demonstrate, and compellingly support, a scientific argument which refutes modern climate science understandings.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom