• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Moderated Global Warming Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
bit_pattern said:
It could be that the heat energy is being stored in the deep ocean, because despite the fact it isn't being reflected in the surface temperature there is a clear and quantifiable energy imbalance where more energy is going into the system than is being released. Oceans are a much more efficient storage medium than the atmosphere and heat content of the oceans has nearly tripled over the last fifty years.
Click to expand...

It could be. There's certainly evidence of lag, the ocean seems like a very likely culprit. Considering it's a giant heat sink it's not hard to imagine it smoothes out some of the effect as well.
 
bit_pattern said:
It could be that the heat energy is being stored in the deep ocean, because despite the fact it isn't being reflected in the surface temperature there is a clear and quantifiable energy imbalance where more energy is going into the system than is being released. Oceans are a much more efficient storage medium than the atmosphere and heat content of the oceans has nearly tripled over the last fifty years.
Click to expand...

There are also strong arguments for aerosol maskings which are gradually clearing.
 
bit_pattern said:
^^ Likely a combination of a number of factors.

Saw this today, probably better suited to the defunct lies repository thread. A disturbing example of how the deniersphere operates

http://deepclimate.org/2010/06/15/mike-hulme-sets-solomon-and-morano-straight/
Click to expand...

Indeed, another fine example of how the deniersphere operates on both sides of the issue.

I read a couple of things by Mike Hulme and even inquired about him on this forum but nobody replied. He seems like a very reasonable person by the few things I've read.
 
Indeed, another fine example of how the deniersphere operates on both sides of the issue.
Click to expand...

What "sides" would those be?

Climate science versus right wing anti-science garbage from the likes of the National Pest?

Or are you trying to maintain there is some science in the nonsense from Solomon et al.
Is this just more trying to justify your ambiguous position and foment doubt.?
 
Also perhaps better suited to a "Defunct Lies" thread is

http://climateprogress.org/2010/06/...onathan-leake-simon-lewis-apology-retraction/

"I welcome the Sunday Times’ apology for failing to accurately report my views and retract the Amazon story. As several experts told them – their story was baseless. What I find shocking about this whole episode is that an article read out [loud] and agreed with me was then switched at the last minute to one that fit with the Times’ editorial line that the IPCC contained a number of serious mistakes, but actually ignored the scientific facts.”
Click to expand...

(Quoting Simon Lewis)

Probably more a zombie lie than a defunct one, but when even the Murdoch press is backing down we are definitely into the end-game of the "discussion".

It was, of course, inevitable that we'd get here at some point. Propaganda, however well resourced, cannot prevent the climate from changing, nor can it conceal the fact for long. Pseudo-science is faring no better since it has no physical foundations. Lindzen's Iris never opened, clouds continue to behave as clouds always have, and Arctic sea-ice really is going away.

It'll be a while longer before we see clearly how the Amazon region is responding but it's safe to say it will be pretty much as predicted by the real scientists involved in the subject.
 
BenBurch said:
I'll wager you a pint of Guinness that the deniers will continue to quote the erroneous story and never, ever mention that it was retracted and apologized-for.
Click to expand...

That’s the basic modus operandi we have seen, make loud public claims and even though they will have to retract them if challenged we will be stuck debunking them for years.
 
Time to move on to solutions

Here's a start

Green machine: Bacteria will keep CO2 safely buried


Green machine is our weekly column on the latest advances in environmental technologies
Take a dollop of bacterial gloop, add a splash of urea and pour into an underground aquifer. That's the latest recipe for a secure carbon dioxide storage site.
With the world still heavily reliant on fossil fuels to meet its energy needs, carbon sequestration technologies could help reduce greenhouse gas emissions. But one of the big challenges to making that a reality is ensuring that the CO2 stays locked away underground.
One way of doing that is to physically trap the gas, by pumping it into permeable rock strata beneath a layer of impermeable "cap rock". An alternative technique, called solubility trapping, pumps the CO2 into brine held within the rock, to create an underground reservoir of carbonated water. This captured CO2 can also react with minerals in the surrounding rock to form carbonates that hold carbon in solid form.
Now Andrew Mitchell at Aberystwyth University in the UK and colleagues at Montana State University in Bozeman think microbes could help these rocks hold carbon even more securely.
Click to expand...
more
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn19063-green-machine-bacteria-will-keep-co2-safely-buried.html
 
and further on the solutions end

Brave New Climate has excellent resources...

Take real action on climate change – Part 1

Posted on 21 June 2010 by Barry Brook
A recent BNC guest post, Public advocacy on nuclear power and climate change, stirred up some really useful ideas. In that post’s comments thread, it was discussed how we, as a concerned and engaged internet community (the BNC crowd, and similar groups like Energy from Thorium), could more effectively engage with the broader public domain on the issue of realistic and affordable solutions for solving climate change and providing long-term energy security. Right now, the public is most developed countries are either totally ‘switched off’ on energy issues (i.e., don’t care), or have idealistic and impractical visions of what is feasible (i.e., don’t understand). This needs to change, urgently… but how?
Click to expand...

more
http://bravenewclimate.com/
 
Pushing the envelope of the thread title ...

http://climateprogress.org/2010/06/23/blacklist-peak-readership-for-denier-blogs/

There's no sensible discussion about the reality of AGW anymore because everything that's actually happening confirms it. What's left to the deniers is repetition, slandering of individuals and the IPCC, and crazy talk about Venus. Preaching to the converted.

Stevie McIntyre is left behind still trying to prove that the Hockey-Stick ain't so. WattsUpMyButt is left trying to argue that Arctic sea-ice is really still there when it isn't, presumably in the hope that it will get them through to at least the Northern Hemisphere autumn. Desperation is all too evident.

The only discussion left is what AGW implies in practical terms, and denial of its very existence is self-exclusion from that discussion.
 
Yet the unwarranted sniping goes on - I actually sent a formal complaint about this to the senior editor of the Toronto Star...talk about totally unwarranted factual error and opinion....:mad:

Climate change progress has also been hampered by revelations that some prominent scientists fudged their calculations to make a more convincing case that greenhouse gases are causing world temperatures to rise.
Click to expand...
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/tor...te-change-debate-to-get-radical-overhaul?bn=1

Had they said allegations then no problem but this vague smearing without a hint of backup or support on the front page of a national newspaper that supports efforts on climate change is all too typical of the odious slime that slips by the editorial overseers when some financial sector reporter tries to comment on something he knows nothing about or has an axe to grind.

It's time media gets hauled up on vague junk like this...
 
Alright, in this thread, TShaitanaku made the following statement:

".....we are facing the dramatic alteration of our planetary environment, the potential collapse of our civilization, and the deaths of most of the animal species on our planet (as well as significant portion, if not a majority, of our own species) as the result of our own misguided greed and incomplete understandings......."

Does TShaitanaku or anyone have some handy peer-reviewed references to confirm these statements?

Specifically:

1. Dramatic alteration of our planetary environment
2. Collapse of our civilization
3. Deaths of most of the animal species on out planet
4. Deaths of a majority of our own species
 
Wangler said:
Alright, in this thread, TShaitanaku made the following statement:

".....we are facing the dramatic alteration of our planetary environment, the potential collapse of our civilization, and the deaths of most of the animal species on our planet (as well as significant portion, if not a majority, of our own species) as the result of our own misguided greed and incomplete understandings......."

Does TShaitanaku or anyone have some handy peer-reviewed references to confirm these statements?

Specifically:

1. Dramatic alteration of our planetary environment
2. Collapse of our civilization
3. Deaths of most of the animal species on out planet
4. Deaths of a majority of our own species
Click to expand...

I'd be happy to confirm that the quoted statement is accurately and truly mine, if that's what you mean. But if you are asking me to qualify and support my statements, as stated previously, I will be happy to!

(but probably not this weekend - my apologies)
 
Wangler said:
Alright, in this thread, TShaitanaku made the following statement:
Click to expand...

By "this thread" you don't actually mean this thread, do you? You mean another thread on another JREF Forum. Unmoderated, for all I know.

".....we are facing the dramatic alteration of our planetary environment, the potential collapse of our civilization, and the deaths of most of the animal species on our planet (as well as significant portion, if not a majority, of our own species) as the result of our own misguided greed and incomplete understandings......."
Click to expand...

Hard to argue with that.

Does TShaitanaku or anyone have some handy peer-reviewed references to confirm these statements?
Click to expand...

Do you have any reason to think they're not accurate? You've got no references to confirm that we're not facing these things for those very reasons.

Specifically:
Click to expand...

But not specificaly about Climate Change, since you quoted Tshainaku from another thread, not this thread ...

1. Dramatic alteration of our planetary environment
Click to expand...

You're looking for scientific references that include the term "dramatic"? "Planetary environment" is hardly specific either.

2. Collapse of our civilization
Click to expand...

Name one that hasn't.

3. Deaths of most of the animal species on out planet
Click to expand...

Well on the way to that, and didn't notice until recently.

4. Deaths of a majority of our own species
Click to expand...

I predict the death of all of them. So far so good myself, but I reckon there's a pattern.
 
Asking for peer review on those sorts of projections is a foolish endeavour.

Are there scientists qualified to advance those opinions making similar statements? - indeed there are..

http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/03/13/scientist-warming-could-cut-population-to-1-billion/
Is he qualified...?

1991 Founding Director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK); since 1993 Director of PIK and Professor for Theoretical Physics at Potsdam University. 2001-2005 additional engagement as Research Director of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research and Professor at the Environmental Sciences School of the University of East Anglia in Norwich (UK). From 2005 - 2009 Visiting Professor in Physics and Visiting Fellow of Christ Church College at Oxford University as well as Distinguished Science Advisor for the Tyndall Centre. Since 2010 External Professor at the Santa Fe Institute.

2002 Royal Society Wolfson Research Merit Award; 2004 CBE (Commander of the Order of the British Empire) awarded by Queen Elizabeth II; 2007 German Environment Prize; 2008 Order of Merit (“Roter Adlerorden”) of the State of Brandenburg; 2009 "Ambassador of Science" of the State of Brandenburg. Elected Member of the Max Planck Society, the German National Academy (Leopoldina), the US National Academy of Sciences, the Leibniz-Sozietät, the Geological Society of London, and the International Research Society Sigma Xi. Ambassador for the International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme (IGBP). Longstanding Member of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) who was awarded the Peace Nobel Prize in 2007.
Click to expand...

and the "other" C02 problem..not just one scientists but 150 of them..

The world's marine ecosystems risk being severely damaged by ocean acidification unless there are dramatic cuts in CO2 emissions, warn scientists.
Click to expand...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7860350.stm

We ARE in the midst of the 6th great extinction.
http://www.actionbioscience.org/newfrontiers/eldredge2.html

The major variable in all this is US...and no scientist can predict our collective actions.
Business as usual tho has dire consequences

This is the kind of work being done....MIT this time..

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/05/090519134843.htm

to assess the risk percentages

and the consequences

6C rise: The consequences
If two degrees is generally accepted as the threshold of dangerous climate change, it is clear that a rise of six degrees in global average temperatures must be very dangerous indeed, writes Michael McCarthy.


Just how dangerous was signalled in 2007 by the science writer Mark Lynas, who combed all the available scientific research to construct a picture of a world with temperatures three times higher than the danger limit.
His verdict was that a rise in temperatures of this magnitude "would catapult the planet into an extreme greenhouse state not seen for nearly 100 million years, when dinosaurs grazed on polar rainforests and deserts reached into the heart of Europe".
He said: "It would cause a mass extinction of almost all life and probably reduce humanity to a few struggling groups of embattled survivors clinging to life near the poles."
Very few species could adapt in time to the abruptness of the transition, he suggested. "With the tropics too hot to grow crops, and the sub-tropics too dry, billions of people would find themselves in areas of the planet which are essentially uninhabitable. This would probably even include southern Europe, as the Sahara desert crosses the Mediterranean.
"As the ice-caps melt, hundreds of millions will also be forced to move inland due to rapidly-rising seas. As world food supplies crash, the higher mid-latitude and sub-polar regions would become fiercely-contested refuges.
"The British Isles, indeed, might become one of the most desirable pieces of real estate on the planet. But, with a couple of billion people knocking on our door, things might quickly turn rather ugly."
Click to expand...

qualified to assess? Indeed
http://www.nceas.ucsb.edu/~mccarthy/cv.html

Far better than you or I....and the voices are consistent in their warning of the seriousness of the consequences - only the time frame varies....
 
Wangler said:
Alright, in this thread, TShaitanaku made the following statement:

".....we are facing the dramatic alteration of our planetary environment, the potential collapse of our civilization, and the deaths of most of the animal species on our planet (as well as significant portion, if not a majority, of our own species) as the result of our own misguided greed and incomplete understandings......."

Does TShaitanaku or anyone have some handy peer-reviewed references to confirm these statements?

Specifically:

1. Dramatic alteration of our planetary environment
2. Collapse of our civilization
3. Deaths of most of the animal species on out planet
4. Deaths of a majority of our own species
Click to expand...

What? You haven't heard the voice of authority?

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brent-...urgents-patriots-inaction-warming-cannibalism
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom