Global warming discussion III

[BrooklynBaby]

No, you're a science denier. Like most Republicans.

BTW, thanks for helping to prove the point of my thread with your posts.

I suppose y'all could just declare victory if it was actually getting hotter. There have been three mild summers in a row in the South, and the NE has had long, brutal, cold winters. This is what you would call the opposite of "global warming", and trying to convince people otherwise by announcing 2014 was the "hottest year on record" is falling on deaf ears. Perhaps it should be changed to "global (somewhere else other than where you live) warming".

True fact: Polls show Americans are more concerned about the cleanliness of their drinking water than "global warming".

 

[Red Baron Farms]

True fact: Polls show Americans are more concerned about the cleanliness of their drinking water than "global warming".

What makes you think they are unrelated? Both are symptoms of the same base problem. Too much carbon in the air and not enough carbon in the soil. Fix the soil and voilà, the air and water quality follow. It's all interrelated.

 

[pharphis]

As was mentioned by someone else, Monckton has been debunked at length online (and apparently on this forum, too).

I already referenced potholer's amusing videos on climate science, but the BEST of these is his Monckton Bunkum series:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fbW-aHvjOgM&index=17&list=PL82yk73N8eoX-Xobr_TfHsWPfAIyI7VAP

Forgive me for not wanting to read an article by Monckton referring to AGW believers as fascists

 

[uke2se]

As was mentioned by someone else, Monckton has been debunked at length online (and apparently on this forum, too).

I already referenced potholer's amusing videos on climate science, but the BEST of these is his Monckton Bunkum series:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fbW-aHvjOgM&index=17&list=PL82yk73N8eoX-Xobr_TfHsWPfAIyI7VAP

Forgive me for not wanting to read an article by Monckton referring to AGW believers as fascists

Monckton is a joke that nobody really has to debunk, primarilly because he doesn't produce any science, and this issue is, regardless what science deniers think, a scientific issue.

 

[Red Baron Farms]

Ahh, sorry about the delay, I've been very involved in a few research endeavors of my own lately and have had to reduce my online social interaction time. I imagine with spring upon us we are both doing a lot more yard, garden and farm work as well. Sitting on the tractor turning over the cover crops, and pulling the spreaders provides a lot of quality thinking time.

As to the research in question:

"Mineral protection of soil carbon counteracted by root exudates" - http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate2580.html

I have a copy of the paper and can send you a copy if you want to PM me a email address. And/or, if you would like to discuss the paper/findings we can take it over to your thread and I can synthesize my understanding of the paper/findings (with supporting quotes) and we can explore the subject in more detail.

for a more casual discussion of the paper/findings:

http://www.farmingfutures.org.uk/blog/plant-roots-may-accelerate-soil-carbon-loss?page=3



http://www.prbo.org/sciencenews/?p=6262

I had a chance to go through the paper. There is nothing really all that surprising there actually. But I would call it a stretch to say the original claimed, "Plant Roots May Accelerate Carbon Loss From Soils".

Here is what the study did:

We tested these hypotheses by delivering a continuous supply of individual exudate solutions through an artificial root (length =10 cm, diameter = 2.5mm) into unperturbed soil, recreating a rhizosphere environment (Supplementary Fig. 1).

Which of course means no Mycorrhizal symbiosis...which means this really isn't a good analogy to a rhizosphere. There will be different bacteria, and different fungi..which means different arthropods and nematodes. The study has merit no doubt..in understanding that oxalic acid can release the adsorbed nutrients off sequestered carbon...and that could potentially release CO2 in aerobic conditions. Probably one reason why plants release it. But you have to be honest, this is far from a realistic rhizosphere. I sincerely doubt it has much meaning in the climate science context.

On the other hand. One of the references used by that paper does have me concerned. Altered soil microbial community at elevated CO2 leads to loss of soil carbon The reason it concerns me is that it may mean that the longer we wait before implimenting CO2 mitigation in soils, the harder it may become. That does not bode well at all. Of course that was just a scrub-oak ecosystem...not generally useful for carbon farming anyway. But it does cause me concern that what may be the only hope of actually drawing down carbon...if we wait too long......just might loose that biggest tool we know.

 

[Belz...]

A new study out of Germany casts further doubt on the so-called global warming “consensus”

Further doubt ? In whose minds ? And why the scare quotes ? It's demonstratably a consensus.

 

[Belz...]

Perhaps you should take it up with whats-his-name, the guy that flies around the world in private jets releasing tons of co2 into the atmosphere, in order to warn people of the danger co2 in the atmosphere poses to all of us.

What should he do ? Sail around the world ?

The problem isn't the planes. It's the plants and the cars and the livestock and such.

Do you guys know anything about this topic ?

 

[Dancing David]

So, when are all of the "global warming" non-deniers going to actually do something to help them survive the imminent dystopian future they are predicting? I mean, if I thought the seas were actually going to start rising any day now, I would be moving inland and storing large supplies of food, fuel, guns, and ammunition. I don't see liberals doing any of those things. Instead, what I see them doing is trying to raise taxes and get rich off of carbon credits. Liberals are talking the talk, but walking an entirely different walk.

I notice that you are not actually addressing the idea that humans are causing the phenomena labeled as global warming.

many people here do many different things....

Also you seem to address this to some shibboleth of liberals as a broad category of posters, so are you just saying nanny nanny boo boo?

 

[macdoc]

BrooklynBaby
I've asked that your posts be moved where they belong out of the science forum ...since you have none to offer...but perhaps you would care to comment on this evidence ..since you seem to not understand...it IS getting hotter despite the nonsense you've been fed by the right wing press.

Originally Posted by BrooklynBaby View Post
I suppose y'all could just declare victory if it was actually getting hotter.

Care to explain??

These are measured changes...can we declare "victory" now?
I do suspect that no amount of evidence will move you off your conspiracy stance.

Even Exxon acknowledges what you won't...

ExxonMobil Acknowledges Climate Change to Shareholders
www.renewableenergyworld.com/.../exxonmobil-acknowledges-climate-...
Mar 21, 2014 - The reason for that is that we view climate change as just one bullet point ... how ExxonMobil assesses the risk of stranded assets from climate ....

why is that??? are they wrong....or perhaps the simpler explanation.... you are ???

Would you like the climate science explanation as to why your small slice of the planet is colder lately??
Would it surprise you to know it's because the Arctic is off the charts warmer??


Here's a hint...

Called the Arctic Dipole....something you would know if you understood your planet better...and spent time with science books instead of right wing rags.

 

[Dancing David]

Ok then, what are the loud and proud non-science deniers doing in their daily lives to mitigate that gradual problem? I'd be willing to bet not much.

Hi some of us avoid airplane travel as a rule, other try to reduce carbon emissions in other ways....

 

[Dancing David]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ear...e-scandal-of-fiddled-global-warming-data.html

Citations sadly lacking, editorial page?

 

[Dancing David]

Here's some easy money for the "global warming" true believers, courtesy of someone named Lord Monckton:

http://www.wnd.com/2015/04/i-challenge-climate-fascists-with-500000-bet/

Ah yes the WingNut daily, there is a source for you...

 

[Reality Check]

So, when are all of the "global warming" non-deniers going to actually do something to help them survive the imminent dystopian future they are predicting? ...

Sorry, BrooklynBaby, but that is a strawman argument.
The people who understand climate change and the probable effects are trying to mitigate those effects by advocating the reduction of CO2 emissions. That is how they propose to survive catastrophic global warming - by making it not happen!

Sea levels are rising today: How much is sea level rising?

Sea levels are measured by a variety of methods that show close agreement - sediment cores, tidal gauges, satellite measurements. What they find is sea level rise has been steadily accelerating over the past century.

We have to be concerned bout global warming today and take action today for a couple of reasons:
* The climate takes time to react to changes in forcing.
The CO2 we emit today will cause warming for a decade or two. Reductions in that emission will take a decade or a to have an effect on global temperatures.
* Obviously we cannot just stop emitting CO2 all together tomorrow .

 

[Reality Check]

Is this a trick question? When sea levels rise 20 feet, all of the land in Key West, Fla. will be underwater.

Is that a trick answer, BrooklynBaby?
If sea levels rise 20 feet then obviously all land that is less that 20 feet above sea level will be under water !
A collapse of a major ice sheet is one mechanism by which that could happen. Or we could just do nothing about CO2:
How much will sea levels rise in the 21st Century?

Observed sea levels are actually tracking at the upper range of the IPCC projections. When accelerating ice loss from Greenland and Antarctica are factored into sea level projections, the estimated sea level rise by 2100 is between 75cm to 2 metres.

 

[Reality Check]

I suppose y'all could just declare victory if it was actually getting hotter. ..weather stuff snipped....

Actually BrooklynBaby, we'all declare victory because we know the difference between weather and climate !
Climate is the trend in measurements over long periods (the standard is 30 years). IOW climate is an average of weather.
More importantly the climate is actually getting hotter. The global warming "hiatus" is not that warming has stopped. It is that warming has been slower in the last couple of decades than it was in the decades before then.
ETA: Unless you are a guy called Monckton and are willing to lie about the trend by cherry picking the one dataset out of 4 or 5 datasets that shows no increase in the last 18 years because Monckton also cherry picked the starting date as 1997 (a year before 1998 which was one of the hottest years on record). Monckton 's ignorance about that the oceans contain heat as well as the atmosphere is not good either.

We'all (including you) lose - global warming is continuing and we can expect bad effects if we do nothing as you seem to want. Personally I am not in favor of billions of dollars being used to fix the effects of global warming after they happen (e.g. sea walls around many cities), millions of people being displaced, more people dying due to weather, etc.

 

[Belz...]

We'all (including you) lose - global warming is continuing and we can expect bad effects if we do nothing as you seem to want. Personally I am not in favor of billions of dollars being used to fix the effects of global warming after they happen (e.g. sea walls around many cities), millions of people being displaced, more people dying due to weather, etc.

Not to mention crop failures, species moving to new latitudes, etc.

 

[Trakar]

Perhaps you should take it up with whats-his-name, the guy that flies around the world in private jets releasing tons of co2 into the atmosphere, in order to warn people of the danger co2 in the atmosphere poses to all of us. Here's a summary of one of his points from a movie he made, which I'm sure won tons of awards, taken from Wikipedia:

"For example, Gore discusses the possibility of the collapse of a major ice sheet in Greenland or in West Antarctica, either of which could raise global sea levels by approximately 20 feet, flooding coastal areas and producing 100 million refugees."

Please complete the quote by providing the contextual information for the time frame over which this event is predicted by climate science to occur,...or was it naiveté which led you to believe that Gore meant that this would happen within weeks of the big screen release of his documentary?

 

[kmortis]

This is the thread to discuss the science of AGW (aka Global Warming, Climate Change, etc.), not the politics or any of the alternate theories of same. Please take those to this thread, which I handily created just for that purpose.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: kmortis

 

[macdoc]

Thanks for the clean up in Aisle 6...

We really need a cope and mitigate thread separate from the climate change science thread to discuss what is actually being DONE as the world warms....from the Dutch dikes to changes in agriculture...instead of just talked about.

I'd kick it off with this.

This blew me away....some are really on the front lines of climate change ...and THIS guy does something to mitigate the hit for poor communities....something just brilliant..

Everyone thought his ideas for making ice sounded crazy, but now he's a national hero.

http://www.upworthy.com/everyone-th...m=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+upworthy+(Upworthy)

Watch both videos too.

 

[Red Baron Farms]

We really need a cope and mitigate thread separate from the climate change science thread to discuss what is actually being DONE as the world warms....from the Dutch dikes to changes in agriculture...instead of just talked about.

Here is something being done right now and being copied extensively:


His best field so far? 11% SOM up from less than 2% SOM. Calculate that if successfully practised worldwide!