Global Cooling. The sky is falling.

[Alan Klein]

Charts don't mean anything if all the factors are not known.   If you're missing a component, the conclusion could be false. 

[RSL]

Exactly, Alan. But I'd go a step further and say that the conclusions almost certainly are false.

[Peter McLennan]

Exactly, Alan. But I'd go a step further and say that the conclusions almost certainly are false.

Yup.  Because we all know better than them damned commie scientists.

[LesPalenik]

While on the subject of charts, here is an interesting one. Even if you don't believe those numbers and cut it in half, it is quite alarming. More CO2 emitted in the last 30 years than in all preceeding years.



https://www.statista.com/chart/13584/worldwide-carbon-emissions-from-fossil-fuel-consumption-and-cement-production/

[Alan Klein]

It's China's fault. 

[LesPalenik]

To some degree, Alan.

In the latest news there was a refreshing item, describing a different kind of a scientitific project.  Sometimes, it takes a team of real scientists to discover some unforeseen and undesired changes on the planet, and then a concerted effort to counteract such changes. When the great explorer James Cook visited South Georgia islands in 1775, the islands were teaming with wildlife, mainly birds. The birds must nest either on the ground or just below it in burrows because there are no trees. When the sealers and whalers started using it as a base in the 19th and 20th centuries, they brought in rats and mice that rapidly multiplied and ate the eggs, chicks and even fully grown birds.

About 9,000 tourists visit these islands and they contributed to South Georgia Heritage Trust, the Scottish charity which started a £10m campaign to protect the biodiversity hotspot. They used helicopters and poison pellets to systematically exterminate the rodents and it seems now they they were 100% sucessful. The birds are already rebounding.
 
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-44046472

Great example of scientists and nature lovers taking an initiative and getting rid of the rats, as opposed to some naysayers who wouldn't pay any atention to the plight of the birds and other wildlife on these islands.

[Alan Klein]

To some degree, Alan.

In the latest news there was a refreshing item, describing a different kind of a scientitific project.  Sometimes, it takes a team of real scientists to discover some unforeseen and undesired changes on the planet, and then a concerted effort to counteract such changes. When the great explorer James Cook visited South Georgia islands in 1775, the islands were teaming with wildlife, mainly birds. The birds must nest either on the ground or just below it in burrows because there are no trees. When the sealers and whalers started using it as a base in the 19th and 20th centuries, they brought in rats and mice that rapidly multiplied and ate the eggs, chicks and even fully grown birds.

About 9,000 tourists visit these islands and they contributed to South Georgia Heritage Trust, the Scottish charity which started a £10m campaign to protect the biodiversity hotspot. They used helicopters and poison pellets to systematically exterminate the rodents and it seems now they they were 100% sucessful. The birds are already rebounding.
 
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-44046472

Great example of scientists and nature lovers taking an initiative and getting rid of the rats, as opposed to some naysayers who wouldn't pay any atention to the plight of the birds and other wildlife on these islands.

Are you suggesting we shoot Chinese?

[LesPalenik]

I knew, I should have split it into two replies.

[pegelli]

Exactly, Alan. But I'd go a step further and say that the conclusions almost certainly are false.

That's a hunch, nothing even close to proof.

[pegelli]

Meanwhile, in North Carolina, the "fake news" climate change is causing more and more of our coast to be flooded.

http://www.newsobserver.com/news/technology/article210413904.html

Thanks for the article.

I wonder how long we have to wait for the religious deniers to discredit the source and/or repeat the hogwash claim it's due to coastal subsidence.

[RSL]

That's a hunch, nothing even close to proof.

Nobody has anything even close to "proof," Pieter, for any of it.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Nobody has anything even close to "proof," Pieter, for any of it.

So, it's not the Chinese?

Alan didn't even supply any proof for that claim, at all.

Cheers,
Bart

[Chairman Bill]

Can I just point out that science doesn't deal in proofs - that's mathematics, philosophy and distilling

[pegelli]

Nobody has anything even close to "proof," Pieter, for any of it.

Apparently you had, but so far unsubstantiated:

Great, Bart. Your charts prove once again that "figures don't lie, but . . ." you know the rest.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Can I just point out that science doesn't deal in proofs - that's mathematics, philosophy and distilling

It matters none, Bill. The deniers do not accept any proof (except maybe from distilling), because one cannot ever know everything ...
They also condemn the scientific research and peer-review, especially when it confirms a hypothesis they don't like.

Even relatively simple things, like measuring the temperature that Earth emits at the surface, and doing the same above the Troposphere (or even Stratosphere), i.e. the Greenhouse effect, is not accepted.

And when science gets even more specific, like breaking down the same temperature difference at the level of wavelengths (which shows which elements caused the absorptions), they will deny the results (even when the absorption spectra can be replicated in controlled laboratory experiments).

Cheers,
Bart

[RSL]

Apparently you had, but so far unsubstantiated:

Okay, Pieter, since it's an aphorism with which you seem not to be familiar, here's the whole thing: "Figures don't lie, but liars figure."

Now I'm not suggesting you're a liar. I'm sure you accept these charts at face value. After all, to you they "prove" what you want proved.

But what you and a lot of other people think they prove is that CO2 and other human-generated "pollutants" (pollutants that make things grow, by the way) are causing "global warming." Of course that overlooks the whole of geologic history which is dominated by a succession of global warmings and coolings. The "planet" may be warming (though there's some evidence it's cooling), but there's certainly no "proof" whatever's happening is caused by anything other than the cosmos, perhaps with a minor contribution from humans (who are part of the cosmos).

And even if global warming exists and humans are causing it (two big ifs) there's no indication the warming is going to be a problem for humanity in general. Yes, it's going to be a problem for people who built stuff too close to the east coast of the U.S., but relative to humanity as a whole that's a pretty small (though vocal) group.

[Alan Goldhammer]

And even if global warming exists and humans are causing it (two big ifs) there's no indication the warming is going to be a problem for humanity in general. Yes, it's going to be a problem for people who built stuff too close to the east coast of the U.S., but relative to humanity as a whole that's a pretty small (though vocal) group.

I'm sure that the citizens of Bangladesh (who are likely to be highest impacted by rising ocean levels) couldn't care less what happens in Florida.  they really don't have much of an alternative in terms of where they locate their housing and are already subject to problems brought about by more extreme weather patterns.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

I'm sure you accept these charts at face value. After all, to you they "prove" what you want proved.

But what you and a lot of other people think they prove is that CO2 and other human-generated "pollutants" (pollutants that make things grow, by the way) are causing "global warming." Of course that overlooks the whole of geologic history which is dominated by a succession of global warmings and coolings.

No, it doesn't overlook that. In fact it has been investigated thoroughly, and it was found that basically none of the major historical causes (before humans could even become extinct, because there were none yet), that could explain the historical changes, can explain the current rapid (and accelerating) change in warming.

In the historical past, those major changes (think major as in Ice-ages) were mainly due to changes in the Earth's orbit and rotation angle relative to the sun (which delivers our heat generating surface temperatures). These are known as Milankovitch cycles . Adjustments were also caused by the shifting of continents that formed mountains (think Himalaya) to permanently change weather patterns and thus climate, and major vulcanic activity.

None of these can explain the current rapid increases of measurable global temperature. However, the influence of Solar Radiative Forcings caused by excess CO2 emissions, do explain the current rapid rise in global temperature. And we also know that the cause of the excess CO2 is caused by the burning of fossil fuel, because of the ratio of Carbon isotopes and because of the ratio of Carbon and Oxide in the atmosphere (Oxide is used for burning, Carbon is released, so the ratio changes in an almost perfect correlation).

Also, major historical changes took a long time, e.g. in the order of 40000 years between Ice-ages. The current warming and increases of CO2 started when the industrial revolution started, and really accelerated in the second half of last century when we started burning amounts of fossil fuels in unprecedented amounts. We're talking decades instead of millennia now, and that's one of the major concerns, the rate of change in a relatively short period of time.

The "planet" may be warming (though there's some evidence it's cooling), but there's certainly no "proof" whatever's happening is caused by anything other than the cosmos, perhaps with a minor contribution from humans (who are part of the cosmos).

Sorry to burst your bubble, but there is lots of proof. Even some oil-companies warned about it in the '90s:
Shell made a film about climate change in 1991 then neglected to heed its own warning

And even if global warming exists and humans are causing it (two big ifs) there's no indication the warming is going to be a problem for humanity in general. Yes, it's going to be a problem for people who built stuff too close to the east coast of the U.S., but relative to humanity as a whole that's a pretty small (though vocal) group.

Those New Yorkers and others were really really stupid, building their harbors and cities that used the goods being shipped through those harbors near the sea. Is that what you are saying?

Cheers,
Bart

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

I'm sure that the citizens of Bangladesh (who are likely to be highest impacted by rising ocean levels) couldn't care less what happens in Florida.  they really don't have much of an alternative in terms of where they locate their housing and are already subject to problems brought about by more extreme weather patterns.

And just wait for the shit hitting the fan repeatedly in New-York, and other major cities located near the shores ...

Much cheaper to prevent than to cure, even mitigation at this late stage is cheaper than doing nothing.

Cheers,
Bart

[RSL]

I'm sure that the citizens of Bangladesh (who are likely to be highest impacted by rising ocean levels) couldn't care less what happens in Florida.  they really don't have much of an alternative in terms of where they locate their housing and are already subject to problems brought about by more extreme weather patterns.

Well that really stirred things up. Facts usually do.

Okay, Alan, obviously the answer is for American taxpayers to come up with the loot to evacuate all Bangladeshis to California, where they can be taken care of.

What, exactly, is your solution, Alan? All I see on here is hand-wringing about (possibly) rising temperatures, and how we ought to reduce our production of CO2, though nobody's suggested how we might get the world to reduce CO2 emissions enough to have an effect on (maybe) rising temperatures (maybe) caused by CO2 emissions.

It's all speculation. But the posters on here are having a lot of fun speculating, especially Pieter with his speculative charts.