Is Global Warming becoming unstoppable?

[Sdajii]

And again, we see the alarmist go on emotional rants (note the frequent use of CAPS etc) and failing to stay relevant or make logical connections. The strawman tactic is used, as usual, and this time the entire post is more or less a strawman.

The age of the ARCTIC permafrost ... is NOT able to be questioned. Carbon dating is quite accurate. The decay of the various atoms .... Yet you do ...

Evidence and links already provided .... and ignored as per usual.

Here we see the emotional use of CAPS, an irrelevant strawman which isn't quite true (it's fine to question the age of the permafrost, but no one here has disputed it), irrelevant reference to the accuracy of carbon dating since no one has questioned it, complaints about something irrelevant not being addressed...

somehow during your supposed warming period ..100,000 years ago ... . IT DID NOT MELT.

Clear loss of ability to compose emotion, and here we see the alarmist hypocritically make the assumption that the entire world must warm evenly. As we typically see with the alarmists, they will happily point out cold weather or prehistoric warm periods as anomalies or regional exceptions, but when it suits their agenda, a localised example is hypocritically used as evidence for the entire system, no doubt being the cause of the emotional nature of the outburst and lack of sense.

This is your latest theory, NOT mine ..

Strawman tactic again.

At the other end of the earth,ANTARCTIC ... ICE BUBBLES capturing the AIR and CO2 content dating also back in the 800,000 to a million year range ... which I might add 5 nations have drilled ice cores to sample CO2 and other gasses back a million years ....

You also dispute and refute this

More emotional strawman tactics. Completely irrelevant too. No one disputed it, yet the alarmist for some reason claims it during the emotional rant.

ICE aged 800,000 to a milli0on years at both extremes of the planet, the polar regions and BOTH clearly frozen for nearly a million years and you ...

The alarmist is presumably oblivious to the fact that many factors such as changing air and water currents, continental drift, localised climates, etc, can cause things to remain frozen or thaw out at times which don't correspond with the average global temperature. It is interesting that the alarmist maintains the capacity to point out the existence of localised temperature anomalies when it suits the agenda but in a tantrum, act like such things don't exist when it suits the agenda.

Deny it ? All date is questioned, even satellite data on CO2 ... all ground stations, even one 16,000 km away from any land ... the wind blowing over the ocean ...

And all data dismissed.

Yet again, the alarmist continues with an irrelevant strawman, making baseless and false assertions.

How if there was some warming period did the ICE and PERMAFROST frozen stuff survive ?

Surely even the stupid know the top layers of the Permafrost with the most recent material ... with Frozen Mammoths would have thawed and decayed. not being pristine and still with stomach contents ... woolly fur and even eyeballs preserved. Below the top layers ... deeper you go older it gets ....

As above.

Santa ? Aliens ? You seriously must tell us how this occurred. Pristine never been thawed, ergo no warming period of any significance your alluding to ....

But still ... you drool your theories. Something occurred 100,000 years ago ... a magical global warming period ... according to you !!

ICE stopped melting as well ?

BTW this is number 27 of your quite bizarre theories.

The emotional tantrum continues and as is often the case, ad hominem attacks are used.

Interestingly, the alarmist is so deranged that he concocts a theory imagined in the mind of someone else and adds it to a list he is keeping which he believes came from someone else. Literally projecting his own imagination of a bizarre theory into the mind of another person and literally believing that person came up with the theory!

Santa cant be two places at once.
Either he lives at the North Pole or South Pole !!

And as seems to be a pattern, the post ends on a particularly bizarre note.

When some alarmists are behaving like this, and other vocal climate change deniers support them or say nothing, it is no wonder that many people are driven to take a completely contrarian point of view. People do tend to want to belong to groups and see people as being part of one group or another, and many people would not want to be in the same group as someone making such insane posts.

 

[kahuna1]

Not once did you address the fact that there are two massive ice blocks at either end of the earth.
Both clearly 1 million years old.

Your denial of science in favor of a quaint view, that you hold, not any other scientist, that the earth had a massive significant warming period in the last 100,000 years.

I thought you told me that the ocean was 120 meters LOWER as well during this period ?

Doesn't water expand when heated ? Ice melt when heated ? Or was the movement of the tectonic plates and relative land being pushed up in some cases a factor in this ?

You cannot explain, as expected how these ice blocks, one at each end of the earth exist. Their mere existence shows the lack of any possibility your bizarre theory, about a warming period of significance in the last million years, has any validity.

Instead of addressing this anomaly, that can only exist in your delusional world, you skipped science.
Nothing new in that.

it is no wonder that many people are driven to take a completely contrarian point of view

That common sense and basic intelligence would lead one to be able to debunk some internet conspiracy theorists view in this case, does not seem to sink in. How is it possible ?

Are you driven to take the opposite view ? Is that what your alluding to ??
You have some weird compulsion to just argue and be the opposite even when it makes you look stupid ?

My use of CAPS or end of posts in frustration, is driven by sheer disbelief at the absurdity of your theories and displayed utter lack of any concept of science.

UTTER LACK. That we were having to tell you and your co-Hort that ICE cores dont exist on Cape Grim which is in Tasmania I thought was absurd.

Now the existence of ice blocks at earth end of the earth that are around a million years old, is denied.
Your view is that some warming period occurred in the last 100,000 years, so they DON'T or cant exist and as such are to be ignored.

That has been your lack of response of late.

In the real world, the melting of the Arctic and Antarctic is proceeding at an unprecedented rate.
The Arctic permafrost of frozen dead animal and vegetable matter Is 1.8 trillion tons of captured carbon that has existed for a million years.

Its thawing. First time for a long time. The second canary of the planet. I did cover the Great Barrier Reef and its imminent death. Some Reefs clearly already gone, Mackay Reef, Green Reef and so on. A lot of others well under 15% of their 1985 levels.

No response. Its in your world not real.
Thank you for your lack of response, on topic.

Santa in light of your being naughty has decided to send you, a clearly person who will appreciate it, his booby prize for naughty children and that's a Christmas stocking filled with coal.

If you feel compelled to respond, please tell us, how these million year old ice blocks existed in your phantom warming of 100,000 years ago !! I know you believe ice cores exist at Cape Grim in Tasmania so is this in some way related to your new theory ?

 

[rederob]

And again, we see the alarmist go on emotional rants (note the frequent use of CAPS etc) and failing to stay relevant or make logical connections. The strawman tactic is used, as usual, and this time the entire post is more or less a strawman.

The "rants" are a response to your inability to show that you understand what you are talking about.
What you say about climate science is mostly nonsensical.
But you keep on saying the same stuff.
Unfortunately when you get caught out you wander off topic and make spurious claims about about how other posters are presenting their arguments.
It remains that those who cannot argue the science will instead write furiously about other things, and think we do not notice.

 

[Struzball]

Not once did you address the fact that there are two massive ice blocks at either end of the earth.
Both clearly 1 million years old.

...

I thought you told me that the ocean was 120 meters LOWER as well during this period ?

...

You cannot explain, as expected how these ice blocks, one at each end of the earth exist. Their mere existence shows the lack of any possibility your bizarre theory, about a warming period of significance in the last million years, has any validity.

...

Now the existence of ice blocks at earth end of the earth that are around a million years old, is denied.
Your view is that some warming period occurred in the last 100,000 years, so they DON'T or cant exist and as such are to be ignored.

...

If you feel compelled to respond, please tell us, how these million year old ice blocks existed in your phantom warming of 100,000 years ago !!

We are currently in the quaternary ice age, which began 2.58 million years ago.

Ice ages are characterised by ice caps at the poles.

We are currently in an interglacial period within that quarternary ice age, called the Holocene, which began 11,700 years ago with rapid warming that raised sea levels by 120 metres.

Interglacials are characterised by receding glaciers.

Human civilisation as we know it has only existed in an interglacial period.

So what else would you expect of an interglacial within an ice age, but ice caps at the poles and receding glaciers?

 

[Sdajii]

We are currently in the quaternary ice age, which began 2.58 million years ago.

Ice ages are characterised by ice caps at the poles.

We are currently in an interglacial period within that quarternary ice age, called the Holocene, which began 11,700 years ago with rapid warming that raised sea levels by 120 metres.

Interglacials are characterised by receding glaciers.

Human civilisation as we know it has only existed in an interglacial period.

So what else would you expect of an interglacial within an ice age, but ice caps at the poles and receding glaciers?

If you've read kahuna's posts you'll see how irrational he is. He has a simplistic view of the climate, dismisses any reality which is contradictory to his simplistic idea, even if it is universally accepted by climate science, such as everything you've said in this post, and anything which supports his simplistic view is accepted, even if he imagines it and it has no evidence of any kind. This is likely why he assumes others do the same.

You have, of course, neatly explained the answers to his questions, which of course don't contradict anthropogenic climate change, but he will presumably deny them anyway, partly because he already has, and partly because his concept of climate change is simplistic and the actual data is contradictory to it. He will presumably use the typical pattern of hypocritically accusing you of making up figures with no basis, because your data (which is actually real) contradicts his concepts (which actually are made up). He is so convinced of the narrative and so caught up in the delusion, that he is able to twist the actual reality he sees to fit the fictional reality which sits in his mind. Consistent with people who do this, he projects the insanity on to the people he is conversing with, so the confusion caused by the conflict of his imagined reality and the real one is reconciled by believing that the other person is the one doing the twisting of reality.

 

[kahuna1]

We are currently in an interglacial period within that quarternary ice age, called the Holocene, which began 11,700 years ago with rapid warming that raised sea levels by 120 metres.

Yes the aboriginals moved their mounds of shells 50 km ... NOT .

his has been confirmed by radiocarbon dating
of marine clay at Sungei Nipa with dates of 7,000 to 8,000 BP obtained from shells and wood at
depths ranging from 5-10m below modern sea-level ...

How did 5-10 become 120 meters ?

 

[Struzball]

his has been confirmed by radiocarbon dating
of marine clay at Sungei Nipa with dates of 7,000 to 8,000 BP obtained from shells and wood at
depths ranging from 5-10m below modern sea-level ...

How did 5-10 become 120 meters ?

How does sea level being 5-10m below modern sea-level 7000-8000 years ago contradict sea level being 120m lower 11,700 years ago?
The Holocene had already been underway for over three thousand years at this point.

 

[Sdajii]

How does sea level being 5-10m below modern sea-level 7000-8000 years ago contradict sea level being 120m lower 11,700 years ago?
The Holocene had already been underway for over three thousand years at this point.

See what I mean? Strange mental gymnastics are employed to deny well-known and undisputed facts to maintain the peculiar delusions, which oddly, is done to 'prove' the narrative the alarmist believes scientists are pushing.

I often say it, I strongly believe the people on the alarmist side are on average more crazy than those on the other side. It's very difficult to quantify, but one thing is more or less for sure, and that is people like kahuna are very common, while 'climate sceptics' of a similar extent of insanity are much less abundant.

This abundance of insanity on the alarmist side does whip up the whole side into an exaggerated and false state of belief in the issue, and no doubt alienates some into moving to the (I cringe to say it) more rational sceptic side. Of course, if you include those who are simply sceptical of the extent the narrative suggests rather than the issue existing at all, they are often perfectly rational.

The insanity we see typified here, where someone unconditionally believes and extremely warped and exaggerated version of a situation and has come to a state where no amount of evidence will help and the use of logic to see the situation properly, no matter how simple it may be to do so, has become impossible.

This phenomenon isn't unique to the climate issue and we're seeing it in a rapidly increasing number of people afflicted by it. It covers political, social, scientific and other issues. It is quite like the mindset the government in Nineteen Eighty-four sought to create in people. About 10-15 years ago I started noticing people slipping into it. At first I just thought a few intelligent people I knew happened to have literally gone insane, but over the last 5-10 years it has accelerated rapidly and become an obvious pattern.

 

[kahuna1]

We have been down this raod before ....

Land rises or falls as tectonic plates collide. If you wish to NOT take this into account, its absurd.
Karatha just outside it, near the Pluto plant lies the oldest rock carvings dated at between 35,000 and 50,000 years ago, dated and with piles of shells from the sea ....

If your going to suggest it was 120 meters below that as you have, and they carried 35,000 year old sea shells to 100,000 odd rock carvings, well .. its interesting.

Whilst I am not calling you an idiot, your theories are delusional and non scientific. Even simple stuff like air bubbles inside ice cores ,,, your deny and dispute.

CO2 being a cause of climate change ...the main one ...
on and on ... you have gone, now with a new fellow joining you.

You do not even accept satellite data ... nor even pictures ... all of it is fake according to you.

You know better than 50,000 scientists on the IPCC ... your theories deny 26 things they find beyond questioning.

They are worried but according to you .... its all fake and exaggerated. If you look, their predictions are falling short of reality and have done so now for 5 years. Let alone the missing feedback loops not included in IPCC estimates such as what happens when the Arctic melts and the permafrost releases 1.8 trillion tons of CO2 and a lot of bloody methane frozen on the Arctic seabed.

NONE of it in the IPCC estimates which already, are being questioned as absurdly optimistic and this is 2019 not the 2050 or 2100 stuff, is correct according to your delusions. NONE OF IT.

Do you accept any IPCC prediction say of 25 cm sea rise by 2050 v 2019 or 75 cm by 2100 ?

Do you accept change in PH by 2100 to 7.7 v 8.1 in 2019 ?

Do you accept 1.5 degree ... C change if we act NOW by 2100 ?

On this last one ... most of the contributors estimate 2.5 if not 4 degrees and some as high as 8 if Arctic Ice melts which is a given.

DO you accept any of their findings ?


You don't accept even a best case .... a very unlikely best case they put forward and this is 50,000 leading scientists and in your view, its all .... hysterical or scientifically incorrect or ... manufactured. I think insanity has you !!

Congratulations.
delusional and non scientific

The true conspiracy theorist.

 

[Sdajii]

We have been down this raod before ....

Land rises or falls as tectonic plates collide. If you wish to NOT take this into account, its absurd.
Karatha just outside it, near the Pluto plant lies the oldest rock carvings dated at between 35,000 and 50,000 years ago, dated and with piles of shells from the sea ....

If your going to suggest it was 120 meters below that as you have, and they carried 35,000 year old sea shells to 100,000 odd rock carvings, well .. its interesting.

Whilst I am not calling you an idiot, your theories are delusional and non scientific. Even simple stuff like air bubbles inside ice cores ,,, your deny and dispute.

CO2 being a cause of climate change ...the main one ...
on and on ... you have gone, now with a new fellow joining you.

You do not even accept satellite data ... nor even pictures ... all of it is fake according to you.

You know better than 50,000 scientists on the IPCC ... your theories deny 26 things they find beyond questioning.

They are worried but according to you .... its all fake and exaggerated. If you look, their predictions are falling short of reality and have done so now for 5 years. Let alone the missing feedback loops not included in IPCC estimates such as what happens when the Arctic melts and the permafrost releases 1.8 trillion tons of CO2 and a lot of bloody methane frozen on the Arctic seabed.

NONE of it in the IPCC estimates which already, are being questioned as absurdly optimistic and this is 2019 not the 2050 or 2100 stuff, is correct according to your delusions. NONE OF IT.

Do you accept any IPCC prediction say of 25 cm sea rise by 2050 v 2019 or 75 cm by 2100 ?

Do you accept change in PH by 2100 to 7.7 v 8.1 in 2019 ?

Do you accept 1.5 degree ... C change if we act NOW by 2100 ?

On this last one ... most of the contributors estimate 2.5 if not 4 degrees and some as high as 8 if Arctic Ice melts which is a given.

DO you accept any of their findings ?


You don't accept even a best case .... a very unlikely best case they put forward and this is 50,000 leading scientists and in your view, its all .... hysterical or scientifically incorrect or ... manufactured. I think insanity has you !!

Congratulations.
delusional and non scientific

The true conspiracy theorist.

...and here we see the deluded invidual go on a lengthy rant, primarily made up of assertions that someone believes a certain thing, despite literally not one single thing being a claim they have made or refuted. Not only that, but the majority of it is irrelevant to the posts he is responding to, clearly the primary purpose is to distract himself from seeing the reality he is ignoring in a post made by someone else, which he is not directly addressing. It is interesting that he continually makes very bold and specific claims about someone denying things which that person has never even mentioned, all the while clearly in an emotional frenzy.

While the climate change sceptics may also get things quite wrong, unlike the alarmists, we do not tend to see anywhere near the degree or frequency of such unhinged emotional tactics used to ignore facts and logic. They are typically at least able to state their case and have a conversation with which makes some form of sense. There is not the same denial of reality. Perhaps facts and figures may not be accepted due to mistrust of the sources, etc, but we don't typically see the blatant imagination such as kahuna is displaying, where a lengthy post is made, full of imagination that a person said things, and denial of what they actually said. This is clear denial of basic, unambiguous reality, and the creation of an imaginary world in their minds.

 

[kahuna1]

Losing Arctic Ice and Permafrost Will Cost Trillions as Earth Warms, Study Says

Thawing permafrost releases greenhouse gases in a climate change feedback loop that worsens over time, fueling more warming and costly damage around the world.

It's considered one of the big tipping points in climate change: as the permafrost thaws, the methane and CO2 it releases will trigger more global warming, which will trigger more thawing. The impacts aren't constrained to the Arctic—the additional warming will also fuel sea level rise, extreme weather, drought, wildfires and more.

https://insideclimatenews.org/news/...-climate-change-costs-feedback-loop-ice-study

Its not in any IPCC model .... sadly ....

 

[kahuna1]

While the climate change sceptics may also get things quite wrong, unlike the alarmists, we do not tend to see anywhere near the degree or frequency of such unhinged emotional tactics used to ignore facts and logic.

I asked a few simple questions about what the IPCC and 50,000 scientists believe .

Are they delusional ?

DO you accept any of their predictions on temperature ?
Or on sea rises ?

Any single issue ?

Are they alarmists ? The Nobel prize winners in the field ?

Are they being hysterical ?

 

[Struzball]

We have been down this raod before ....

Land rises or falls as tectonic plates collide. If you wish to NOT take this into account, its absurd.
Karatha just outside it, near the Pluto plant lies the oldest rock carvings dated at between 35,000 and 50,000 years ago, dated and with piles of shells from the sea ....

If your going to suggest it was 120 meters below that as you have, and they carried 35,000 year old sea shells to 100,000 odd rock carvings, well .. its interesting.

You’re in the wrong epoch now. The Pleistocene. There were both warmer and cooler periods during the Pleistocene (but mostly cooler).

Again, the fact they found 35,000 sea shells somewhere does not contradict that they were 120m lower 11,700 years ago.

 

[kahuna1]

I asked a few simple questions about what the IPCC and 50,000 scientists believe .

Are they delusional ?

DO you accept any of their predictions on temperature ?
Or on sea rises ?

Any single issue ?

Are they alarmists ? The Nobel prize winners in the field ?

Are they being hysterical ?


PS the shells were 35,000 years OLD .... not the number of them ... there were millions in various piles along the coast.

 

[Struzball]

I asked a few simple questions about what the IPCC and 50,000 scientists believe .

Are they delusional ?

DO you accept any of their predictions on temperature ?
Or on sea rises ?

Any single issue ?

Are they alarmists ? The Nobel prize winners in the field ?

Are they being hysterical ?


PS the shells were 35,000 years OLD .... not the number of them ... there were millions in various piles along the coast.

Lol, at least I know you actually read my posts, and then ignore them.

Obviously a type error, I know you are talking about 35,000yo shells.

 

[Struzball]

I asked a few simple questions about what the IPCC and 50,000 scientists believe .

Are they delusional ?

DO you accept any of their predictions on temperature ?
Or on sea rises ?

No I don’t accept predictions as fact.

Do you?

Besides, they call them “projections” so they can be taken more seriously.

 

[kahuna1]

No I don’t accept predictions as fact.

We are talking about the future, I have designed models, computer models for a very long time.

I am well aware they are NOT facts, merely best science predictions and in this case, watered down ones.

No I don’t accept predictions as fact.

Do you?

Besides, they call them “projections” so they can be taken more seriously.

It is NOT about my beliefs, but yours. I asked.

Do you accept any of the projections, or predictions as presented by IPCC ?

Not as being fact, but being based upon best science and literally the best math brains in the world along with computer modelling.

Do they have any validity in your opinion ?
Does the science behind these projections in your opinion pose a problem ?
Or is it the math behind the computer models ?

You still have not answered any of my questions. NOT one.

Do you accept any IPCC prediction say of 25 cm sea rise by 2050 v 2019 or 75 cm by 2100 ?

Do you accept change in PH by 2100 to 7.7 v 8.1 in 2019 ?

Do you accept 1.5 degree ... C change if we act NOW by 2100 ?

Simple enough .... projections ... predictions ... based upon rate of change and TIME and MATH. No externals such as feedback loops like permafrost melting are in there ... nor change in PH what it may or may not do to the ocean and its CO2 and Oxygen production ....

Do you accept any of the above may be close to the outcome ?

DO you accept any of their findings ?

I asked you, but NO ... with good cause, I am the other side of the predictions that they have been watered down ... a view I might add held by 24,000 scientists in a peer reviewed paper on this topic ...

But that is MY view, I looked at the science, then the model, then the papers ... and listened to 100 or so sources ... and agreed that the Models are likely to fall way short of reality. I made this decision prior to the 2017 paper ... and well ... 2019 data is showing it sadly to be correct that the numbers are all well above IPCC estimates for the fiorst time since 1993 and getting worse.

But do you believe or accept any of their science ? Not just you struzzball but Saiji ...

I am fascinated to find if you accept any of it. Any projection or prediction they make.

Not as fact, but a likely outcome ? Can you even accept that ? A very likely outcome ?

Temperature change ? Sea level rise ? Even Arctic ice melt ? PH level falling ?

 

[Struzball]

It really is of no consequence how likely I consider a prediction.

I honestly have no idea what will happen in the future.

Anybody who does is kidding themselves. They may as well predict what the stock market will be at in 2050.

 

[kahuna1]

Anybody who does is kidding themselves.

Strange ... still no answer.

Some things have a high frequency of being able to be predicted. A high probability.

Some things you don't think can be predicted, well ... can .... In this, I am not kidding myself or being delusional. Nor the scientists.

Charting a stock market ... is quite different than a rock falling from the sky when it reaches terminal velocity .... one can predict with extreme accuracy where it will be when dropped from 10,000 meters PRIOR to hitting the ground.

So in your case you don't accept any computer model ?

PH levels measured in the ocean with extreme accuracy via 3,000 deep diving sensors and measuring PH levels .... rising and rising and rising at even a faster rate. Its not hard ...

Same with temperature ... same with ice melting and similar with CO2 levels rising ...

So in your case you don't accept any computer model ? even a rock falling at 9.8 mt per second per second till it reaches terminal velocity .... the maximum gravity will propel it ... nope we cant
predict that ? Nor can any scientist, computer geek or even an actuary ...

I await Anne and Sadiji ... if they would care to share.

 

[rederob]

Anybody who does is kidding themselves. They may as well predict what the stock market will be at in 2050.

That's an absurd idea.
AGW is a theory because it uses science to explain how climate changes over time.
The science relies on basic physics.
Climate science is actually very easy.
If heat is prevented from leaving the planet at greater rates over time, then the planet will warm (assuming minimal changes to irradiance).
If you think that climate science is deficient, what are your grounds?