- Joined
- 8 June 2008
- Posts
- 12,928
- Reactions
- 18,961
Actually i should check it is actually worse
Is Global Warming becoming unstoppable?
- Thread starter basilio
- Start date
-
- Tags
- global warming
- Joined
- 18 June 2004
- Posts
- 1,045
- Reactions
- 638
Well ...
Trying to debate physics or science is a waste of time.
Alarming developments in the Arctic which is NOT included in any IPCC estimate about climate change.
Its missing due to USA and Canada and Saudi Arabia demanding it be excluded.
Bottom line the 2 degree which will be bad is assured at 4 degrees by 2100. Possibly MORE is a distinct possibility if more feedback loops occur such as less rain in the Amazon.
I find this guy interesting and his research excellent and backed by just factual information.
Debating with someone who doesn't even accept any science, refutes all evidence is sadly what the debate is .... akin to those who deny gravity.
Actually having done so, debating people denying science and gravity is not evident in their view, was educational as to their logic and thinking, but beyond a point, the debate becomes one where your speaking to your pet cat and expecting it to understand.
I note the total destruction of all multi year Arctic sea ice occurred in 2019. Its all GONE. Whilst ice still at the level well above an Arctic blue event of say 1.5 million sq km, its sadly looking likely the event which IPCC ... the United nations supposed peak body which discarded this event as it would NOT occur till post 2100 is likely if not assured pre 2040 if not 2030 if we were to have a few more of 2019 summers.
each to their own.
Allergic to cats, so not about to discuss or try and explain ... enjoy that denial of gravity existing, if that's your thing.
Take care
Trying to debate physics or science is a waste of time.
Alarming developments in the Arctic which is NOT included in any IPCC estimate about climate change.
Its missing due to USA and Canada and Saudi Arabia demanding it be excluded.
Bottom line the 2 degree which will be bad is assured at 4 degrees by 2100. Possibly MORE is a distinct possibility if more feedback loops occur such as less rain in the Amazon.
I find this guy interesting and his research excellent and backed by just factual information.
Debating with someone who doesn't even accept any science, refutes all evidence is sadly what the debate is .... akin to those who deny gravity.
Actually having done so, debating people denying science and gravity is not evident in their view, was educational as to their logic and thinking, but beyond a point, the debate becomes one where your speaking to your pet cat and expecting it to understand.
I note the total destruction of all multi year Arctic sea ice occurred in 2019. Its all GONE. Whilst ice still at the level well above an Arctic blue event of say 1.5 million sq km, its sadly looking likely the event which IPCC ... the United nations supposed peak body which discarded this event as it would NOT occur till post 2100 is likely if not assured pre 2040 if not 2030 if we were to have a few more of 2019 summers.
each to their own.
Allergic to cats, so not about to discuss or try and explain ... enjoy that denial of gravity existing, if that's your thing.
Take care
Logique
Investor
- Joined
- 18 April 2007
- Posts
- 4,290
- Reactions
- 768
..someone who doesn't even accept any science, refutes all evidence ..kahuna1
A better description of the warmist lovies you would not get. In these threads, hundreds of pages of quoted scientific papers debunking the exaggerated hysteria, literally hundreds kahuna1.
We see who are the real luddites.
A better description of the warmist lovies you would not get. In these threads, hundreds of pages of quoted scientific papers debunking the exaggerated hysteria, literally hundreds kahuna1.
We see who are the real luddites.
- Joined
- 25 July 2010
- Posts
- 1,120
- Reactions
- 284
Just thought I'd post this. A reminder that although the scientific theory checks out, our modelling may not
"In July last year, his father was called in to work at around 10pm one night after a leak was spotted on the lower surface of the dam.Fernando Coelho said “The supervisor found the mud leaking,” . Coelho broke into tears as he remembered his father warning him to steer clear of the dam. “That’s going to burst at any time,” he recalled him saying.
FacebookTwitterPinterest
Fernando Coelho. Photograph: Nicolo Lanfranchi/The Guardian
Coelho has related the same events to state prosecutors. A spokesman for prosecutors said they would not comment on an ongoing investigation.
Dam safety experts said that such a leak would mean the dam was not safe.
“A leak like that … would inherently make the dam more unstable,” said David Chambers, an expert on tailings dam failures who co-founded the Center for Science in Public Participation. “Any kind of leak through the face of the dam is significant. It shouldn’t do that if it was working properly.”
FacebookTwitterPinterest
Fernando Coelho. Photograph: Nicolo Lanfranchi/The Guardian
Coelho has related the same events to state prosecutors. A spokesman for prosecutors said they would not comment on an ongoing investigation.
Dam safety experts said that such a leak would mean the dam was not safe.
“A leak like that … would inherently make the dam more unstable,” said David Chambers, an expert on tailings dam failures who co-founded the Center for Science in Public Participation. “Any kind of leak through the face of the dam is significant. It shouldn’t do that if it was working properly.”
- Joined
- 18 June 2004
- Posts
- 1,045
- Reactions
- 638
Meow ...
Earth is flat.
Gravity does not exist.
NASA faked the moon trip.
I note the UN thing quoted did not come from the IPCC .... it came from Koch Brothers funded think tank.
Congratulations.
Meow.
What Hansen actually said ... WAS not what which the AP published.
https://www.desmogblog.com/2018/12/01/decades-denial-american-petroleum-institute-climate-crunch
Or this
https://www.theguardian.com/environ...-hansen-nasa-scientist-climate-change-warning
Usual stuff to discredit science .... for the cat lovers and delusional non thinkers.
Earth is flat.
Gravity does not exist.
NASA faked the moon trip.
I note the UN thing quoted did not come from the IPCC .... it came from Koch Brothers funded think tank.
Congratulations.
Meow.
What Hansen actually said ... WAS not what which the AP published.
https://www.desmogblog.com/2018/12/01/decades-denial-american-petroleum-institute-climate-crunch
Or this
https://www.theguardian.com/environ...-hansen-nasa-scientist-climate-change-warning
Usual stuff to discredit science .... for the cat lovers and delusional non thinkers.
- Joined
- 18 June 2004
- Posts
- 1,045
- Reactions
- 638
Ahh statistics ...
Worlds largest exporter of Iron ore ?
LNG Gas ?
Massive exporter of coal, wheat and a long list of other things...
Hence the per capita CO2 is high, of course it is. We produce 5 times the amount of food we consume and 10 times the resources mineral wise and now export double the energy we use ....
It takes CO2 to produce and farm the crops, mine the other stuff.
Sadly its easy to say misquote the NASA guy in 1988 he and IPCC have been BELOW the actual on their estimates for the past 30 years, NOT above ,,, below reality.
Each to their own ... I will not be around post 2100 when the hard stuff hits. Until say the Antarctic ... ice 3 km thick melts in earnest sea levels maybe rise 1 metre by 2100 ... this will be bad enough. Prior to that radical changes to rain and land use and viability will occur.
The 70 cm guaranteed rise by 2100 or a maybe of 1 metre ... will minimum cause 100 million to need to move and nations like Bangladesh hardest hit.
Permafrost melting and not included in ANY of these numbers MAY add another say 50% by 2100 and it seems assured this occurs. How much sooner is I suppose the debate ... Best maths and models suggesting it hits in 2070 .... instead of 2170 ... then again USA pulled out of UN ... stopped paying its fair share of its funding and on the issues outside climate, USA is ... for USA and bugger all else.
Glad to see New York is going to build a wall of mud to keep the high tides out of Wall St ... good luck ... spend 500 million on more Pumps for Miami and again, a waste of time beyond the next 30 years. Trump will be gone by then ..., One Koch brother is gone thankfully ... our own funder of climate denial Gina Rhinehart who funds it to support her Qld coal mines will hopefully gone soon up there with Koch or should I say DOWN there with Koch brother number one.
- Joined
- 29 January 2006
- Posts
- 7,217
- Reactions
- 4,438
Wrong by a very large margin - use data rather than make up nonsense!
The USA is the single largest contributor to cumulative CO2 emissions, despite having about a quarter of China's population.
The largest per capita emitters of CO2 do not include China.
Per capita hides that China is actually the highest emitter overall.
- Joined
- 30 June 2008
- Posts
- 15,501
- Reactions
- 7,370
Its all accelerating ... the IPPC report is heavily influenced by CC denialist governments that are trying to minimise the extent of the changes.
Having said that what they have reported is dark.
Climate change 'hitting harder and sooner' than forecast, warn scientists ahead of UN meeting
A new report published ahead of key UN climate talks has warned the world is falling drastically behind in the race to avert climate disaster, with the five-year period ending in 2019 the hottest on record.
Key points:
The data, compiled by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), says climate change is accelerating, with sea levels rising, carbon dioxide levels increasing and ice sheets melting faster than ever before.
It warned that carbon-cutting efforts have to be intensified immediately and comes ahead of a major UN climate summit in New York on Monday that will be attended by more than 60 world leaders, as secretary-general Antonio Guterres pushes for countries to increase their greenhouse gas reduction targets.
The report "highlights the urgent need for the development of concrete actions that halt global warming and the worst effects of climate change," said its authors, the Science Advisory Group to the summit.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-09-23/climate-change-accelerating-warn-scientists/11537240
Having said that what they have reported is dark.
Climate change 'hitting harder and sooner' than forecast, warn scientists ahead of UN meeting
A new report published ahead of key UN climate talks has warned the world is falling drastically behind in the race to avert climate disaster, with the five-year period ending in 2019 the hottest on record.
Key points:
- The new report revealed that global temperatures between 2015-2019 were the hottest on record
- It noted carbon emissions in the same period had risen by 20 per cent
- Its authors also warned of the alarming extent of sea-level rise and melting glaciers
The data, compiled by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), says climate change is accelerating, with sea levels rising, carbon dioxide levels increasing and ice sheets melting faster than ever before.
It warned that carbon-cutting efforts have to be intensified immediately and comes ahead of a major UN climate summit in New York on Monday that will be attended by more than 60 world leaders, as secretary-general Antonio Guterres pushes for countries to increase their greenhouse gas reduction targets.
The report "highlights the urgent need for the development of concrete actions that halt global warming and the worst effects of climate change," said its authors, the Science Advisory Group to the summit.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-09-23/climate-change-accelerating-warn-scientists/11537240
wayneL
VIVA LA LIBERTAD, CARAJO!
- Joined
- 9 July 2004
- Posts
- 25,833
- Reactions
- 13,053
Like, global socialism, per chance?
- Joined
- 14 February 2005
- Posts
- 15,220
- Reactions
- 17,295
"per capita" won't save the planet.
Eg Australia's emissions are down approximately 27% per capita since the year 2005 or 35% since 1990 so if we take the "per capita" argument as valid, then we need do nothing more in order to meet our Paris obligations other than maintain constant emissions per capita going forward. No need for anyone to protest, we're doing exactly as promised.
Trouble is, the "per capita" argument won't fix the problem and that's easily illustrated by pointing out that constant "per capita" emissions will see Australia's total emissions increase by 20% between now and 2030 assuming population goes from 25 million to 30 million as expected.
Now what's the bet that there's an argument put forward that despite the 27% cut per capita from 2005 exactly as promised, Australia's growing total emissions are seen as a problem? Is anyone seriously expecting to not see that argument put forward over the coming decade or so?
In the real world it's total emissions, not per capita, which matters.
If the entire population of the world was 5 million and the biggest city on earth was Bendigo then quite simply none of this would matter. They could be stoking up coal fires all day every day and it just wouldn't matter in the slightest.
That's there's 7.7 billion and rising, each seeking high per capita resource consumption, is what makes it a problem.
- Joined
- 14 February 2005
- Posts
- 15,220
- Reactions
- 17,295
I have used the Kelvin scale specifically to avoid the problem you refer to.
Many members of the general public, particularly in places where temperatures rarely if ever go below zero, seem to think that if the temperature drops from 30'C to 15'C then it has halved. Or that rising from 20'C overnight to 40'C during the day means it has doubled.
Since Kelvin starts at absolute zero it avoids that problem hence why I've used it.
To use your speed analogy, we're not talking about an increase of 1 km/h without knowing whether that's from 0 to 1 or if it's from 300 to 301. Rather, we're talking about an increase that, rounded to the nearest whole degree, is from 287 to 288 degrees above absolute zero.
Noting that I have clearly stated I am referring to percentages and sticking to the simplest terms which suffice, the issue is climate not purist maths, I will step this through to ensure no confusion.
8000 / 8000 would be 100%. No argument there hopefully.
1000 / 8000 = 12.5% or 1 in 8
100 / 8000 = 1.25% or 1 in 80
10 / 8000 = 0.125% or 1 in 800
1 / 8000 = 0.0125% or 1 in 8000
- Joined
- 14 February 2005
- Posts
- 15,220
- Reactions
- 17,295
Hence my thinking that there's more to this than CO2 and other accepted greenhouse gases and my pondering of what those other things may be.
That doesn't mean CO2 etc aren't a problem, it means they're plausibly not the only cause and that would explain why actual warming, melting etc seems to be exceeding projections.
- Joined
- 29 January 2006
- Posts
- 7,217
- Reactions
- 4,438
That's two fails.I have used the Kelvin scale specifically to avoid the problem you refer to.
Many members of the general public, particularly in places where temperatures rarely if ever go below zero, seem to think that if the temperature drops from 30'C to 15'C then it has halved. Or that rising from 20'C overnight to 40'C during the day means it has doubled.
Since Kelvin starts at absolute zero it avoids that problem hence why I've used it.
To use your speed analogy, we're not talking about an increase of 1 km/h without knowing whether that's from 0 to 1 or if it's from 300 to 301. Rather, we're talking about an increase that, rounded to the nearest whole degree, is from 287 to 288 degrees above absolute zero.
Noting that I have clearly stated I am referring to percentages and sticking to the simplest terms which suffice, the issue is climate not purist maths, I will step this through to ensure no confusion.
8000 / 8000 would be 100%. No argument there hopefully.
1000 / 8000 = 12.5% or 1 in 8
100 / 8000 = 1.25% or 1 in 80
10 / 8000 = 0.125% or 1 in 800
1 / 8000 = 0.0125% or 1 in 8000
You specifically stated an increase in temperature of 1K against the temperature scale and not the planet's average temperature.
Unless you could answer my km/hour question your explanation is not valid.
And 1/8000 was provided as a fraction, not as 100% of itself - that's absurd.
The Roaring Forties winds are part of the polar vortex , caused by the angular momentum of the smaller global distance there. It is low pressure and maybe industrial gases collect there ?
It's said the north pole has a brown haze in the air. There is ozone layer hole , ultra violet light and the aurora ionisation. Who knows what chemical mixing is going on with methane etc. The most temperature alteration is at the poles and heat then is another new factor.
It's said the north pole has a brown haze in the air. There is ozone layer hole , ultra violet light and the aurora ionisation. Who knows what chemical mixing is going on with methane etc. The most temperature alteration is at the poles and heat then is another new factor.
- Joined
- 29 January 2006
- Posts
- 7,217
- Reactions
- 4,438
No - it will not.
But we are quick to demonise countries which have not had the opportunity to reach our standard of living, despite the fact that we, on average, are more culpable.
We have been happy to send poorer countries or rubbish, and manufacturing industries, thereby offsetting our per capita emissions while increasing theirs, and now we want to blame them for apparently becoming the problem.
Whereas, in reality, the problem has significantly been the USA because we should be talking about why we are where we are.
