This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Is Global Warming becoming unstoppable?

Come on Sifu, you know I'm right at least half the time.
I don't know, I'm just trying to "be like water, my friend".

Ya know, cups, bottles and tea cups etc
 
Come on Sifu, you know I'm right at least half the time.
I suggest being right on this forum is largely irrelevant.
Much more important to be "right".

Or perhaps Grasshopper, you are saying half the time you are right and the other half of the time you are also "right".
 
I suggest being right on this forum is largely irrelevant.
Much more important to be "right".

True that, teacher.

I saw an interview today where they discussed the findings that C02 at 405 parts per million [?] is the highest it's been in 800,000 years.

That can't be good.

Or perhaps Grasshopper, you are saying half the time you are right and the other half of the time you are also "right".

I just had a Heineken, and even if I didn't, that's too deep for me .
 
I don't know, I'm just trying to "be like water, my friend".

Ya know, cups, bottles and tea cups etc

Were you mocking our Chinese sages there Master Sifu?

Remember that in drinking, "... it is better to stop short than fill to the brim." That and use a coaster

Tao Te Ching:
"The highest good is like water.
Water give life to the ten thousand things and does not strive.
It flows in places men reject and so is like the Tao.

In dwelling, be close to the land.
In meditation, go deep in the heart.
In dealing with others, be gentle and kind.

In speech, be true.
In ruling, be just.
In daily life, be competent."


Recently spent a few weeks finishing my brother's slabs and plumbing so have these audiobook version on repeat.

I read it at uni but got practically nothing out of it. Though Carl Jung's praise that it's the most insightful book in history a bit much... but man, it's quite something once you have it on repeat.
 
I saw an interview today where they discussed the findings that C02 at 405 parts per million [?] is the highest it's been in 800,000 years.

That can't be good.

You realise that means you are pointing out that only 800,000 years ago (long before humans existed but recently in the context of the planet's history), the CO2 levels were higher than they are today. This is only the most recent example.

Spoiler alert: It reversed. The world didn't end.

Again, this doesn't mean I am saying we aren't heading into catastrophe, just that the climate is still well within the natural range in every respect (temperature, CO2 levels, rate of change, etc). Everything happening now has happened many times before, and it has all happened to far, far greater extremes many times. And every time, it reversed.

The climate can get bad enough to wipe us out and it will still be reversible. To make it irreversible we would have to go far, far beyond the point at which humans would all be dead.

You are being completely irrational and twisting every piece of information to a ludicrous extent to unconditionally push your agenda, with no regard for trying to make sense.
 
Regardless of the causes there's also the question of our ability to adapt.

Considering weather events that have occurred in Australia since we've been keeping accurate records, and that only goes back to the 1800's, the following would all seem very plausible with only a fairly small change in climate needed to bring them about.
  • Shade temperature in Adelaide reaches 50 degrees
  • Direct cyclone hit to Brisbane
  • More fire events of the "it just blew up" variety.
How would we go about coping with any of these?

As was the case with last week's floods in Hobart, there's no time to prepare once it arrives so if we're going to plan for Adelaide getting toasted or Brisbane being blown to bits then we'd better do it now not when it's already happened.
 

Curious post. Some of your questions and concerns may well be important, but interestingly, none of it is really relevant to the thread.

Yes, those are some of the more extreme *weather* (not climate) events recorded in the last 200 years or so. They are tiny compared to the most extreme we would have seen if we'd been observing for the last few hundred thousand years.

Obviously, if you observe anything for any amount of time, you will get the most extreme measurements ever recorded during that time! This says nothing about what things were like before you were recording.

Weather/climate fluctuates on cycles ranging from the daily cycle where it gets warmer by day and cooler by night, yearly seasonal cycles, multi year cycles (eg El Nino/La Nina), unnamed but observable cycles over thousands of years (of the magnitude of causing massive sea level changes), hundreds of thousands of years, millions of years, tens of millions of years (eg around 50 million years ago the arctic had a tropical climate!) and perhaps longer, but the planet hasn't been around for long enough to show it.

To try to extrapolate anything from the last 200 years is like taking measurements between 10am and 11am and from that alone predicting what the climate will be like next month. Obviously you'd be predicting armageddon in that timeframe, but you'd be wrong, because you're ignoring the cycles of periods far longer than your reference range.

Even if we were having no impact on the climate and even if the climate was not changing and even if there was a baseline climate which we always stuck to, over the next 300 years, most of the climate/weather records we have taken so far would be broken by greater extremes. This is basic statistics and people on an investment forum should be able to grasp this simple concept.

Since we've only been recording for around 200 years, even if there was zero climate change (I'm not at all saying that's the case by the way), we would recently have seen all manner of records being broken.

Since the climate always changes, always has and probably always will, if you were to start taking measurements at any point over the last billion years, over the following 200 years you would almost always have the climate changing in the same direction over that short 200 year period, so at the end of that period, you would be at the most extreme level ever recorded. You could literally do that for the vast majority of random points over the last billion years. We just happen to have started recording where we did.

It's amazing that even in a forum where statistical analysis is a key focus, most people overlook this basic mathematical reality, and misuse the data to justify playing Chicken Little.
 
Actually, they can go back 800,000 years using ice core samples.

https://www.bas.ac.uk/data/our-data/publication/ice-cores-and-climate-change/

Ice cores don't tell us how hot it was on October 7 1232 or whether or not a cyclone hit where Brisbane now is in 51 BC.

Your words are irrelevant and demonstrate that you totally miss the point and fail to understand the concept.

I should have known better than to join a climate change discussion. Have fun, folks! I'm out!
 
Looking at data from CSIRO, the sea level increase has been fairly consistent over the last ~150years @ ~1.5mm/annum.
 
Average rate of increase of average global temperature is 0.007degC/annum over last ~140 years
 

Don't let he door hit you on the way out.

 
Or perhaps Grasshopper, you are saying half the time you are right and the other half of the time you are also "right". bas

I just had a Heineken, and even if I didn't, that's too deep for me .[/QUOTE]

There is right (in reality) and then Right in political views.
Liked the Tao Te Ching quote. Simple, elegant, timeless, useful.

_______________________________________________________________
Re the question of CC being unstopable. I opened this thread on the basis that regardless of what is done in terms of reducing CO2 and other emissions there will be a continued effect on our climate of the greenhouse gases already in the atmosphere. Temperatures will continue to increase but to what level is still open to many possibilities. The extent of global warming is also open to how much extra greenhouse gases are emitted. Unfortunately we may have lost control of this factor as a number of tipping points in our climate start start to take effect.

Sjaii is quite right in saying "the world won't end" with CC. But as Smurf points out the world we live in will change drastically and in ways that will certainly undermine our current civilisations.

Probably the most concrete near term consequence of CC would be the collapse of the Thwaites glacier and subsequent release of the West Antarctic ice cap. That will change world coast lines for millenia. Whatever we do to respond to that event can't happen in a decade.

Do we want to know what the risks are or is it easier to keep the blindfolds in place and plead ignorance if/when it all turns over ?

http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2017/11/01/everything-you-need-to-know-about-climate-tipping-points/
 

No one's arguing about the fact that the Earth and the universe will still be around no matter what level CO2 or if the planet completely freezes over.

Like I said before, the various human races and their recorded history... i.e. they came to be developed and organised enough to form states, pass laws, slaughter each other and know how to write about it... That kind of history has only been, at best, 5,000 years.

Most recorded, formal, history that I'm aware of dates back maybe 3,000 years. Anything before that are guesses, imagined or just made up.

During the same period - 3,000 years - scientists worked out that sea level rises were practically zero.

But maybe it's just a coincidence. We human are so superior we can take on anything and all live.

Just look at the Pacific Islands... some of them are seeing their island being taken away by the sea, with water lapping at their feet and yet some of them are cracking jokes about it. Oh wait, a few idiot on higher ground did that.
 
Sand deposition offset sea rise?

 
Mocking?

Not in the slightest Grasshopper, merely paraphrasing Bruce Lee's paraphrasing of our friend Lao Tzu.

FWIW, I think the TTC is a very interesting document.
 
There is right (in reality) and then Right in political views.

Ah yes, and of course any person with the temerity to debate the philosophical poison that is postmodernism, is "alt right". Isn't that "right" bas?
 
Left and right,
postmodern the frequency,
there is a wall,
can we see,
from which side,
do we want to?

Uh oh,, getting hard, might lose so throw in some mud as confusion deters and usually wins.
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...