Climate Change(d)?

[bilby]

Sarcasm. however the issue is no climate change iself it is the rapifity of chnage. We are seeing it in real time. The correlation is clear, the current chnages trace back ro the beinnings of industrialization.


So, you are saying our current situation with climate change is no big deal, and why worry about it? Increase ccoal usage without concerns?

Again a Tucker Carlson kind of position. Climate change is a leftist fabrication.

I hate to say it, but on some level he isn't actually that wrong. Industrialization can be traced back to the agricultural revolution, and the agricultural revolution can be traced back to the beginning of the holocene (after the last ice age). On some level it was climactic conditions that allowed us to flourish and produce man made changes to the biosphere. By the time we even had the tools to understand climate, the damage was already largely done.

Where TSwizzle's logic fails is that it still makes sense to try to mitigate our own impact on climate. Just because we aren't wholly the cause, doesn't mean we should ignore imminent danger. Let's not jump out of the way of the car barrelling toward us?

People get hit by cars all the time. It's truly bizarre that you think you can prevent road deaths. Jumping out of the way is probably communism anyway.

 

[skepticalbip]

There are two very different things here.
1. There is a serious scientific study of climate that is predicting rising temperatures.
2. There is a hell of a lot of political hyperbolic fearmongering. A good example Al Gores' "An Inconvenient Truth" movie according to which we should now have no polar bears and lower parts of New York city should already be underwater.

Well, heck if there isn't a bit of drama added, people won't give a damn... take Covid-19 for instance. It ain't killing tens of millions, therefore, meh.

My problem with anti-climate change folk is they always assume the predictions are wrong... but always in their favor. If the fresh water dump from Greenland did screw with the Gulf Stream, the consequences could be devastating. There are thresholds out there we don't know of. Greenland all melting might not make the gulfstream budge, but it could. And we can't undo that. Currently the Earth is warming... and even if we stop excess emissions of CO2, it is going to continue to warm as we aren't even at the static point where the CO2 level is today, and the impact on the ocean and oceanic ecology is again another one of those thresholds.

Quite a quandary, ain't it? It is the immediate crisis, hyperbolic, fearmongering claims that continually turn out to be wrong that feed (in some cases create) the rejection of global warming.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Climate change occurs naturally no matter what. Putting in a few bicycle lanes along Santa Monica Blvd does nothing for the climate but screws up traffic. It's idiotic virtue signaling.

<Shoots TSwizzle>

Why do you say I did anything wrong? Death is natural!

I will agree with you on bicycle lanes, though--almost all of them are in places where it isn't viable. Long ago living in a 50k town I rode my bike frequently. I haven't ridden it since we moved to the city--the only place I feel safe biking to is where I frequently pass it anyway. I don't think I've made a trip only to there other than to the pharmacy.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Where TSwizzle's logic fails is that it still makes sense to try to mitigate our own impact on climate. Just because we aren't wholly the cause, doesn't mean we should ignore imminent danger. Let's not jump out of the way of the car barrelling toward us?

"our own impact" on the climate I believe to be negligible either way. This obsession with "carbon" pollution also needs to stop. And what "imminent danger" are you on about? I've been hearing about the coming catastrophes for decades and none have materialized. Every apocalyptic prediction has been spectacularly wrong. Monbiot: "our children are not going to know what snow is in a few years." What utter nonsense.

You said this before--and you never addressed the fact that all of those failed "predictions" were not from climate scientists. The scientists aren't suggesting severe consequences to happen yet. The warming we have already seen is going to be an issue to some low-lying areas but there's a big lag due to the thermal mass of the oceans. The weather is also getting more severe--while you can't blame any given event on climate the number of events is another matter.

 

[skepticalbip]

Where TSwizzle's logic fails is that it still makes sense to try to mitigate our own impact on climate. Just because we aren't wholly the cause, doesn't mean we should ignore imminent danger. Let's not jump out of the way of the car barrelling toward us?

"our own impact" on the climate I believe to be negligible either way. This obsession with "carbon" pollution also needs to stop. And what "imminent danger" are you on about? I've been hearing about the coming catastrophes for decades and none have materialized. Every apocalyptic prediction has been spectacularly wrong. Monbiot: "our children are not going to know what snow is in a few years." What utter nonsense.

You said this before--and you never addressed the fact that all of those failed "predictions" were not from climate scientists. The scientists aren't suggesting severe consequences to happen yet. The warming we have already seen is going to be an issue to some low-lying areas but there's a big lag due to the thermal mass of the oceans. The weather is also getting more severe--while you can't blame any given event on climate the number of events is another matter.

You have to remember that most people are not science geeks... even fewer have actually read many climatology science papers to learn what climate scientists have done. The overwhelming majority (almost all) get their understanding of any science finding from newscasts. Newscasts rarely ever actually present hard science but instead will have an interview with some climate activist. Imagine some non-science geek but rational person who have listened to the news for decades and been presented with activists declaring "the science says (whatever disaster) is imminent in the next ten years unless we (whatever the program is)" then ten years later the programs had not implemented and there had been no disasters. After twenty or thirty of such experiences a rational person would have to conclude that "the science" was pure bull shit.

Personally, I think the dedicated climate activists are the worse enemy of climatology since their hyperbolic claims are a major reason for rational people doubting actual climate science.

 

[steve_bank]

I have a product idea sure to be a big seller.

We all know of the ostrich that puts its head in the ground when threatened leaving its but exposed.

A plastic foam 'hole in ground' that you can put over your head.

No one disputes climate change is cooccurring rapidly, that question once opposed has been settled by observation. There are some who still argue there is no change at all.

The naysayers fall back to claiming it not related to human activity. That is where science comes in.
The same modeling and simulation metods for weather forecasting and hurricane path prediction is used for simulating future climate.

What I listen to is local climate reports directly from the University Of Washington climate science center.

Miami is moving rods back from the shore and NYC is working on preventing flooding in subways. Climate change is upon us, evidenced by measures taken for coming weather changes and increasing intensity and occurrence of storms.

We all go by comsesus of experts on thigs we know little about. When my cardiologist gives me a statistical correlation between benefit and a drug I may look up info on the net, but I take him at his word. I have no choice excepts perhaps a second opinion.

The idea that climate change is something to debate is simply a combination of stubbornness and willful ignorance.

People were concerned about long term consequences of air pollution as early as the late 19th century with the rise of colal consumption and smog.

 

[steve_bank]

There was a 19th century event called 'the summer that wasn't' or something like that. A summer was unchareticalt cold in the USA and Europe. Crops failed.

In modern times it is thought to be correlated to a volcanic eruption and particulates in the atmosphere. What in the 60s was called Nuclear Winter, the rseult of large scale nuclear war.

 

[steve_bank]

Sarcasm. however the issue is no climate change iself it is the rapifity of chnage. We are seeing it in real time. The correlation is clear, the current chnages trace back ro the beinnings of industrialization.


So, you are saying our current situation with climate change is no big deal, and why worry about it? Increase ccoal usage without concerns?

Again a Tucker Carlson kind of position. Climate change is a leftist fabrication.

I hate to say it, but on some level he isn't actually that wrong. Industrialization can be traced back to the agricultural revolution, and the agricultural revolution can be traced back to the beginning of the holocene (after the last ice age). On some level it was climactic conditions that allowed us to flourish and produce man made changes to the biosphere. By the time we even had the tools to understand climate, the damage was already largely done.

Where TSwizzle's logic fails is that it still makes sense to try to mitigate our own impact on climate. Just because we aren't wholly the cause, doesn't mean we should ignore imminent danger. Let's not jump out of the way of the car barrelling toward us?

I suppose in a forest fire people trying to escape may exhibit cult like zombie behavior. Republcans in congress exhibit cult like zombie behavior regarding Trump as lord and master. Political parties are cults. Followers of music bands are cults.

Calling environmentalists cults is just handwaving and misdirection attempting to discredit the credible. Ad homs insteadopf debating science.

Calling the climate activists a zombie cut is the conservatives tactic by those who want to use coal because for profit. Standard fare from Sean Hannity and Tucker Carlson.

Call anyone supporting social programs a communist.

Yawn.

 

[TSwizzle]

Calling environmentalists cults is just handwaving and misdirection attempting to discredit the credible. Ad homs insteadopf debating science.

It is not possible to debate with irrational fundamentalists.

It really is a rapture like cult.

 

[Shadowy Man]

It is not possible to debate with irrational fundamentalists.

It really is a rapture like cult.

I think you need a hyphen between “rapture” and “like”.

 

[steve_bank]

My mention of 'redneck' Americans was misleading. There are plenty of non-rural Californians who fit the stereotype and millions in Flyover-Land who do not. I added the 'redneck' because the correlation, however weak, might help clarify.

A simple reason why not to add the 'd' to Climate Change and form a past tense:
It's not over yet! Expect climate to continue changing. (Where's the :gak: emoticon? )

Not long ago, ignorant redneck Americans had a standard punchline: Whenever the weather turned cold, or there was snow, they'd say "More of that global warming, chortle chortle!"

My guess is that most of them have stopped that chortling by now.

Do ypu really want to get into cultural stereotypes?

Ignorance is word wide.

Indeed it is. But there's a certain kind of smugly confident ignorance that's almost uniquely American. It's not really a geographical thing though, it's a fundamentalist Christian thing - you needn't be American to have it, though most who have it are. You needn't even be a Christian, but you do need to have been strongly influenced by the type in your formative years. That level of childhood exposure pretty much ceased in the developed world in the middle of the twentieth century. But it persists in the USA.

Those Americans who suffer it are as oblivious to this brand of ignorance as fish are to water, and for the same reasons.

It leads to all kinds of denial of reality, from denial of climate change and pandemic diseases, to denial of Donald Trump's imbecility. Denial of personal privilege is another common symptom, as is denial of all familial, societal and infrastructural assistance in personal success.

Indeed. Americans who seldom or never leave America may be unaware of it, but an American stereotype is visible when traveling abroad. (I'm thinking of characters unrelated to religion, though.)

Correlation isn't perfect: Most Americans lack this "Americanishness" and some non-Americans have it. Some Brits also tend to be insufferable, but the details differ from the American characters!

Cultural stereotypes exist for a reason. They may be caricatures, but there's frequently a grain of truth in them.

Indeed. No more examples from me; no need to be accused of bigotry.

There are many people in India who are as ignorant as a rock...that is my point. Same with any culture. Stereotypes serve no purpose. I cold go into American stereotypes of India and Asians in general, but there is no point to it.

On some level using the word redneck can be as racist as nigger.

 

[steve_bank]

Don’t be daft.

Not the Guardian, but I do listen to BBC reporting on how climate is affecting the poorer parts of the world amd first world as well

Oh ffs, the BBC is just as bad, possibly worse. Propaganda.

Trolling?

Accusing someone of trolling is against the rules. But no, not trolling, the BBC is probably worse than Teh Gruaniad.

Again drop the handwaving nd misdirection. Do you have any idea of the physics behind weather forecasting and simulation methods? If the report is next weekend it is going to be heavy snow do you plan on raking a drive in the back country on dirt road?

If you live on our east coast and the hurricane track is predicted to hit where you live do you go to the beach for a barbecue?

The irony is you rely o the same science for climate change as is used in weather prediction.

You say most people are not 'sceince heels' and get their information from the news.

Where do you get information to base your views on climate change? I seriously doubt you can articulate. You probably have some fuzzy ill formed non scientific ideas from listening to people you selectively listen to. Tunnel vision.

 

[steve_bank]

People say the talk of 'future' catastrophe s not warranted or exaggerated.

It is not like a disater movie where everything happens in a few hours.

The catastrophe is beginning. Governments and local municipalities are reacting to changes. like rising ocean levels. Depending on where you live on the planet food insecurity previously going down is on the rise from rising temperatures.

I watch a serious news report on climate. When done the adult reporters move on to stories about movies and ice cream giggling like kids.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

There was a 19th century event called 'the summer that wasn't' or something like that. A summer was unchareticalt cold in the USA and Europe. Crops failed.

In modern times it is thought to be correlated to a volcanic eruption and particulates in the atmosphere. What in the 60s was called Nuclear Winter, the rseult of large scale nuclear war.

Nuclear winter would have been far worse, but it is the same principle at work.

 

[steve_bank]

Watched reporting on Kuwait on BBC America.

Daytimes temperatures are reaching 50c. I worked in temperature screening rooms at 55c. I could take it for maybe 20 minutes. Could not touch anything without gloves.

Conclusion from the report Kuwait and the region is heading towards being uninhabitable.

It is not apocalyptical as in a movie, but it is apocalyptical in terms of how we are being affected right now.

 

[skepticalbip]

Watched reporting on Kuwait on BBC America.

Daytimes temperatures are reaching 50c. I worked in temperature screening rooms at 55c. I could take it for maybe 20 minutes. Could not touch anything without gloves.

Conclusion from the report Kuwait and the region is heading towards being uninhabitable.

It is not apocalyptical as in a movie, but it is apocalyptical in terms of how we are being affected right now.

What day was that? I just checked Kuwait temperature for today and the high was 85F (29.4C)... pretty much normal. Maybe you saw something like is popular for weather people of frying an egg on the sidewalk which I have seen every summer for the last several decades.

You seem to misunderstand what climatology models are predicting. They don't say that where you live things will become scorching... what they say is that the global temperature will become more uniform with very little (if any) increase at the equator and much more increase at the poles..

 

[steve_bank]

Watched reporting on Kuwait on BBC America.

Daytimes temperatures are reaching 50c. I worked in temperature screening rooms at 55c. I could take it for maybe 20 minutes. Could not touch anything without gloves.

Conclusion from the report Kuwait and the region is heading towards being uninhabitable.

It is not apocalyptical as in a movie, but it is apocalyptical in terms of how we are being affected right now.

What day was that? I just checked Kuwait temperature for today and the high was 85F (29.4C)... pretty much normal. Maybe you saw something like is popular for weather people of frying an egg on the sidewalk which I have seen every summer for the last several decades.

You seem to misunderstand what climatology models are predicting. They don't say that where you live things will become scorching... what they say is that the global temperature will become more uniform with very little (if any) increase at the equator and much more increase at the poles..

Yesterday or the day before. There were Kuwaiti scientists and citizens.

I don't know if this is the entire segment.

bbc news video kuwait heat - Search Videos

www.bing.com

Sigh... I know what climate change means. Where did I day that where YOU are will be scorching hot? If you have not been following te news increasing temperature here on the west cost s resulting in more forest fires. The fire seasons are getting longer.

Where you re may get wetter. Or colder. Local weather is in large due to global air and ocean currents in part due to Coriolis effects. Oceans heat up and overall temperature distribution goes up. Currents shifts slightly and drought occurs in one place and rain in another.

Here on the west coast El Nino and El Nina. I hear heavy rain outside right now. An 'atmospheric river' has formed ruining from Ca to alaska dumping rain.

We have seen for a long time local climate effects based on ocean temperature swings. The climate change problem is a long term steady state rise in ocean temperature. Differences in temperature form a 'heat engine'. Higher ocean temps are like higher voltages on a battery. Potential energy.

El Niño and La Niña

The El Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO) is one of the most important climatic phenomena on Earth.

www.noaa.gov

Jul 01, 2015 · An El Niño condition occurs when surface water in the equatorial Pacific becomes warmer than average and east winds blow weaker than normal. The opposite condition is called La Niña. During this phase of ENSO, the water is cooler than normal and the east winds are stronger. El Niños typically occur every 3 to 5 years.

El Nino tends to make atmospheric rivers stronger: they carry and deposit higher precipitation amounts to coastal areas. That enhances rainfall characteristics to the western coast of the U.S. It remains to be seen whether this winter’s El Nino can be a ‘drought-buster’ for California after four years of drought.

 

[TSwizzle]

In California we had some heavy rain over the weekend which eventually made its way down to the LA area on Monday. The moron Newsom says, and I paraphrase, "If you don't believe the science, believe your own eyes. The wets are getting wetter." He's a idiot and he thinks everyone else is an idiot. Rain is now climate change, what a moron.

It really is a religion, a rapture like-cult.

Meanwhile, it is a catastrophic 63f on the West Side.

 

[Shadowy Man]

Yes. A single weather event neither proves nor disproves climate change. A cold winter doesn’t disprove global warming, for example, no matter how many politicians bring snowballs into Congress.

However, the ensemble of weather events, especially when viewed in a historical context, can indicate the impact of climate change.

I’m sure no climate scientist is writing a paper about climate change and including only one weekend of rain as their dataset.

The science cheerleaders can be just as bad as the science deniers. But I’d bet that if real scientists were trotted out to explain the real science they’d be greeted by the detractors just like Fauci has been on covid.

 

[skepticalbip]

Watched reporting on Kuwait on BBC America.

Daytimes temperatures are reaching 50c. I worked in temperature screening rooms at 55c. I could take it for maybe 20 minutes. Could not touch anything without gloves.

Conclusion from the report Kuwait and the region is heading towards being uninhabitable.

It is not apocalyptical as in a movie, but it is apocalyptical in terms of how we are being affected right now.

What day was that? I just checked Kuwait temperature for today and the high was 85F (29.4C)... pretty much normal. Maybe you saw something like is popular for weather people of frying an egg on the sidewalk which I have seen every summer for the last several decades.

You seem to misunderstand what climatology models are predicting. They don't say that where you live things will become scorching... what they say is that the global temperature will become more uniform with very little (if any) increase at the equator and much more increase at the poles..

bbc news video kuwait heat - Search Videos

www.bing.com

That is not a news report... That is advocacy journalism. If it was presented as news then you should pen a nasty letter to BBC. That is the kind of advocacy that hurts the science of climatology because it distorts reality and is intended to evoke an emotional rather than reasoned reaction. Reasonable people can check the veracity of the "report".