Climate Change(d)?

[Shadowy Man]

It is winter here until Saturday

View attachment 47533

I translated into Freedom Degrees for our audience in Santa Monica:

View attachment 47534

And to repeat, this is still officially WINTER.

Please. Its august. We know it’s not winter.

 

[steve_bank]

Fizzle is playing all of you.

When he gets bored he rattles the cages and its back and chuckles.

 

[TSwizzle]

I'm sure what I'm about to post can't possibly apply to Santa Monica....No worries. It probably won't happen until the turn of the Century when we posters will be dead and gone. Still, my grandkids or their kids might still be around.

https://weather.com/science/environ...coastline-beaches-rising-seas-global-warming#

ENVIRONMENT​

California's Iconic Coastline Is Being Snatched Up By Rising Sea Levels Faster Than Previously Thought​

By​

May 17, 2017​

Exposed bedrock at Isla Vista beach, California.
(Alex Snyder/U.S. Geological Survey)

At a Glance​

• Research shows that California's coastline is in dire straights because of rising sea levels.
• The price tag associated with coastal infrastructure loss will be staggering, researchers note.

California risks losing thousands of miles of its iconic coastline as climate-driven sea levels rise faster than anyone anticipated, a new report says.

The state-commissioned report conducted by the California Ocean Protection Council Science Advisory Team determined that if nothing changes, California’s coastal waters will rise at a rate 30 to 40 times faster than in the previous century. The news came on the heels of a U.S. Geological Survey report released in March that estimates that as much as 67 percent of Southern California’s beaches could be lost to rising seas by the end of the century if nothing is done to curb the carbon emissions that lead to global warming.

The impacts on the state that already has some of the most stringent carbon emissions regulations in the country would be far-reaching and devastating, researchers note.

“Beaches are perhaps the most iconic feature of California, and the potential for losing this identity is real," said lead author of the USGS study Sean Vitousek. "The effect of California losing its beaches is not just a matter of affecting the tourism economy. Losing the protecting swath of beach sand between us and the pounding surf exposes critical infrastructure, businesses and homes to damage. Beaches are natural resources, and it is likely that human management efforts must increase in order to preserve them."

(MORE: New Maps Show Exactly Which Homes Will Go Under If Sea Levels Rise)

You're not going to like it when all the climate change immigrants rush to Santa Monica because it's the only place where the weather is always perfect. Maybe you need to shut your mouth Bro, before the rest of the world rushes to your area to escape floods, drought and unbearable heat.

Why would “climate refugees” come to Santa Monica when the whole of the California coast is going to be fucked soon?

It really is a rapture like cult.

 

[Elixir]

Why would “climate refugees” come to Santa Monica when the whole of the California coast is going to be fucked soon?

Because soon is still a long time in terms of a human’s life, and an even longer time for Santa Monica than say, Tonga. (Barring a truly major fault line “incident” of course.)
It will be ironic when East LA becomes beachfront property though, don’t you think? Of course if it happens to Seattle first you can point and laugh - they always thought it would be a tsunami or a volcano that would get them (if they lived through the drug epidemic).

 

[bilby]

It is winter here until Saturday

View attachment 47533

I translated into Freedom Degrees for our audience in Santa Monica:

View attachment 47534

And to repeat, this is still officially WINTER.

Please. Its august. We know it’s not winter.

Regardless, it's not normal.



Translated into Santa Monica °F_reedom:

 

[Loren Pechtel]

It has been quite cool in Santa Monica today. I don't think the temperature got much above 70 degrees.

#PrayForSantaMonicaPier

You realize that the difference between an ice age and normal is only 5C? (11 in Freedom Degrees.)

Small changes in the middle translate to big changes in the tails.

And it's those tails that lead to most of the problems.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

About that California weather.

UCLA climate scientist Daniel Swain said the summer of 2024 is likely to go down as the hottest or second to the hottest on record despite the fact that most Californians did not experience it that way.

“The most densely populated parts of Ventura, L.A., Orange County and San Diego — really all those counties west of the mountains — saw a summer that was right in the middle of the historical distributions,” Swain said.

Inland temperatures made up for that, Swain said. He noted that the difference between a record-shattering summer and an unremarkable one may be as little as 30 miles. Places such as Palmdale and Palm Springs “are very hot places that still managed to see record-breaking temperatures.”

“If you lived on Ocean Beach in San Francisco or Santa Monica, that was not your experience,” he said.

 

[Elixir]

“If you lived on Ocean Beach in San Francisco or Santa Monica, that was not your experience,”

IOW it’s a Democrat fascist power grab just as Swiz sez!

 

[southernhybrid]

I'm sure what I'm about to post can't possibly apply to Santa Monica....No worries. It probably won't happen until the turn of the Century when we posters will be dead and gone. Still, my grandkids or their kids might still be around.

https://weather.com/science/environ...coastline-beaches-rising-seas-global-warming#

ENVIRONMENT​

California's Iconic Coastline Is Being Snatched Up By Rising Sea Levels Faster Than Previously Thought​

By​

May 17, 2017​

Exposed bedrock at Isla Vista beach, California.
(Alex Snyder/U.S. Geological Survey)

At a Glance​

• Research shows that California's coastline is in dire straights because of rising sea levels.
• The price tag associated with coastal infrastructure loss will be staggering, researchers note.

California risks losing thousands of miles of its iconic coastline as climate-driven sea levels rise faster than anyone anticipated, a new report says.

The state-commissioned report conducted by the California Ocean Protection Council Science Advisory Team determined that if nothing changes, California’s coastal waters will rise at a rate 30 to 40 times faster than in the previous century. The news came on the heels of a U.S. Geological Survey report released in March that estimates that as much as 67 percent of Southern California’s beaches could be lost to rising seas by the end of the century if nothing is done to curb the carbon emissions that lead to global warming.

The impacts on the state that already has some of the most stringent carbon emissions regulations in the country would be far-reaching and devastating, researchers note.

“Beaches are perhaps the most iconic feature of California, and the potential for losing this identity is real," said lead author of the USGS study Sean Vitousek. "The effect of California losing its beaches is not just a matter of affecting the tourism economy. Losing the protecting swath of beach sand between us and the pounding surf exposes critical infrastructure, businesses and homes to damage. Beaches are natural resources, and it is likely that human management efforts must increase in order to preserve them."

(MORE: New Maps Show Exactly Which Homes Will Go Under If Sea Levels Rise)

You're not going to like it when all the climate change immigrants rush to Santa Monica because it's the only place where the weather is always perfect. Maybe you need to shut your mouth Bro, before the rest of the world rushes to your area to escape floods, drought and unbearable heat.

Why would “climate refugees” come to Santa Monica when the whole of the California coast is going to be fucked soon?

It really is a rapture like cult.

I was being sarcastic. You are the one who is always telling us there is no climate change because it's a lovely 70 degrees in Santa Monica. You act as if Santa Monica will somehow be spared what the rest of the world is starting to experience, some more so than others. There is a big difference between weather, and climate, but for some reason, you prefer to be in denial.

It's weird that you think almost every actual climate scientist, who are people who have advanced degrees in climate science and do research regarding how and why the climate is changing so rapidly, are wrong and that you know better than they do. We are simply presenting the evidence these scientists report.

You are the one who acts similar to a religious fanatic. The more evidence that is presented to you, the more you hold fast to your out of date beliefs. Maybe that makes you feel comfortable, or hopeful, just like evangelicals do when they think they will be raptured up to spend eternity with their god.

 

[pood]

You are the one who acts similar to a religious fanatic. The more evidence that is presented to you, the more you hold fast to your out beliefs. Maybe that makes you feel comfortable, or hopeful, just like evangelicals do when they think they will be raptured up to spend eternity with their god.

Exactly. He is the one in a rapture-like cult, not us.

 

[Elixir]

He is the one in a rapture-like cult, not us.

Problem is that his ilk are likely to “rapture” the rest of us to death with their stoopid.

 

[TSwizzle]

I was being sarcastic. You are the one who is always telling us there is no climate change because it's a lovely 70 degrees in Santa Monica.

This is absolutely false. Link to a post where I have said there is no climate change?

You act as if Santa Monica will somehow be spared what the rest of the world is starting to experience, some more so than others. There is a big difference between weather, and climate, but for some reason, you prefer to be in denial.

It's weird that you think almost every actual climate scientist, who are people who have advanced degrees in climate science and do research regarding how and why the climate is changing so rapidly, are wrong and that you know better than they do. We are simply presenting the evidence these scientists report.

Oh this again.

You are the one who acts similar to a religious fanatic. The more evidence that is presented to you, the more you hold fast to your out of date beliefs. Maybe that makes you feel comfortable, or hopeful, just like evangelicals do when they think they will be raptured up to spend eternity with their god.

Oh puhlease. You are the one in the grip of an end of times cult.

 

[pood]

I was being sarcastic. You are the one who is always telling us there is no climate change because it's a lovely 70 degrees in Santa Monica.

This is absolutely false. Link to a post where I have said there is no climate change?

You have said climate change is not caused by humans, which is clearly false, as attested by tons of scientists (not Al Gore or other non-scientists), and which is dramatically demonstrated by the chart of carbon dioxide emissions you pointedly and repeatedly ignore. You are behaving EXACTLY like someone in a religious cult, not us.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I was being sarcastic. You are the one who is always telling us there is no climate change because it's a lovely 70 degrees in Santa Monica.

This is absolutely false. Link to a post where I have said there is no climate change?

there is no climate change

link

Yeah, that might be taking a privilege, but you do constantly tell people they are in a cult in almost every post on climate change. So you aren't particularly in a position to complain about privilege. It isn't like you've given any real thought to the "cult" poke, seeing the Oil industry research (as cited in this thread) implied unmitigated CO2 related global temp increases were (as researched in the 1980s) were irreversible and given 100 or so years, potentially "catastrophic". As in, their word, not ours.

 

[pood]

The first predictions of human-induced climate change go back to the 19th century. It’s not rocket science. Even then they could see that putting more and more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere would lead to disaster. The first president to actually mention the problem was Lyndon Johnson.

 

[southernhybrid]

The first predictions of human-induced climate change go back to the 19th century. It’s not rocket science. Even then they could see that putting more and more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere would lead to disaster. The first president to actually mention the problem was Lyndon Johnson.

https://www.livescience.com/humans-first-warned-about-climate-change

Even earlier than the 19th Century, there was some concern that human activity might be impacting rainfall in the local area, so some aspects of human influenced climate change science goes even further back, even if it was just on the local level, long before we started to realize our impact on the climate globally due to carbon output secondary to human activity. No cult, just science.

As far back as ancient Greece (1200 B.C. to A.D. 323), people debated whether draining swamps or cutting down forests might bring more or less rainfall to the region, according to Weart's Discovery of Global Warming website, which is hosted by the American Institute of Physics and shares the name with his book "The Discovery of Global Warming" (Harvard University Press, 2008).


The ancient Greek debates were among the first documented climate change discussions, but they focused only on local regions. It wasn't until a few millennia later, in 1896, that Swedish scientist Svante Arrhenius (1859-1927) became the first person to imagine that humanity could change the climate on a global scale, according to Weart. That's when Arrhenius published calculations in The London, Edinburgh, and Dublin Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science showing that adding carbon dioxide to the atmosphere could warm the planet.

This work built on the research of other 19th-century scientists, such as Joseph Fourier (1768-1830), who hypothesized that Earth would be far cooler without an atmosphere, and John Tyndall (1820-1893) and Eunice Newton Foote (1819-1888), who separately demonstrated that carbon dioxide and water vapor trapped heat and suggested that an atmosphere could do the same, JSTOR Daily reported.

The scientific opinion on climate change wouldn't begin to shift until two significant experiments some 60 years after Arrhenius' realization. The first, led by scientist Roger Revelle (1909-1991) in 1957 and published in the journal Tellus, found that the ocean will not absorb all of the carbon dioxide released in humanity's industrial fuel emissions and that carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere could, therefore, rise significantly. Three years later, Charles Keeling (1928-2005) published a separate study in Tellus that detected an annual rise in carbon dioxide levels in Earth's atmosphere. With carbon dioxide levels known to affect the climate, scientists began to raise concerns about the impact human-related emissions could have on the world.

Pood is correct. This scientific evidence for human influenced climate change has a long history, and we are experiencing some of it now, maybe not in Santa Monica, but in many parts of the world.

 

[Elixir]

Oh puhlease. You are the one in the grip of an end of times cult.

Puhleeeze quote someone predicting the end of times due to climate change.

(Hint; the end of GOOD times in Santa Monica is NOT “the end of times”)

 

[pood]

No one here has predicted the “end of times,” ALTHOUGH, the release of methane hydrates, precipitated by the melting of the permafrost caused by current human-caused climate change, would fill the atmosphere with a greenhouse gas ten times more portent than carbon dioxide. Some scientists have speculated that this COULD precipitate a runaway greenhouse effect, such is believed to have happened on Venus. That would make the earth uninhabitable.

But there is no one PREDICTING this end-times scenario, only suggesting that it is POSSIBLE. Still far short of that, what we have now, and will have in the decades ahead, is and will be increasingly be devastating.

 

[pood]

Runaway climate change

 

[Shadowy Man]

Oh puhlease. You are the one in the grip of an end of times cult.

Puhleeeze quote someone predicting the end of times due to climate change.

(Hint; the end of GOOD times in Santa Monica is NOT “the end of times”)

Most of the "doomerism" is coming from politicians and activists, not the scientists. A point we have been trying to make in this thread for quite some time.

For example, see this article (https://www.eenews.net/articles/doomerism-why-scientists-disagree-with-biden-on-1-5-c/) in which scientists criticize Biden and others for their strong language. (emphasis mine)

Biden has been ratcheting up his warnings about breaching that benchmark in recent speeches, claiming that future generations would be damned and that “we lose it all” if the world overshoots that target.

But those assertions go beyond what many climate scientists say would happen. Surpassing 1.5 C is dangerous, they say, but it’s not a point of no return.

Biden’s rhetoric is “misleading and unhelpful,” said Michael Mann, a climate scientist at the University of Pennsylvania. The best way to view what lies beyond 1.5 C is as a continuum of worsening climate impacts, he said, rather than as a climate cliff.

“It indeed feeds doomerism since there’s a very real possibility that we will fail to limit warming below 1.5 C,” Mann said of Biden’s remarks. “If we miss that exit ramp, we don’t continue headlong down the fossil fuel highway. We get off at the earliest possible exit.”

Note: Michael Mann is a climate scientist, Joe Biden is not.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) has said “global temperatures must not increase more than 1.5 degrees Celsius above preindustrialized levels in order to avoid the most severe impacts of climate change.” United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres has said humanity is on “a fast track to climate disaster.” Activist groups have also made the same claim, including the Sunrise Movement, which called it a “critical threshold.”

...

...the world is not expected by scientists to reach the point of no return. Many experts anticipate that global temperatures will go over 1.5 C before international efforts to reduce emissions, such as removing carbon dioxide from the air with fans, pumps and plants, bring temperatures back down.

The likelihood is that “we are going to overshoot it and come back down,” said Robert Kopp, a climate scientist at Rutgers University and contributing author to the latest IPCC report.

Note: Robert Kopp is a climate scientist, AOC and Antonio Guterres are not.

In that way, there is “nothing magical” about the 1.5 C threshold, said Kevin Trenberth, an atmospheric scientist with the National Center for Atmospheric Research who said it is not a tipping point.

Yet he agrees with Biden that the world is on an arc of disruption that will get worse as temperatures climb 1.5 C. The consequences could lead to environmental refugees and regional conflicts.

Note: Kevin Trenberth is an atmospheric scientist, Joe Biden is not.