Jump to content

The Climate thread

Laxtonto

By Laxtonto
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

bolverk
bolverk

Now apply that way of thinking to other topics: You want me to stop treating minorities like shit when people in other countries can treat their minorities like shit? You want me to pay

CooterBrown
CooterBrown
mop
mop

what a thread.   the thread i jumped on back in like 2008 or something started with a claim that the Arctic would be ice free by the summer of 2012.  this didn't happen. in fact, while 2012

Posted Images

  • 1 month later...
TahoeHorn

TahoeHorn 107

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Chrispy said:

The sun’s life is roughly half over, so only about 5 billion more years until it’s a red giant and cooks us all. We’re all living on borrowed time. 

Well, long term it will cease emitting any energy at all.  So my theory is that we have global cooling.  It may get hotter in the "short" term, but long term we'll be at absolute zero, plus a scooch.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom

Tom 2959

Posted
Posted

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2018/05/17/global-warming-april-400th-consecutive-warm-month/618484002/?csp=chromepush

 

Quote

Earth just had its 400th straight warmer-than-average month thanks to global warming

It was December 1984, and President Reagan had just been elected to his second term, Dynasty was the top show on TV and Madonna's Like a Virgin topped the musical charts.

It was also the last time the Earth had a cooler-than-average month.

Last month marked the planet's 400th consecutive month with above-average temperatures, federal scientists from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration announced Thursday. 

The cause for the streak? Unquestionably, it’s climate change, caused by humanity's burning of fossil fuels. 

"We live in and share a world that is unequivocally, appreciably and consequentially warmer than just a few decades ago, and our world continues to warm," said NOAA climate scientist Deke Arndt. "Speeding by a '400' sign only underscores that, but it does not prove anything new."

Climate scientists use the 20th-century average as a benchmark for global temperature measurements. That's because it's fixed in time, allowing for consistent "goal posts" when reviewing climate data. It's also a sufficiently long period to include several cycles of climate variability.

"The thing that really matters is that, by whatever metric, we've spent every month for several decades on the warm side of any reasonable baseline," Arndt said.

NOAA's analysis found last month was the 3rd-warmest April on record globally. The unusual heat was most noteworthy in Europe, which had its warmest April on record, and Australia, which had its second-warmest.

Portions of Asia also experienced some extreme heat: In southern Pakistan, the town of Nawabshah soared to a scalding 122.4 degrees on April 30, which may have been the warmest April temperature on record for the globe, according to Meteo France. 

Argentina also had its warmest April since national records began there in 1961.

North America was the one part of the world that didn't get in on the heat parade. Last month, the average U.S. temperature was 48.9 degrees, 2.2 degrees below average, "making it the 13th-coldest April on record and the coldest since 1997," NOAA said. 

For the year-to-date, the Earth is seeing its 5th-warmest start to the year. 

A separate analysis of global temperature data from NASA also found last month was the third-warmest April on record. 

Another milestone was reached in April, also related to the number "400": Carbon dioxide — the gas scientists say is most responsible for global warming — reached its highest level in recorded history at 410 parts per million.

This amount is highest in at least the past 800,000 years, according to the Scripps Institute of Oceanography.

 

Cool.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
R2D2

R2D2 91

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, TahoeHorn said:

Uh oh!

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2013/02/13/peer-reviewed-survey-finds-majority-of-scientists-skeptical-of-global-warming-crisis/#3e33bf264c7c

Peer-Reviewed Survey Finds Majority Of Scientists Skeptical Of Global Warming Crisis

Everybody on earth is going to die within my lifetime because this article exists. And I expect to die soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
R2D2

R2D2 91

Posted
Posted
36 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Geoscientists and engineers. That's who you want to listen to on the subject of climate science, a subject beyond their field. Not the actual scientists engaged in the study of the climate. 

 

That article isn't real. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
R2D2

R2D2 91

Posted
Posted

We are beyond the tipping point BTW. That's the actual consensus. 

Don't panic. That's the solution they've come up with so far.

If you read between the lines of literally everything, you might notice that innovation, risk and progress have all stopped. They have becomes facades.

Everything a sham, devolving into shambles. Fuck you, Oil.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
R2D2

R2D2 91

Posted
Posted

If you don't agree with me, say so. This august, wherever you are. Post from an unshaded park bench outside at 12am. We'll argue till dusk. All the math and graphs and studies etc.

It is vital that you be outside. Call me an alarmist. I'll call you an ambulance for your heatstroke. Good luck!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
R2D2

R2D2 91

Posted
Posted (edited)

Zika Mosquito. Refugees. Giant storms & floods. Drought & wildfires ubiquitous. Rising seas. Is this "evidence"? Study says NO, it's 120° outside because "you ever heard of summer!", says Petroleum Engineer.

Edited by R2D2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
52-80

52-80 19140

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Geoscientists and engineers. That's who you want to listen to on the subject of climate science, a subject beyond their field. Not the actual scientists engaged in the study of the climate. 

 

yeah, dont bother listening to these geoscientists at UT who have geoscience degrees and working as geoscience professors at the school of geoscience

 

http://www.jsg.utexas.edu/research/themes/disciplines/climate-dynamics/

http://www.esi.utexas.edu/about-esi/staff-members/

http://www.jsg.utexas.edu/research/themes/climate-carbon-geobiology/

Link to comment
Share on other sites
B00M

B00M 6413

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, R2D2 said:

If you don't agree with me, say so. This august, wherever you are. Post from an unshaded park bench outside at 12am. We'll argue till dusk. All the math and graphs and studies etc.

It is vital that you be outside. Call me an alarmist. I'll call you an ambulance for your heatstroke. Good luck!

Lulz, 12am. It'll be a hellish 75 deg F

This thread is going exactly as expected: local weather is the main talking point and no source of information is legit

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JBJ

JBJ 3654

Posted
Posted (edited)
16 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Geoscientists and engineers. That's who you want to listen to on the subject of climate science, a subject beyond their field. Not the actual scientists engaged in the study of the climate. 

Those are the categories licensed by Canada.  It includes "climatologists, geologists, glaciologists, meteorologists, geophysicists, and paleo-climatologists."

In Alberta, the petroleum industry is going to be over-represented.

The survey aimed to frame the debate (by identifying the different views people argued from) not to quantify those views as a representation of the entire field.

Edited by JBJ
Link to comment
Share on other sites
EastTexan

EastTexan 662

Posted
Posted
On June 4, 2018 at 1:13 AM, WhatTheBuck said:

Geoscientists and engineers. That's who you want to listen to on the subject of climate science, a subject beyond their field. Not the actual scientists engaged in the study of the climate. 

 

 

Yea. I'll trust that  "science guy" dude.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
fattyflattie

fattyflattie 4639

Posted
Posted
51 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Who do you trust?

Well, the guy with all the talking points on this thread doesn’t know the difference between Ante Meridiem and Post Meridiem.  

But he knows all about our climate. Tough one. I’ll go with the opposite of whatever position he takes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sawbonz

Sawbonz 27525

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Well, the guy with all the talking points on this thread doesn’t know the difference between Ante Meridiem and Post Meridiem.  

But he knows all about our climate. Tough one. I’ll go with the opposite of whatever position he takes. 

I had an Auntie Meridiem

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ScottishHorn

ScottishHorn 172

Posted
Posted

Our lives are too short to worry about crap we can't fix. Personally and with no scientific knowledge about this at all, I think we are moving toward a cooling period. I see the ring of fire heating up.  Perhaps even Yellowstone will have a minor eruption.  A volcanic winter will result allowing for California coastal weather in Texas during August.  Sweet....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nivek

Nivek 16916

Posted
Posted (edited)

Many years ago, my adviser received one of these surveys and he shared it with us.  The survey was clearly biased and we all had a laugh at it.  It ended up in the trash.   We were in a geophysical group.  The climatologists at the University did not receive a survey.   

Those unfamiliar with the science think they are skeptics, but really they are just uninformed blowhards.  

Edited by Nivek
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhatTheBuck

WhatTheBuck 28771

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, SpiralOut said:

Don't worry, fellas.  We're saved.

http://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/06/its-possible-to-reverse-climate-change-suggests-major-new-study/562289/

Not a lot of info there. Does it work on all greenhouse gases or just CO2? How do they scrub greenhouse gases from the upper atmosphere? What sort of waste is produced? Will the fossil fuel industry disappear as a result? Will it really result in a stabilization of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere or will it just slow their increase?

So many questions. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CooterBrown

CooterBrown 18001

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, ScottishHorn said:

Personally and with no scientific knowledge about this at all, I think we are moving toward a cooling period. I see the ring of fire heating up.  Perhaps even Yellowstone will have a minor eruption.  A volcanic winter will result allowing for California coastal weather in Texas during August.  Sweet....

FIFY

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ScottishHorn

ScottishHorn 172

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, SpiralOut said:

Don't worry, fellas.  We're saved.

http://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/06/its-possible-to-reverse-climate-change-suggests-major-new-study/562289/

Looks like he's hoping to profit.  I guess he's tired of his teaching gig and wants to profit like his colleague's did when they received millions in cash subsidies to start green energy companies which ultimately failed.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sawbonz

Sawbonz 27525

Posted
Posted

That is really cool. I always thought that it cost relatively too much energy to reduce CO2 to methane and then for each subsequent hydrocarbon you add to get to a liquid at room temp.   I assume they are using alternative fuel sources for this? The article doesn’t say

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...
Dahobbs

Dahobbs 17521

Posted
Posted (edited)

In case anyone is interested, here is an older article about San Francisco and Oakland's recently dismissed lawsuit against oil companies on climate change. The lawsuit was dismissed because the judge found the conduct didn't create a cause of action under nuisance law. But, the important point for all of us is the science, and the oil companies agreed that humans (and fossil fuels in particular) have caused global warming:

Quote

The defendants, on the other hand, had Chevron lawyer Theodore Boutrous do all the talking. (After Boutrous surprisingly stated that he would speak only for Chevron, the judge gave the other defendants two weeks to decide whether or not they agreed with everything presented.) As expected, Boutrous did not deny that humans have caused climate change, but he did seek to paint climate science as much more uncertain in the recent past.

 

This likely sets out the strategic foundation for the case. Boutrous said Chevron accepted the conclusion of human responsibility in the last two Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports (going back to 2007), but the company attempted to paint earlier reports as fundamentally uncertain.

 

To do this, the attorney cherry-picked some of the cautious language on uncertainty going back to the first report in 1990, which said we could not yet calculate how much warming had been caused by humans. But that report also clearly said that greenhouse gas emissions were causing warming and would have to be greatly curtailed to avoid dangerous climate change and sea-level rise. And as the plaintiff’s presentation pointed out, our estimate of how much warming results from greenhouse gas emissions hasn’t really changed since a 1979 National Academy of Sciences report on the topic.

 

By sticking to the IPCC reports, the defendants seem to be planning to argue that oil companies could fairly disagree about climate change as long as climate scientists were saying some uncertain things. To do this, though, they’ll at least have to do a better job of accurately representing the reports.

 

Because this case focuses on the impacts of sea-level rise, Boutrous turned next to uncertainties in those projections from the 2013 IPCC report, characterizing sea-level rise as still unclear and hard to quantify (without denying that some of it is human-caused).

 

Finally, Boutrous argued that it’s the use of fossil fuels—rather than the production and sale of them—that causes climate change. He pointed out that the IPCC report discusses population growth, land use, and energy use but not fossil fuel extraction. This is the obvious argument for the companies to make, despite the fact that the case explicitly targets their behavior as sellers.

 

Boutrous said Chevron didn’t necessarily agree with everything in the sections of the reporting on impacts or mitigation of climate change, but he did call out IPCC descriptions of climate change as a global collective-action problem.

As judge Alsup said in his order dismissing the case:

Quote

The issue is not over science, . . .  All parties agree that fossil fuels have led to global warming and ocean rise and will continue to do so.

I’ll be interested if any of the deniers can explain why I shouldn’t believe the major oil companies that humans are causing global warming.

Edited by Dahobbs
Seriously, multi quotes are so so so so broken
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TexArcher

TexArcher 37761

Posted
Posted

When it comes to this debate, there are three types of people:

1. Those who believe in man-made climate change.

2. Those who stand to profit by convincing people that man-made climate change is a hoax and 97% of the climatologists in the world are in on it.

3. Those stupid and/or gullible enough to believe group 2.  And it's no coincidence that most of this group fell for Trump's con as well and now stubbornly refuse to admit that they made a mistake in spite of a mountain of evidence that they made a mistake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mapache

Mapache 1117

Posted
Posted

This makes me want to kick any climate change denier square in the balls

Red-hot planet: All-time heat records have been set all over the world during the past week

Source: Washington Post

(This article, originally published Tuesday, was updated Wednesday to add all-time heat records at Mount Washington, N.H., and Tbilisi, Georgia set since Monday.) 

From the normally mild summer climes of Ireland, Scotland and Canada to the scorching Middle East, numerous locations in the Northern Hemisphere have witnessed their hottest weather ever recorded over the past week. . . .

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2018/07/03/hot-planet-all-time-heat-records-have-been-set-all-over-the-world-in-last-week/?utm_term=.5ee07868781f&wpisrc=nl_most&wpmm=1

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
zork

zork 629

Posted
Posted

 

Quote

...

U.S. District Judge John Keenan dismissed the city’s claims against Exxon Mobil Corp., Chevron Corp., BP Plc, Royal Dutch Shell Plc and ConocoPhillips, ruling that the federal Clean Air Act controls carbon dioxide emissions and blocks suits such as New York’s. The problem of climate change is for Congress and the Executive Branch to address, he said.

"The immense and complicated problem of global warming requires a comprehensive solution that weighs the global benefits of fossil fuel use with the gravity of the impending harms," Keenan wrote Thursday.
The ruling is the latest courtroom defeat for a legal strategy that sought to paint Big Oil as similar to Big Tobacco, with claims they pushed for increased sales while hiding the dangerous effects of their products on the planet. The companies won a similar ruling in June in which a federal judge threw out complaints by the cities of San Francisco and Oakland, California, and also concluded the issue is best addressed by the other branches of government.
 

Trump Backs Big Oil, Argues Climate Case Could Force Paris Deal

“The Mayor believes big polluters must be held accountable for their contributions to climate change and the damage it will cause New York City,” Seth Stein, a spokesman for New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, said in a statement. “We intend to appeal this decision and to keep fighting for New Yorkers who will bear the brunt of climate change.”

Shell and Exxon hailed the decision.

“Judge Keenan’s decision reaffirms our view that climate change is a complex societal challenge that requires sound governmental policy and is not an issue for the courts,” Shell said in a statement.

...

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-07-19/new-york-s-global-warming-suit-against-oil-companies-thrown-out

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
Mapache

Mapache 1117

Posted
Posted

U.S. report: Greenhouse gases surge to new highs worldwide in 2017

Planet-warming greenhouse gases surged to new highs as abnormally hot temperatures swept the globe and ice melted at record levels in the Arctic last year due to climate change, a major U.S. report said Wednesday. 

The annual State of the Climate Report, compiled by more than 450 scientists from over 60 countries, describes worsening climate conditions worldwide in 2017, the same year that U.S. President Donald Trump pulled out of the landmark Paris climate deal. 

The United States is the world's second leading polluter after China, but has rolled back environmental safeguards under Trump, who has declared climate change a "Chinese hoax" and exited the Paris deal signed by more than 190 nations as a path toward curbing harmful emissions.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/us-report-greenhouse-gases-surge-to-new-highs-worldwide-in-2017/ar-BBLn5sI

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...