Global Climate Status Report
- Thread starter babe
- Start date
The definition of "stupid" is, essentially, refusing to utilize available facts and make the requisite judgments and take the better actions.....
You believe science is a discipline that guarantees extrapolations of the past into an extended future. In the case of Warming Alarmists, there is a determined resistance to considering the possible large-scale cycles that have, in the past, created repeated cycles of temp changes a full order of magnitude greater than the relative weak carbon dioxide factor.
determined ignorance.....
determined refusal to collect ocean temp data at depth. determined refusal to include sun cycles. determined refusal to study galactic factors..... our 65M year course around the Milky Way..... encountering considerable variations in "space junk" like hydrogen clouds, particle clouds, and close fly-bys with other solar systems. "Space" is anything but uniform, bro.
Even the stuff that some scientists study.... like geologic volcanism.... have cyclical patterns.....which are determined by real stuff like heat convection within the earth, "schleren currents" or mixing currents within molten rock. gravity-forced settling of heavier elements like most nuclear fissionable elements.
We can take righteous comfort in the fact that most of nature moves pretty slow..... we might not have to deal with the facts within a lifetime....
But the odds are, historically, that we are at our max "warm" peak right now.
The priestly scientists blythly ignore their measurements of ocean outgassing with unaccountably is producing five times the increase in CO2 that their computations of human activities is producing.....
That is a dead giveaway they aren't being realistic, or honest.... and have gone off the rails because of the political pressure they are subject to. Little grant-desperate gurus in their labs, knowing they have to publish "the right stuff", or they will be bypassed on grant-renewals.
The reason the Oceans are outgassing CO2 is because they are warming up, at depth.... significantly. The supply of ice-cold polar ice melt water is being cut off.
Three major possible reasons for that..... one is geological volcanism undersea on the rise. One is reduction of available ice to melt. One is long-term solar cycles. Another is a precessional change in the tilt some fraction of a degree, a predictable and expected development. Another is changes in particle flux we are encountering as we move through space.... and there are others....
countering that would be increasing CO2 atmospheric levels and other greenhouse gases, which scientists have focused on and extrapolated into an alarming future. But those extrapolations, logically, must have their limits. When all the ice is gone, the oceans will be warming up at depth rapidly.
So I am safe. If I am the only man on planet earth who can see it, the facts are still there. We are going to have rapidly rising Ocean temps at depth, and we are going to have a serious rise in Oceanic evaporation rates..... which will drive moisture into the polar regions on a augmented, synchronistic principle. The principal precipitation zones will shift towards the poles..... Snow will fall in a large excess of what our solar-minimized Sun will melt. Past glacial onsets have produced ice at incredible rates.
But you likely will not see the glaciers at your back door, or the sea receded a mile outy towards Block Island. You would need to be thinking of your descendants three hundred years from now to make that smart investment in lands relicted.
I have to believe the best scientists know all this, but find it politically adverse to discuss.... and many probably believe the globalist claptrap and are willing to promote it as a way to achieve political ends they consider more important.
yah gotta just drop the snide. Don't play the idiot. You don't know a lot. I don't know a lot either. I'm willing to question some stuff you consider important, politically.
I know when I'm making assumptions, where there is not information to sustain the point beyond question. You don't care because your great social cause demands "the good lie".
Socialism requires compliance. Compliance requires persuasion. The ends justifies the means.
I think socialism is a human evil, in comparison with actual education and the liberty to act on one's own beliefs.
Red
Well-Known Member
Well, exactly. And that's why I chuckled. The Wisconsin ice sheet was about 2 miles high in these parts, and I'll be in my grave a long time before the next advance, assuming we are living in an interglacial period. Even assuming that, our contribution of greenhouse gases is bound to change the equation to some degree. The principle reason some geologists now prefer to speak of we humans living in the Anthropocene Era, just disputing exactly when we should date its beginnings.
Now, it's no skin off your hide, but I do love my home. I hate knowing a most beautiful stretch of Atlantic coast, Narragansett to Westerly, RI, is bound to lose what makes it so beautiful, and makes it such a great place to hang in the good ole summertime. But, that too is in a future I won't quite see, and anyway there is nothing constant but change. So I'll still enjoy that coast. And losing our barrier beaches cannot compare to things like millions living downstream of Himalayan glaciers losing their fresh water.
Just a glance at geological epochs..... deserts and rainforests rise and fall.
Himalyan Glaciers and Tibetan glaciers have some kind of annual cycle with their streams changing runoff, but if the glaciers were gone, with warmer temps, atmospheric moisture carries better to the higher elevations, and overall runoff would actually increase. So don't the alarmists scare you with every theoretical bogeyman. Deserts and Ice Ages sync up. In the interglacial warms, the deserts move north because the storm track does the hokey pokey more.
I mean, zonal flows and relatively untwisted storm tracks do the mid latitudes a lot of benefit. This year we had a lot of deep snake tracks from like Hawaii to Alaska....
Himalyan Glaciers and Tibetan glaciers have some kind of annual cycle with their streams changing runoff, but if the glaciers were gone, with warmer temps, atmospheric moisture carries better to the higher elevations, and overall runoff would actually increase. So don't the alarmists scare you with every theoretical bogeyman. Deserts and Ice Ages sync up. In the interglacial warms, the deserts move north because the storm track does the hokey pokey more.
I mean, zonal flows and relatively untwisted storm tracks do the mid latitudes a lot of benefit. This year we had a lot of deep snake tracks from like Hawaii to Alaska....
One Brow
Well-Known Member
In case I was not clear, I was including myself as much as you. As for the rest of the post, I'll chalk that up to hurt feelings over the misreading.
Red
Well-Known Member
I'd enjoy hearing opinions regarding William Happer. Anything anybody might know and care to share.
The histories of this era, just from the point of view of the battle between climate narratives, should one day inspire some interesting courses. "Climate Change Denialism and the American Dark Ages" is running through my head, lol...
William Happer:
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/na...ial-consulted-climate-change-deniers-n1017526
The histories of this era, just from the point of view of the battle between climate narratives, should one day inspire some interesting courses. "Climate Change Denialism and the American Dark Ages" is running through my head, lol...
William Happer:
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/na...ial-consulted-climate-change-deniers-n1017526
It's often not clear that you consider your points highly questionable, if not patently ridiculous..... considering how far our current experts must be from a "final solution" on questions of the day. I think anyone who actually pays attention could quickly catch the drift that I'm comfortable with my stuff. I might think about it more than anyone else, but I'm not done, yet.....comfortable questioning what I think right along with questioning others.....
typical politicians will gather stuff from every quarter of the issues of the day.
Do you realize how racist the Han Chinese are???? I know some, and they're fairly bubbling with price about being the greatest humans ever, past or present. Xi is quite explicit about this. Other races are only qualified to serve the Masters, really.
But hey.... filipino nationalism exists, filipino racism and microracism…. And the Japanese and Koreans are quite advanced racists, too. Without nearby "blacks", almost any distinction is sufficient basis for arguing superiority.
What I see in @Red 's link above is intellectual "racism", where for whatever reason it is abundantly evident that other "thinkers" must be suppressed, socially and politically.
Why is the Left doing so much of this kind of arrogance?
One Brow
Well-Known Member
We all get caught up in the fun of argumentation. It's my duty to myself, as a skeptic, to remember that all knowledge of the world is provisional.
This would be a serious handicap in your effort to promote an ideological cause or a specific crusade to make the world perfect somehow…..
well, maybe not.
I'm pretty sure Bill Gates and Prince Philip and maybe even Hitler had the intellectual fluidity to manage this feat. The critical factor is commitment to ideas or dreams, which is often actually missing in the leaders of great crusades or causes. Some praise this non-commitment as "pragmatism". Beware "pragmatism" where ever you find it..... in a Hillary or a Trump, but even more in an Obama.
Pragmatism without compassion is more to be feared than genocidal maniacism, for it can, and often does, dictate killing without regard to any reason.
Bill Gates, for example, believes world overpopulation to be the greatest issue of our day. I think Prince Philip and David Rockefeller have lived out lives long dictated by the same concern. It has been the main driver in progressive thought since Lord Cecil Rhodes concocted the plan for the New World Order. For some it has been an over-concern for the "quality" of the human crop..... like how to cull out the ethnic, racial, and untalented "deplorables", as Hillary put it.... but generally applied to justify policies with racial efficiencies.
For example, the war on DDT..... which has resulted in hundreds of millions of blacks, colored, south Asian and Central American "deplorables" dying from malaria over the past forty years. While the claimed pollution/bird/wildlife effects remain questionable.
The promotion of mass migrations from Africa, the Mideast, and central America.... areas where other methods of population control have been ineffective.... into the "slave labor" pools of developed countries.... I should include migrations of similar populations in Asia into Japan and China as well.... is designed to change the circumstances of those over-breeding people, putting them where they must use birth control and in fact can be controlled to use birth control.
While this example of determined population reductions is not "unreasoned" in the context of assumed imperatives that would justify it, I think it is nevertheless not properly reasoned.
The "lack of resources" to sustain exploding populations is questionable. The manner of "exploitation" we use should be the question. Cartel interests politically reinforce their monopolies, and are in fact the chief polluters. And the chief financiers of population reduction schemes. "The Kings Forest" model of the world is Medieval if not ancient. Pretty sure China's silk trade would make the point that control of technology and resources for the extravagant profit of the few has always been the obvious way to do things.
But people with access to the resources have generally been responsible about their exploitation much better than cartels.
Education, in a form that encourages individual responsibility and imitative over "fitting in" with cartelist organizations, would answer every concern. Liberty of the individual is the real answer.
population has always been subject to some kind of limitation. Like mosquitos.... nothing in nature goes unchecked by the realities of resource competition. We would have a ball of mosquitos, not dirt, if the Malthusian nightmare were a reality, or if the exponential curves ever turned real.
So "overpopulation" is the Big Lie, and Bill Gates and the thousands of New World Order fascists are just exploiting it. No one really believes it. It is intuitively false, except to the credulous students in your class who haven't seen the real world yet.
But more to the point.
People don't have to believe something to think it serves their interest.
True of Climate Change. True of Overpopulation. True of Socialism.
One Brow
Well-Known Member
Should I ever undertake such an effort, I'll keep that in mind. Meanwhile, I'll just keep aiming for smaller, incremental improvements in the near future.
Exponentially increasing populations will always eventually outstrip their resources. Ultimately, all our food comes from sunlight, and while we could use it more efficiently, it's not unlimited. However, I completely agree we are currently no where near the carrying capacity of the planet, and the reason people starve is the inefficient distribution that is endemic to capitalism.
True of harebrained notions that the Rhodes and Rockefellers of the world form some sort of secret cabal.
Assuming that the Rhodes and Rockefellers of the world need any kind of "secret cabal" is just stupid, OB. They write books about their plans, they organize multiple broad-based public outreach programs and chatter endlessly about the needs of the world as they see it.
Denying the effectiveness of their strategies is the sort of thing "harebrained" socialists who deny the very origins and perpetrators of world socialism today is the kind of stuff the Obstinately Blind need to do to ignore it all.
There is actually no.... absolutely NO.... "capitalist" political organization on the face of the globe today. Well, no effective organization, no coordinated action. Most of the "Capital" today is controlled by people who finance global fascism/socialism. The fascism part is the part that staffs world organizations of consequence to make corporate elites... well ….the "right" corporate elites.... dominant. The Red Chinese "Army" is a pretty well-integrated "capitalist" sort of organization that effectively coordinates political influence with profitable undertakings the world over, securing the friendliness and favors of people like Bill and Hillary Clinton, Elaine Chou, various senators including Biden.... a virtual laundry list of American politicians.... but all that "capitalist" insider influence goes toward a globalist vision of the world's future with the Chinese Master Race running the show.....
You truly have a sort of intellectual stumbling block even mentioning "Capitalism" as the "endemic" problem causing all this misdirection of world resources away from the beneficial use of ordinary people. It is expressly "Socialism" that is effectively doing all that.
The manipulation of the public with ideals we call "socialism" when the fact is it is an extremely well-organized fascism.
Denying the effectiveness of their strategies is the sort of thing "harebrained" socialists who deny the very origins and perpetrators of world socialism today is the kind of stuff the Obstinately Blind need to do to ignore it all.
There is actually no.... absolutely NO.... "capitalist" political organization on the face of the globe today. Well, no effective organization, no coordinated action. Most of the "Capital" today is controlled by people who finance global fascism/socialism. The fascism part is the part that staffs world organizations of consequence to make corporate elites... well ….the "right" corporate elites.... dominant. The Red Chinese "Army" is a pretty well-integrated "capitalist" sort of organization that effectively coordinates political influence with profitable undertakings the world over, securing the friendliness and favors of people like Bill and Hillary Clinton, Elaine Chou, various senators including Biden.... a virtual laundry list of American politicians.... but all that "capitalist" insider influence goes toward a globalist vision of the world's future with the Chinese Master Race running the show.....
You truly have a sort of intellectual stumbling block even mentioning "Capitalism" as the "endemic" problem causing all this misdirection of world resources away from the beneficial use of ordinary people. It is expressly "Socialism" that is effectively doing all that.
The manipulation of the public with ideals we call "socialism" when the fact is it is an extremely well-organized fascism.
Red
Well-Known Member
So I guess the ice melt of the Greenland ice sheet is at record levels for mid June:
https://truthout.org/articles/scientists-are-stunned-by-how-rapidly-ice-is-melting-in-the-arctic/
"June has set a record low of Arctic sea ice, while the extent of melting across the Greenland Ice Sheet this early in the summer has never been seen before.
Recently, temperatures in parts of Greenland soared to 40 degrees above normal, while open water (not covered by sea ice) is already being observed in places north of Alaska where it has seldom, if ever, been observed.
The current sea ice coverage in the Arctic is the lowest ever recorded for mid June."
This photo of the Greenland ice sheet has gone viral in recent days...
https://truthout.org/articles/scientists-are-stunned-by-how-rapidly-ice-is-melting-in-the-arctic/
"June has set a record low of Arctic sea ice, while the extent of melting across the Greenland Ice Sheet this early in the summer has never been seen before.
Recently, temperatures in parts of Greenland soared to 40 degrees above normal, while open water (not covered by sea ice) is already being observed in places north of Alaska where it has seldom, if ever, been observed.
The current sea ice coverage in the Arctic is the lowest ever recorded for mid June."
This photo of the Greenland ice sheet has gone viral in recent days...
I'd have to do some digging to see if these pics are anomalous or what. I've been saying the oceans are worldwide about 1 C above our known norms with any data at all to compare.
meanwhile, some areas are having cooler extremes...… our solar minimum..... As recently as this past week we still had a deep Pacific low north of Hawaii that was bringing tropical air (and moisture) clear up to Alaska. Not the usual very weak zonal flow of the Northern Hemisphere summer. A corresponding deep low over the Hudson Bay/Great Lakes has some folks in Buffalo wondering it there will be any summer at all.
The obvious "viral" evidence for global warming is just popular ignorance. The disappearance of sea ice is correlated with warmer global ocean temps, and suggests it is true at depth and not just on the surface. This is, I believe, the necessary setup for a change in climate patterns towards a new ice age. It might last fifty years. The oceans might get two or even five degrees warmer.
But I think there needs to be another major element to turn things decisively that way. Precessional variations in the earth's tilt on its axis has in the past correlated with Northern Ice Age evens. Just one degree more tilt.... Other events I think positively correlate with the cycle, including solar cycles on longer period than the 22-year sunspot cycle we have some records on…. I suspect possibly the greatest cycle might be our own earth's volcanism. I believe it is about a 35 million year cycle, and might be on the rise now.
polar ice sheets might not be seen again in 25 million years. So maybe we should just accept it and go on with our lives.....
meanwhile, some areas are having cooler extremes...… our solar minimum..... As recently as this past week we still had a deep Pacific low north of Hawaii that was bringing tropical air (and moisture) clear up to Alaska. Not the usual very weak zonal flow of the Northern Hemisphere summer. A corresponding deep low over the Hudson Bay/Great Lakes has some folks in Buffalo wondering it there will be any summer at all.
The obvious "viral" evidence for global warming is just popular ignorance. The disappearance of sea ice is correlated with warmer global ocean temps, and suggests it is true at depth and not just on the surface. This is, I believe, the necessary setup for a change in climate patterns towards a new ice age. It might last fifty years. The oceans might get two or even five degrees warmer.
But I think there needs to be another major element to turn things decisively that way. Precessional variations in the earth's tilt on its axis has in the past correlated with Northern Ice Age evens. Just one degree more tilt.... Other events I think positively correlate with the cycle, including solar cycles on longer period than the 22-year sunspot cycle we have some records on…. I suspect possibly the greatest cycle might be our own earth's volcanism. I believe it is about a 35 million year cycle, and might be on the rise now.
polar ice sheets might not be seen again in 25 million years. So maybe we should just accept it and go on with our lives.....
Carbon13
Well-Known Member
As risk mitigators, it is in our best interests to work toward decarbonizing our industries, electricity generation, and transportation. The question is at what cost? I think the Energiewende in Germany has had mixed results thus far and has been expensive - especially for the poor and middle class compared to the rich. The answers are difficult.
fishonjazz
Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2019 Award Winner
2020-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
Carbon13
Well-Known Member
That’s correct. Climate change is real and concerning. The question is what are we willing to do about it? I think you also have to consider costs when considering risks. Energy transitions are never easy and are unpredictable.
Focusing on carbon is the wrong approach imo. It allows us to invent fake things to "help" the situation, like carbon credits. Al Gore can fly all over in his private jet, maintain multiple houses he hardly ever sees, and do it all guilt free because he just pays (whom exactly?) To "offset" his carbon footprint. Ridiculous. The focus should be on sustainability, not paying carbon credits.