The 2018 UN Climate Report

[lauriandres]

There are millions of scientists in the US, and they overwhelmingly support the science behind climate change. My statement was tongue-in-cheek, yours was ignorant.

One Brow, am i correct that according to the law in most of the countries - every person can be hired with the title "scientist"? I.e the scientist term/title is not regulated unlike CEO or doctor (at least in Estonia everybody, who has officialy graduated an university as a doctor for example orthopedist, gets an unique doctor's ID from the government and is put on a special database).
Am i scientist, if a company that belongs to my wife, hires me to research new accounting (she has an one-person accounting company) technologies?
IMHO, at least in my country there seems to be enough persons, who work at some university, claim to be scientist, however, most of the research seems to related to problems which are (loosely translated from estonian language - maybe there is better wording in english) - sucked out from the pen and are getting paid by the taxpayer.

 

[Red]

Why the right's usual smears don't work on Greta Thunberg. She keeps the focus on science, and they hate it:

https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/en...nberg-climate-change-trump-attacks-right-wing

The story of Greta Thunberg:

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/09/greta-thunberg-climate-change-movement.html

 

[One Brow]

Earth Cooling At The Fastest Rate On Record | Real Climate ...
realclimatescience.com/2017/01/earth-cooling-at...

https://www.investors.com/category/politics/editorials/
Don't Tell Anyone, But We Just Had Two Years Of Record-Breaking Global Cooling

NASA Discovers the Earth is Actually Cooling - NaturalON
naturalon.com/nasa-discovers-the-earth-is...
This means that there was an overall cooling effect that directly contradicts the global warming crowd as well as NASA’s own climatology division. Data collected shows that both carbon dioxide and nitric oxide are “greenhouse” gases that reflect energy, causing heat to return to space, not absorbed into the earth’s atmosphere.

Don't know if the links work, but just type in earth warming the last 10 years One Brow. I know you hate to be wrong. Sorry.

The use of short-term drops to hide long-term increases is an old, tired game. No one is fooled by it except people who want to be.

https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/

This graph illustrates the change in global surface temperature relative to 1951-1980 average temperatures. Eighteen of the 19 warmest years all have occurred since 2001, with the exception of 1998. The year 2016 ranks as the warmest on record.

Look at the graph at the top right. The five highest values (the dots) are 2014 through 2018. Coming down very slightly from a record high is not global cooling, and it's not a sign of a long-term trend.

Global warming deniers pulled this garbage after the then-record high in 1998, and the data this decade has blown away that temperature. The data in 20 years will be leving our current temperatures in the dust. Meanwhile, your type will still be there in 2039, talking about how it's cooler than 2037, so global warming must not be a thing. Your denial is a disease that will sicken the planet for your children and grandchildren.

 

[One Brow]

I would dispute the "ignorant" characterization, because he is referencing an actual document signed by his 500, whereas while there are similar documents from the concerned scientists who believe we have an urgent crisis, generally there is not yet one actually signed by your millions. So his point has some merit.

There are tens of thousands of papers published in scientific journals supporting teh reality of climate change. Why would there need to be some document for them to sign?

 

[One Brow]

One Brow, am i correct that according to the law in most of the countries - every person can be hired with the title "scientist"? I.e the scientist term/title is not regulated unlike CEO or doctor (at least in Estonia everybody, who has officialy graduated an university as a doctor for example orthopedist, gets an unique doctor's ID from the government and is put on a special database).
Am i scientist, if a company that belongs to my wife, hires me to research new accounting (she has an one-person accounting company) technologies?
IMHO, at least in my country there seems to be enough persons, who work at some university, claim to be scientist, however, most of the research seems to related to problems which are (loosely translated from estonian language - maybe there is better wording in english) - sucked out from the pen and are getting paid by the taxpayer.

I'm pretty sure the title of CEO is also unregulated. You are correct that the term "scientist" is not administered by a regulatory body, in the way "doctor of medicine" and "attorney" would be. You are correct that if we looked into this list of 500 "scientists" that jazz_rule discussed, most of them would not be working actively in climate research and therefore not have anything truly worthwhile to comment upon.

 

[NUMBERICA]

For once I agree with Thriller...she is not a "mentally ill Swedish child". She is simply brainwashed by her handlers.

"Handlers."

[EDITED}

 

[Red]

When the subject of Greta Thunberg came up on the impeachment thread, some argued that she was coached in the speech she delivered. According to this BBC profile, she spent the two weeks sailing across the Atlantic working on her UN speech, and those close to her insist she writes all her own speeches.

https://news.google.com/articles/CBMiNWh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmJiYy5jb20vbmV3cy9zY2llbmNlLWVudmlyb25tZW50LTQ5ODU1OTgw0gE5aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuYmJjLmNvbS9uZXdzL2FtcC9zY2llbmNlLWVudmlyb25tZW50LTQ5ODU1OTgw?hl=en-US&gl=US&ceid=US:en

And climate scientists are impressed with her effect.

https://www.nbcnews.com/mach/scienc...nberg-s-efforts-are-building-real-ncna1059321

 

[Zombie]

When the subject of Greta Thunberg came up on the impeachment thread, some argued that she was coached in the speech she delivered. According to this BBC profile, she spent the two weeks sailing across the Atlantic working on her UN speech, and those close to her insist she writes all her own speeches.

https://news.google.com/articles/CBMiNWh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmJiYy5jb20vbmV3cy9zY2llbmNlLWVudmlyb25tZW50LTQ5ODU1OTgw0gE5aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuYmJjLmNvbS9uZXdzL2FtcC9zY2llbmNlLWVudmlyb25tZW50LTQ5ODU1OTgw?hl=en-US&gl=US&ceid=US:en

And climate scientists are impressed with her effect.

https://www.nbcnews.com/mach/scienc...nberg-s-efforts-are-building-real-ncna1059321

I don't doubt it. One of the criticisms of Climate Change awareness for years is that scientists by their nature have a hard time moving public opinion with facts and studies. We've needed communicators who can make appeals to the world on a level that actually gets people to care. She's done more than anyone on this account.

 

[Red]

Hurricane Lorenzo, as far east as it is in the Atlantic, briefly reached Category 5. Wow...



https://www.sciencealert.com/hurric...-winds-and-presents-an-ominous-climate-signal

 

[babe]

One Brow, am i correct that according to the law in most of the countries - every person can be hired with the title "scientist"? I.e the scientist term/title is not regulated unlike CEO or doctor (at least in Estonia everybody, who has officialy graduated an university as a doctor for example orthopedist, gets an unique doctor's ID from the government and is put on a special database).
Am i scientist, if a company that belongs to my wife, hires me to research new accounting (she has an one-person accounting company) technologies?
IMHO, at least in my country there seems to be enough persons, who work at some university, claim to be scientist, however, most of the research seems to related to problems which are (loosely translated from estonian language - maybe there is better wording in english) - sucked out from the pen and are getting paid by the taxpayer.

Pretty obvious thing here. "Science" has never been owned or regulated. The definition has never been "settled". The term has a root in language, and no human is out of the equation.

"Science, since people must do it, is a socially embedded activity. It progresses by hunch, vision, and intuition. Much of its change through time does not record a closer approach to absolute truth, but the alteration of cultural contexts that influence it so strongly. Facts are not pure and unsullied bits of information; culture also influences what we see and how we see it. Theories, moreover, are not inexorable inductions from facts. The most creative theories are often imaginative visions imposed upon facts; the source of imagination is also strongly cultural. [Stephen Jay Gould, introduction to "The Mismeasure of Man," 1981]"
https://www.etymonline.com/word/science

 

[babe]

There are tens of thousands of papers published in scientific journals supporting teh reality of climate change. Why would there need to be some document for them to sign?

So the contest is for willing participants, with a sorta solid wall of authoritarians who won't actually discuss stuff with the little band of disputants.

There are thousands of Priests of almost any traditional religion, some being ordained some not I suppose, but all holding fairly consistent views. And lots of books and publications to sit on.

The fundamental thing here is that it is anyone's right to think, to believe something or not. The idea of authoritarian dogmas just cries out for challenge. If you can't or won't discuss it, you are not credible, no matter how "settled" you are, nor how many sit in your choir.

The idea of a government determinining and standardizing beliefs is inherently abhorrent.

 

[babe]

There are obvious deficiencies in published, peer-reviewed reports, and the willingness of political proponents of action, claiming support from the "Science", to push "solutions" that are basically political..... rather than practical..... that are ineffective in regard to the problem of the climate change.... should set off all kinds of warning bells.

Look, I see you are not a scientist. You are not inclined to the methods traditional to science. You are a political activist, like little Greta. It does not impress me, or change my thinking that political wonks are worried about climate. I am not.

I will do something about it, but not "worry".

 

[babe]

So, in summary, we have no idea what all is changing, or why. CO2 is only one factor, and not an especially strong driver. Changes in solar output, or the earth's precession or wobble in orbit, are stronger drivers than a change of .01% in CO2. There are huge natural cycles involving carbon dioxide, some much stronger than human activity.

One thing I am seriously looking into is internal earth processes.... changes in heat generation. I would like to see a lot more data than we have. There have been a few studies and calculations made of the amount of heat emanating from beneath towards the surface. So far, it's figured that earth's contribution to the heat balance is maybe 10% of the Sun's. But it is important to the Ocean temp at depth. A 1C change in ocean temp, top to bottom, would be thousands of times more important than a 1C change in the atmosphere temp.

Scientists all assume it is not changing. But geologically we know that it does change, and massively. Most scientists think it is decreasing. But recent reports, published in leading peer-reviewed journals no less, by uncontroversial "scientists" have found that the old ideas are just wrong. It's clear that the fission sources of heat are only about half of the heat being generated, and that a second source is necessary to explain the heat. A source that is not decreasing.

Ocean data is showing more CO2 outgassing from the oceans than scientists have thought, too.

So it's possible, besides the human component, there is a more powerful source for climate change.

The practical thing to do is plan to adapt ourselves, not change our economics or politics.

 

[jazzrule]

"Handlers."

Suck a dick off a cliff.

Reported

 

[Red]

Humans are disturbing the Earth's carbon cycle more then the asteroid that killed the dinosaurs 65 million years ago, and more then all the volcanoes in the world combined:

https://www.livescience.com/anthropogenic-warming-like-dinosaur-killing-asteroid.html

 

[Red]

Wow, pretty alarming, and, if you like birds, downright depressing...

 

[Red]

 

[Red]

No surprise here, and I don't blame anyone. If the US doesn't care, why should anyone else?

https://www.politico.com/news/2019/...-collapse-after-trump-shuns-paris-pact-085464

MADRID — U.N. climate negotiations ended in disarray on Sunday, amid worries that President Donald Trump will win reelection next year and follow through on his promises to withdraw the U.S. from the international effort to head off catastrophic changes across the planet.

The talks exposed deep rifts among industrialized nations, fast-growing economies like China and India and the poorest countries – divides that the U.S. had helped bridge under former President Barack Obama in the run-up to the 2015 Paris climate accord. With Trump moving to pull out of the pact, delegates from many countries retreated behind their long-held grievances over how to bear the burdens of reducing greenhouse gases and preparing for the worsening effects of a changing climate.

The talks in Madrid dealt largely with technical issues, but raised questions about whether countries will unite to take aggressive steps without the diplomatic might of the U.S. to drive the process forward.

“[The U.S.] are not helping,” said former French environment minister Laurence Tubiana, who shepherded the 2015 Paris pact, adding that other countries are “waiting for the U.S. election. This type of thing, which really is pretty stupid ... creates an impact of ‘wait and see.’”

The U.S. cannot officially withdraw from the Paris agreement until Nov. 4, 2020, the day after the election. But Trump has repeatedly disavowed the pact, has dismissed climate change as a hoax and has begun dismantling the Obama-era regulations aimed at reducing the United States’ greenhouse gas output.

"We're in a very politically difficult time right now where we've got one key world leader denying climate change, so it's very hard to get other countries to move forward when you've got such a critical country playing a spoiling role," said Ian Fry, a delegate from the Pacific Ocean island nation Tuvalu. "That's the state of the world we're in at the moment."

 

[fishonjazz]

No surprise here, and I don't blame anyone. If the US doesn't care, why should anyone else?

https://www.politico.com/news/2019/...-collapse-after-trump-shuns-paris-pact-085464

MADRID — U.N. climate negotiations ended in disarray on Sunday, amid worries that President Donald Trump will win reelection next year and follow through on his promises to withdraw the U.S. from the international effort to head off catastrophic changes across the planet.

The talks exposed deep rifts among industrialized nations, fast-growing economies like China and India and the poorest countries – divides that the U.S. had helped bridge under former President Barack Obama in the run-up to the 2015 Paris climate accord. With Trump moving to pull out of the pact, delegates from many countries retreated behind their long-held grievances over how to bear the burdens of reducing greenhouse gases and preparing for the worsening effects of a changing climate.

The talks in Madrid dealt largely with technical issues, but raised questions about whether countries will unite to take aggressive steps without the diplomatic might of the U.S. to drive the process forward.

“[The U.S.] are not helping,” said former French environment minister Laurence Tubiana, who shepherded the 2015 Paris pact, adding that other countries are “waiting for the U.S. election. This type of thing, which really is pretty stupid ... creates an impact of ‘wait and see.’”

The U.S. cannot officially withdraw from the Paris agreement until Nov. 4, 2020, the day after the election. But Trump has repeatedly disavowed the pact, has dismissed climate change as a hoax and has begun dismantling the Obama-era regulations aimed at reducing the United States’ greenhouse gas output.

"We're in a very politically difficult time right now where we've got one key world leader denying climate change, so it's very hard to get other countries to move forward when you've got such a critical country playing a spoiling role," said Ian Fry, a delegate from the Pacific Ocean island nation Tuvalu. "That's the state of the world we're in at the moment."

Trump just ****ing things up and making the world a worse place like usual.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app