• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

Climate change ?

Bob Maxey said:
... Sometimes, we simply do not want our sacred cows slaughtered and what seems outrageous or seems like a lie is actually the truth. When you post actual facts, some people do not believe what you say. Their exposure to the largely liberal media disagrees, so the facts must not be actual facts, but lies.
Click to expand...

This article somewhat supports your position :rolleyes: that our interpretation of facts can be bias.

Climate Change and Confirmation Bias - Reason Magazine

"The more scientifically literate you are, the more certain you are that climate change is either a catastrophe or a hoax, according to a new study [PDF] from the Yale Cultural Cognition Project.

Many science writers and policy wonks nurse the fond hope that fierce disagreement about issues like climate change is simply the result of a scientifically illiterate American public. If this “public irrationality thesis” were correct, the authors of the Yale study write, “then skepticism about climate change could be traced to poor public comprehension about science” and the solution would be more science education. In fact, their findings suggest more education is unlikely to help build consensus; it may even intensify the debate."

"The Wildavskyan schema situates Americans’ cultural values on two scales, one that ranges from Individualist to Communitarian and another that goes from Hierarchy to Egalitarian. In general, Hierarchical folks prefer a social order where people have clearly defined roles and lines of authority. Egalitarians want to reduce racial, gender, and income inequalities. Individualists expect people to succeed or fail on their own, while Communitarians believe that society is obligated to take care of everyone."

"The researchers report that people whose values are located in Individualist/Hierarchy spaces “can be expected to be skeptical of claims of environmental and technological risks. Such people, according to the theory, intuitively perceive that widespread acceptance of such claims would license restrictions on commerce and industry, forms of behavior that Hierarchical/Individualists value.” On the other hand Egalitarian/Communitarians “tend to be morally suspicious of commerce and industry, which they see as the source of unjust disparities in wealth and power. They therefore find it congenial, the theory posits, to see those forms of behavior as dangerous and thus worthy of restriction.” On this view, then, Egalitarian/Communitarians would be more worried about climate change risks than would be Hierarchical/Individualists."
 
Bob Maxey said:
Try these:

DailyTech - New Scandal Erupts over NOAA Climate Data

This:

NOAA: FUBAR high temp/climate records from faulty sensor to remain in place at Honolulu | Watts Up With That?

If you do not trust those links, follow the links in the articles. Also, search Google for other articles about this data issue. Learn how this data was collected (NOAA uses amateurs to collect data and they acknowledge some of those taking measurements are not complying with accepted standards)
Click to expand...

Don't believe these links fully support your position, as these are isolated examples. I believe what you are getting at is that terrestrial temperature observations are bias toward warmer temperatures over time due to urbanization, thus creating "heat sinks".
 
JimmyRayBob said:
... Long term is what matters. Globally. We will always have highs and lows in the short term, and locally. One "hottest summer ever" or one "coldest winter ever" doesn't change my mind one way or another.
Click to expand...

The Temperature Record Reliability Attack : A Few Things Ill Considered

"The investigation is focused on trends not the absolute level, and often, as in this case, it is actually easier to determine how much a given property is changing versus what its exact value is. If one station is near the airport at 3 feet above sea level, another is in a park at 3000 feet, it doesn't really matter because they are both rising, that is the critical information. So how do we finally know when all the reasoning is reasonable and the corrections correct? One good way is to cross check your conclusion against other completely unrelated data sets. In this case, all of the other various indicators of global temperature trends that are available unanimously agree. Go ahead, put aside the direct surface temperature measurements, because Global Warming is also indicated by:

All of these completely independent analyses of widely varied aspects of the climate system lead to the same conclusion: the Earth is undergoing a rapid and large warming trend. Looks like the folks at NASA and CRU do know what they are doing after all."
 
Global warming and cooling has been going on since the beginning. What no one seems to be looking at is what will happen to the atmosphere with the changes - for instance x, gamma, cosmic rays. Are there some that are beneficial that more clouds and thicker atmosphere would block, or would thinning and changes in the atmosphere let more rays in, especially if they are found to be more dangerous than thought?

Ash and pollutants in the atmosphere are recorded in ice sheets. They do sample cores of ice which do record fairly accurately.
There was the "year without a summer" in New England around 1816. That was caused by the explosion of Mt. Tambora.

Quote from Wikipedia:
The 1815 eruption is rated 7 on the Volcanic Explosivity Index, the only such eruption since the Lake Taupo eruption in about 180 AD.[6] With an estimated ejecta volume of 160 cubic kilometers, Tambora's 1815 outburst was the largest volcanic eruption in recorded history. The explosion was heard on Sumatra island (more than 2,000 km (1,200 mi) away). Heavy volcanic ash falls were observed as far away as Borneo, Sulawesi, Java and Maluku islands. Most deaths from the eruption were from starvation and disease, as the eruptive fallout ruined agricultural productivity in the local region. The death toll was at least 71,000 people (the most deadly eruption in recorded history), of whom 11,000–12,000 were killed directly by the eruption;[6] the often-cited figure of 92,000 people killed is believed to be overestimated.[7] The eruption created global climate anomalies that included the phenomenon known as "volcanic winter": 1816 became known as the "Year Without a Summer" because of the effect on North American and European weather. Agricultural crops failed and livestock died in much of the Northern Hemisphere, resulting in the worst famine of the 19th century.[6]

So carbon pollutants similar to volcanic eruptions can be a problem. Some of the scaremongers do have other agenda - like selling anti pollution solutions.
 
zuben el genub said:
Global warming and cooling has been going on since the beginning. What no one seems to be looking at is what will happen to the atmosphere with the changes - for instance x, gamma, cosmic rays.
Click to expand...

But you are missing the point. If climate change continues, millions of people would have to relocate. Hundreds of thousands of acres of farm land will have to be abandoned and moved. Everything we based our society on will be toss aside and we will have change with it. We are horrible at any form of change.

Which is the bottom line. Climate change will make a hard life even harder, creating greater problems and disrupting the balance in the ecosystem we have enjoyed in the last 10,000 years.

Does the planet heat up and cool off over time, yes it does. But in the same tone it also dramatically effects our ability to use the landscape to survive. If you enjoy your life and how the world is today, you need to stop climate change, no matter what is causing it. If you enjoy having to relocate and fight for survival, then climate change is for you.
 
The heating and cooling of the planet is a natural process that has taken place since the planet came into existence. Will it impact people living in coastal areas? Most definitely! The weather change will also have an impact on inland areas. Is this change in temperature due to the "global warming" hysteria? Nobody know for sure... There simply is not enough evidence to prove that what we are seeing today is not simply a peak in the planets weather pattern.

Consider this... scientists believe that this planet is about 4.5 billion years old. Weather patterns on planet Earth have been tracked and recorded for about 150 years with some limited anecdotal evidence of ancient weather patterns going back maybe 2000 years. Well if my mathematics is anywhere close that's about 0.00000333% of the overall age of the planet (if scientists are correct about the planets age).
 
Martimus said:
The heating and cooling of the planet is a natural process that has taken place since the planet came into existence. Will it impact people living in coastal areas? Most definitely! The weather change will also have an impact on inland areas. Is this change in temperature due to the "global warming" hysteria? Nobody know for sure... There simply is not enough evidence to prove that what we are seeing today is not simply a peak in the planets weather pattern.



Consider this... scientists believe that this planet is about 4.5 billion years old. Weather patterns on planet Earth have been tracked and recorded for about 150 years with some limited anecdotal evidence of ancient weather patterns going back maybe 2000 years. Well if my mathematics is anywhere close that's about 0.00000333% of the overall age of the planet (if scientists are correct about the planets age).
Click to expand...


We have ice cores that go back 700 thousand years. Thats a pretty fair sample size
 
try a simple science experiment......... take 2 blocks of ice....... drill holes in one and place them both on the sidewalk to see which one melts faster

global warming scientists are causing accelerated polar ice melts
 
copestag said:
try a simple science experiment......... take 2 blocks of ice....... drill holes in one and place them both on the sidewalk to see which one melts faster

global warming scientists are causing accelerated polar ice melts
Click to expand...

Try this one:

Buy four 10 pound turkeys. Put one in the refrigerator, put one under warm running water, place one under cool running water, and let one set out on the counter to thaw.

Which one thaws quicker?

The turkey under cold running water thaws first. Do not ask me why, ask Alton Brown. So what is the point? None except that we often think things work one way and they really do not.

Actually, the real point is, I want someone here to prepare a few turkeys and invite me to dinner. I like chestnut dressing, by the way.

As for the blocks of ice, it is the block with the holes. I think it is a trick answer.
 
RiverOfIce said:
But you are missing the point. If climate change continues, millions of people would have to relocate. Hundreds of thousands of acres of farm land will have to be abandoned and moved. Everything we based our society on will be toss aside and we will have change with it. We are horrible at any form of change.

Which is the bottom line. Climate change will make a hard life even harder, creating greater problems and disrupting the balance in the ecosystem we have enjoyed in the last 10,000 years.

Does the planet heat up and cool off over time, yes it does. But in the same tone it also dramatically effects our ability to use the landscape to survive. If you enjoy your life and how the world is today, you need to stop climate change, no matter what is causing it. If you enjoy having to relocate and fight for survival, then climate change is for you.
Click to expand...

Why will they need to relocate and why will farm land need to be abandoned? More interesting is how will we move the farmland. UPS perhaps?

They better not come here is all I am saying.
 
RiverOfIce said:
To quote the movie "Paul", "You just can't win with these people."

Explorers for the last 500 years have looked for a northwest passage, it never existed until 2007. For those that do not believe in climate change, explain that.

Global warming, photography, pictures, photos, climate change, impact, science, weather, arctic, antarctica, climate zones, glacier, arctic warming, antarctica warming, documentation, effects, effects of climate change, paleoclimate, mountain glacier
Click to expand...

Easy to explain . . . it is perhaps natural?

BTW, Gary Braasch devotes his life to proving how bad we humans are. A look at his web site paints a pretty good picture of what he is all about. He is all about how bad us humans are and how horrible us GW deniers are.

I know a few things about Mr. Braasch.
 
Bob Maxey said:
BTW, Gary Braasch devotes his life to proving how bad we humans are. A look at his web site paints a pretty good picture of what he is all about. He is all about how bad us humans are and how horrible us GW deniers are.

I know a few things about Mr. Braasch.
Click to expand...

Well, we're wrecking the planet. Other than that, heck, human beings are the bomb.

Oops, no pun intended.
 
keale18 said:
We have ice cores that go back 700 thousand years. Thats a pretty fair sample size
Click to expand...

And when the layers are peeled back, how granular is the weather information that they provide? day-by-day? year-by-year? century-by-century?

Like looking at layers of sediment in rock these provide a very high level peek at what happened in the past. You simply cannot look at an ice core and determine what were the high, low, and median temperatures during each day/month/year represented in the ice core... And without detailed weather statistics it's difficult to make an accurate comparison of the weather patterns today with the weather patterns of the planet 123,456 years ago. :eek:

With such limited data to work with you might have to simply guess... ;)
 
Martimus said:
The heating and cooling of the planet is a natural process that has taken place since the planet came into existence. ...
Click to expand...

This is Just a Natural Cycle : A Few Things Ill Considered

"While it is undoubtably true that there are some cycles and natural variations in global climate, anyone who wishes to insist that the current warming is purely natural or even just mostly natural has two challenges. Firstly, they need to identify just what the mechanism is behind this alleged natural cycle, because absent a forcing of some sort, there will be no change in global energy balance. So natural or otherwise, we should be able to find this mysterious cause. Secondly, a "natural cause" proponent needs to come up with some explanation for how a 35% increase in the second most important greenhouse gas does not itself affect the global temperature. Theory predicts that the temperature will rise given an enhanced greenhouse effect, how is it possible this is not happening?

In other words, the mainstream climate science community has provided a well developed, internally consistent theory that predicts the effects we are observing. It provides explanations and makes predictions. Where is the sceptic community's model, or theory whereby CO2 does not affect the temperature? Where is the evidence of some other natural forcing, like the Milankovich cycles that controlled the ice ages, a fine historical example of a very dramatic and very regular climate cycle that can be read in the ice core records taken both in Greenland and in the Antarctic?"
 
Unfortunately it still does not answer the question of how you compare granular modern weather trend data to climate cycles over hundreds of thousands of years that shows tiny layers in ice cores extracted from polar regions.

The following chart was in that hyperlink

volstok.gif


Every listed gradiant on the bottom axis of this chart is a period of 25 thousand years. This chart lists trends over a very long period of time. It simply does not account for any sort of seasonal variation... any short term spikes get lost in the ambient noise. Comparing data on this chart to data accumulated real time by meteorologists is simply conjecture... there is no commonality and there is no equivalent point of reference.

Oh and if you notice there are periodic spikes of temperature, CO2, and/or methane that exceed current values at 125, 225, and around 325 thousand years ago...
 
I think we don't really have to worry about people relocating. When the world gets too hot, it'll kill us, and when it gets too cold, it'll kill any of us that survived. ;)
 
Martimus said:
... The following chart was in that hyperlink

volstok.gif


... Comparing data on this chart to data accumulated real time by meteorologists is simply conjecture... there is no commonality and there is no equivalent point of reference. ....
Click to expand...

The referenced graph is a combination of several graphs from the IPCC site, i.e. File:Holocene Temperature Variations Rev.png - Global Warming Art

Methods

To construct this plot, eight data sources (listed below) were selected on the basis of good temporal resolution (preferably ~100 years or less per data point) and coverage of the last 12 kyr. Seven of the eight specifically reported temperature and were used as is. The other one reported an unscaled temperature proxy and was scaled as described in Notes below. Each curve was smoothed by a Gaussian weighted filter to produce a history of the Holocene temperature variations at that site with approximately 300 year resolution (one exception, see notes). These smooth curves were adjusted to have the same mean over the interval 100-6000 years BP. The average of these curves was then constructed, and the alignment relative to modern day determined by comparing the average over the interval 250-1900 AD relative to the three short-term proxies shown in inset (for details on those plots, see: Image:2000 Year Temperature Comparison.png). Note that the short-term proxies are not at all used in constructing the average itself.
 
nlsme said:
How about asking yourself this Bob, why exactly are the ice caps melting? Ice caps that have been around for millennia are disappearing at an ever increasing rate. Its a hoax, right? To bad MOST scientist don't back you up....
Click to expand...

You're not claiming that ice caps have never melted prior to now, are you? At the same time, ice is growing at the south pole. Why is that?
 
mike114 said:
You're not claiming that ice caps have never melted prior to now, are you? At the same time, ice is growing at the south pole. Why is that?
Click to expand...
Nowhere did i say anything of the sort. I just made a point that showed it is happening NOW, contrary to what some have said. Also, as I've pointed out, it really doesn't matter why it is happening, all that matters is the effect it will have on us, and what we can do to mitigate the effects. Now, I see you are making a claim that it isn't happening now, because the ice in the south is growing. Care to provide any links to verify that, because the last I heard, it is breaking off in sheets the size of states.
 
mike114 said:
You're not claiming that ice caps have never melted prior to now, are you? At the same time, ice is growing at the south pole. Why is that?
Click to expand...
Ice always grows during the winter :p Yeah I know that some parts of the Antarctic arent losing ice, but much of it is

nlsme said:
The fact that the ice caps are melting is a pretty good indicator that it is in fact happening. Also, as I've pointed out, it really doesn't matter why it is happening, all that matters is the effect it will have on us, and what we can do to mitigate the effects.....
Click to expand...
Its an indicator, but its really the global climate that matters with this.
The Arctic is losing much more ice then the Antarctic too
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom