(Oct 31, 2017 08:48 AM)confused2 Wrote: It doesn't matter what model you choose - CO2 is being added faster than it is being removed. Anything that is going to stop that needs to start happening in (say) the next sixty years - there's no sign of it so far. The claim that something will stop the increase is based on faith without evidence. You would be better off with a model that claims to show there will be no effect of (say) a 50% in CO2.
And? My main contention is that none of this is imminently catastrophic.
(Nov 1, 2017 01:11 AM)Syne Wrote: "Catastrophic" means runaway climate change. Look it up.
Losing your job (or political support) is more immediately and personally catastrophic than runaway global warming. Look after the economy and let plants take care of runaway global warming - isn't that what you said?
(Nov 1, 2017 01:11 AM)Syne Wrote: "Catastrophic" means runaway climate change. Look it up.
Losing your job (or political support) is more immediately and personally catastrophic than runaway global warming. Look after the economy and let plants take care of runaway global warming - isn't that what you said?
Did you miss where I said, "My main contention is that none of this is imminently catastrophic."
Remember? And then you asked what I thought "catastrophic" meant.
Are you asserting that runaway global warming is imminent or already underway? O_o
(Nov 1, 2017 01:11 AM)Syne Wrote: "Catastrophic" means runaway climate change. Look it up.
Quote:runaway climate change
"runaway" infers a sense of control ?
(Nov 1, 2017 04:09 AM)Syne Wrote:
(Nov 1, 2017 01:29 AM)confused2 Wrote:
(Nov 1, 2017 01:11 AM)Syne Wrote: "Catastrophic" means runaway climate change. Look it up.
Losing your job (or political support) is more immediately and personally catastrophic than runaway global warming. Look after the economy and let plants take care of runaway global warming - isn't that what you said?
Did you miss where I said, "My main contention is that none of this is imminently catastrophic."
Remember? And then you asked what I thought "catastrophic" meant.
Are you asserting that runaway global warming is imminent or already underway? O_o
does climate change not bother(do you think only those effected directly should pay for their own personal issue out of their own pocket, businessess included) you if it only effects the people after you have gone ?
Again, are you asserting runaway climate change is imminent or already underway? That is the only catastrophic scenario here. Why else would climate change significantly bother you unless you think it's a foregone conclusion that it is catastrophic? And if you think so, where's your evidence? More hurricanes after a hiatus that we were long overdue for? What "personal issue"? Hurricanes that only coincidentally caused higher king tides...not signaling dramatic sea level rise.
(Nov 1, 2017 06:15 PM)Syne Wrote: Again, are you asserting runaway climate change is imminent or already underway?
i am not "asserting"
i am stating a facts(predominantly just posting scientists findings).
i do notice your desire to personalise the entire subject to make it a personal belief of someone rather than scientific facts so you can then attempt to define it as a beleif system to argue your "belief/religion" against theirs.
attempting to render science into a religion does not change science & does not make you any more scientifically valid either.
Quote:The White House has sought to downplay a major climate change report, which was compiled by 13 US federal agencies.
The study is at odds with assertions from President Donald Trump and several members of his administration.
It says it is "extremely likely" human activity is the "dominant cause" of global warming.
Syne, you tell me what bit you do not understand about global warming & climate change and i will explain it to you.
You would think, if only for public relations, that the big companies associated with the production of co2 (oil, nat gas, pipeline) would be at the forefront with regards to implementing the newest technologies available for controlling/reducing emissions. We are left with the impression those companies don't care. Maybe they don't but to wake up every day facing a high degree of negativity from the consumer can't be what's best for a company, IMHO. If irony ever comes into play some day, we may just see these very wealthy and despised companies becoming the leaders in green energy production. Until then they will go about doing what they do, and without any pressure from the gov't nothing will change. Who knows how long that will take or if it will ever happen.
(Nov 4, 2017 01:50 PM)Zinjanthropos Wrote: My two cents...
You would think, if only for public relations, that the big companies associated with the production of co2 (oil, nat gas, pipeline) would be at the forefront with regards to implementing the newest technologies available for controlling/reducing emissions. We are left with the impression those companies don't care. Maybe they don't but to wake up every day facing a high degree of negativity from the consumer can't be what's best for a company, IMHO. If irony ever comes into play some day, we may just see these very wealthy and despised companies becoming the leaders in green energy production. Until then they will go about doing what they do, and without any pressure from the gov't nothing will change. Who knows how long that will take or if it will ever happen.
indeed.
what country leadership is not heaily influenced by big business ?
Quote: Wrote:In Greenland, sea ice is seen from NASA's Operation IceBridge research aircraft in March 2017. NASA's Operation IceBridge has been studying how polar ice has evolved over the past nine years and is currently flying a set of eight-hour research flights over ice sheets and the Arctic Ocean to monitor Arctic ice loss. According to NASA scientists and the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC), sea ice in the Arctic appears to have reached its lowest maximum wintertime extent ever recorded.
Quote: Wrote:Albedo feedbacks
Albedo is a measure of how reflective a surface is, and the Earth's albedo influences the climate by determining how much sunlight is absorbed. Ice and snow have very high albedos, meaning they reflect a lot of sunlight. According to Dr. Johannes Sutter, a climatologist at the Alfred Wegener Institute in Bremerhaven, Germany, “the cryosphere is the planet's air conditioner. Its white surface—snow and ice—reflect much of the incoming sunlight, cooling the environment.”
the height at which the heat exchange takes places will rise.
this raises the precipitation level.
thus everything under that level will get warmer, which obviousely includes the land and general surface temperature.
if you have not watched this Documentary put together by some of the worlds leading scientists from many different countries then i recomend you watch it.
Oct 31, 2017 07:15 PM
![[Image: energy_balance.jpg]](https://forecast.weather.gov/jetstream/atmos/images/energy_balance.jpg)