Jump to content
Snow?
Local
Radar
Cold?
IGNORED

Report Climate change ipcc


weirpig

Recommended Posts

Posted
  • Location: Exeter
  • Weather Preferences: Warm and sunny!
  • Location: Exeter

Climate change denial only exists because people want to deny responsibility for the destruction of the environment.  Sure, the Earth may have been warmer in the past.  However, the planet has warmed by 1C within a LIFETIME!  That's almost unprecedented in Earth's history!  You'd have to be a madman to deny global CO2 concentrations have increased.  Ocean acidification is another clear example of this.  It's basic physics that CO2, CH4, etc. are radiatively active gases.  It astounds me that people who frankly have very little education on atmospheric physics can discount scientists who have dedicated their lives studying it.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Mytholmroyd, West Yorks.......
  • Weather Preferences: Hot & Sunny, Cold & Snowy
  • Location: Mytholmroyd, West Yorks.......

hi Earthshine!

Got another potent GHG ( 300 times as bad as CO2) that is on the increase now we're melting our permafrost;

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/04/190415090848.htm

If , via Arctic amplification, the Arctic is seeing 4 times the warming of the rest of the world we might expect our first 'Earth shocks' to originate there?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Exeter
  • Weather Preferences: Warm and sunny!
  • Location: Exeter
10 minutes ago, Gray-Wolf said:

hi Earthshine!

Got another potent GHG ( 300 times as bad as CO2) that is on the increase now we're melting our permafrost;

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/04/190415090848.htm

If , via Arctic amplification, the Arctic is seeing 4 times the warming of the rest of the world we might expect our first 'Earth shocks' to originate there?

Hi Gray-Wolf!

Snowball effect underway then.  Had a quick read of the article and I had no idea nitrous oxide has yet another threat.  The problem is that since very few people live in the Arctic the full impacts of global warming aren't being felt by most of us (yet).  I would not be surprised if the 2020s will be the warmest decade on record.  Even now we are seeing disastrously low Arctic sea ice extents.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Near Newton Abbot or east Dartmoor, Devon
  • Location: Near Newton Abbot or east Dartmoor, Devon
28 minutes ago, Earthshine said:

Climate change denial only exists because people want to deny responsibility for the destruction of the environment.  Sure, the Earth may have been warmer in the past.  However, the planet has warmed by 1C within a LIFETIME!  That's almost unprecedented in Earth's history!  You'd have to be a madman to deny global CO2 concentrations have increased.  Ocean acidification is another clear example of this.  It's basic physics that CO2, CH4, etc. are radiatively active gases.  It astounds me that people who frankly have very little education on atmospheric physics can discount scientists who have dedicated their lives studying it.

It's astonished me for a couple of decades...If people don't want to hear they stubbornly wont. Over history and in recent time there are numerous example of that sort of behaviour.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Beccles, Suffolk.
  • Weather Preferences: Thunder, snow, heat, sunshine...
  • Location: Beccles, Suffolk.
5 minutes ago, Devonian said:

It's astonished me for a couple of decades...If people don't want to hear they stubbornly wont. Over history and in recent time there are numerous example of that sort of behaviour.

Aye, Dev: every time we might reasonably expect the argument to have been 'won', Deniers Incorporated wheels out a 'useful idiot: a position the likes of Monckton and Lawson seem only too eager to fill...?

Edited by Ed Stone
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Near Newton Abbot or east Dartmoor, Devon
  • Location: Near Newton Abbot or east Dartmoor, Devon
32 minutes ago, Ed Stone said:

Aye, Dev: every time we might reasonably expect the argument to have been 'won', Deniers Incorporated wheels out a 'useful idiot: a position the likes of Monckton and Lawson seem only too eager to fill...?

Perhaps I might start to call said Monckton and Lawson 'bullies' and a 'rabble' who want half the world population to stave....It's certainly the case such mud slinging has worked (so far) for those who dispute rock solid climate science and observations of the atmosphere..

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Liphook
  • Location: Liphook
1 hour ago, Earthshine said:

I would not be surprised if the 2020s will be the warmest decade on record.  Even now we are seeing disastrously low Arctic sea ice extents.

Almost certainly, though if the AMO does flip negative and we get a few decent la Nina events then that may balance things out globally for 10-15 years. These happened during the 60/70s which combined with a flatlining of Co2 (maybe due to ww2?) In the 40s and maybe the dimming GW said helped to slightly cool the earth...but it was hardly as drastic as the upswing since then.

What's really amazing is nearly every 5 year mean for the Arctic sea ice has ticked down a touch. Worrying for sure!

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Edmonton Alberta(via Chelmsford, Exeter & Calgary)
  • Weather Preferences: Sunshine and 15-25c
  • Location: Edmonton Alberta(via Chelmsford, Exeter & Calgary)
3 hours ago, Earthshine said:

Climate change denial only exists because people want to deny responsibility for the destruction of the environment.  Sure, the Earth may have been warmer in the past.  However, the planet has warmed by 1C within a LIFETIME!  That's almost unprecedented in Earth's history!  You'd have to be a madman to deny global CO2 concentrations have increased.  Ocean acidification is another clear example of this.  It's basic physics that CO2, CH4, etc. are radiatively active gases.  It astounds me that people who frankly have very little education on atmospheric physics can discount scientists who have dedicated their lives studying it.

here is the mistake...nobody..not even so called 'climate change deniers' claim that CO2 concentrations have not increased over the last 150 years..not that i am aware of anyway..their argument is how much warming is caused by CO2 if any at all and how much is caused by other factors ..one thing to consider is we only really have 50 years of reliable world wide statistical data on the climate of our planet...Climatology compared to other branches of science is fairly young so we are filling in a lot of holes with our best scientific guesses based on the information we have to date..which compared to other areas of science is very limited indeed...so when people try to close the debate and say a consensus has been reached..which means there is no room for debate or discussion..then we are in a dangerous place..we may indeed be staring down the barrel of a gun..but is it the right gun??

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Near Newton Abbot or east Dartmoor, Devon
  • Location: Near Newton Abbot or east Dartmoor, Devon
44 minutes ago, cheeky_monkey said:

here is the mistake...nobody..not even so called 'climate change deniers' claim that CO2 concentrations have not increased over the last 150 years..not that i am aware of anyway..their argument is how much warming is caused by CO2 if any at all and how much is caused by other factors ..one thing to consider is we only really have 50 years of reliable world wide statistical data on the climate of our planet...Climatology compared to other branches of science is fairly young so we are filling in a lot of holes with our best scientific guesses based on the information we have to date..which compared to other areas of science is very limited indeed...so when people try to close the debate and say a consensus has been reached..which means there is no room for debate or discussion..then we are in a dangerous place..we may indeed be staring down the barrel of a gun..but is it the right gun??

Only 50 years? 1969? How old are you :oldrolleyes:

I'm well over fifty, very well over actually...,  and I have to tell you that in 1969 we had invented cars, doctors, electricity, thermometers, aeroplanes, TV, radio, weather forecasts - we even had electric light back then! 50 years? I think not! 150 years then maybe you can make a case, of sorts...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Beccles, Suffolk.
  • Weather Preferences: Thunder, snow, heat, sunshine...
  • Location: Beccles, Suffolk.
49 minutes ago, cheeky_monkey said:

here is the mistake...nobody..not even so called 'climate change deniers' claim that CO2 concentrations have not increased over the last 150 years..not that i am aware of anyway..their argument is how much warming is caused by CO2 if any at all and how much is caused by other factors ..one thing to consider is we only really have 50 years of reliable world wide statistical data on the climate of our planet...Climatology compared to other branches of science is fairly young so we are filling in a lot of holes with our best scientific guesses based on the information we have to date..which compared to other areas of science is very limited indeed...so when people try to close the debate and say a consensus has been reached..which means there is no room for debate or discussion..then we are in a dangerous place..we may indeed be staring down the barrel of a gun..but is it the right gun??

At least if they denied increasing CO2 concentrations, they'd be being consistent: but, to accept a cause whilst denying its effect, is just plain daft...It's denial of the laws of physics!

I guess that's why the vast majority of deniers would struggle with a Science GCSE?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Edmonton Alberta(via Chelmsford, Exeter & Calgary)
  • Weather Preferences: Sunshine and 15-25c
  • Location: Edmonton Alberta(via Chelmsford, Exeter & Calgary)
40 minutes ago, Devonian said:

Only 50 years? 1969? How old are you :oldrolleyes:

I'm well over fifty, very well over actually...,  and I have to tell you that in 1969 we had invented cars, doctors, electricity, thermometers, aeroplanes, TV, radio, weather forecasts - we even had electric light back then! 50 years? I think not! 150 years then maybe you can make a case, of sorts...

how many reporting stations were there 150 years ago in the world?? quite a few in North America and UK a few in Western Europe and pretty much zero elsewhere in the world..only in the last 50 years or so do we have much more widespread stations across the rest of the globe.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Hull
  • Weather Preferences: Cold Snowy Winters, Hot Thundery Summers
  • Location: Hull
16 minutes ago, cheeky_monkey said:

how many reporting stations were there 150 years ago in the world?? quite a few in North America and UK a few in Western Europe and pretty much zero elsewhere in the world..only in the last 50 years or so do we have much more widespread stations across the rest of the globe.

That is incorrect coverage becomes pretty widespread over many areas of the world from the 1880s onwards over land and over the oceans (away from the Antarctic and South Pacific). Ocean coverage is pretty good from the 1880s onwards aside from the two world wars.

Yes the observing network isn't as dense but the anomalies give a very strong indication as to what temperatures may have been over a wide area. We also have uncertainty estimates due to coverage issues and these can be calculated by subsampling present data coverage to that of past decades.

So your assumption that we only have enough data after 1969 is wrong.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Exeter
  • Weather Preferences: Warm and sunny!
  • Location: Exeter
2 hours ago, cheeky_monkey said:

here is the mistake...nobody..not even so called 'climate change deniers' claim that CO2 concentrations have not increased over the last 150 years..not that i am aware of anyway..their argument is how much warming is caused by CO2 if any at all and how much is caused by other factors ..one thing to consider is we only really have 50 years of reliable world wide statistical data on the climate of our planet...Climatology compared to other branches of science is fairly young so we are filling in a lot of holes with our best scientific guesses based on the information we have to date..which compared to other areas of science is very limited indeed...so when people try to close the debate and say a consensus has been reached..which means there is no room for debate or discussion..then we are in a dangerous place..we may indeed be staring down the barrel of a gun..but is it the right gun??

Evidence suggests humans are by far the main driver for climate change.  Until new evidence arises that suggests the contrary we can be quite certain that humans are causing climate change.  Frankly the "evidence" provided by climate change deniers is rubbish and their beliefs are just that, beliefs (i.e. not grounded in reality).  You can believe what you want, but I have a problem when people start conspiracy theories and claim they are correct.  It's rather an insult to those who have dedicated their lives to climate science by stating they are completely wrong with no evidence to back up the claim.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Edmonton Alberta(via Chelmsford, Exeter & Calgary)
  • Weather Preferences: Sunshine and 15-25c
  • Location: Edmonton Alberta(via Chelmsford, Exeter & Calgary)

Here is an interesting stat for the protesters...The UK carbon omissions have fallen by 36% since 1990...The US has remained unchanged...India is up by 405% and China is up by 455%..so the UK is leading the charge on omissions yet they want to still bring London to a standstill whilst ignoring the big 3?

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Edmonton Alberta(via Chelmsford, Exeter & Calgary)
  • Weather Preferences: Sunshine and 15-25c
  • Location: Edmonton Alberta(via Chelmsford, Exeter & Calgary)
20 minutes ago, Earthshine said:

Evidence suggests humans are by far the main driver for climate change.  Until new evidence arises that suggests the contrary we can be quite certain that humans are causing climate change.  Frankly the "evidence" provided by climate change deniers is rubbish and their beliefs are just that, beliefs (i.e. not grounded in reality).  You can believe what you want, but I have a problem when people start conspiracy theories and claim they are correct.  It's rather an insult to those who have dedicated their lives to climate science by stating they are completely wrong with no evidence to back up the claim.

who said they were wrong? who said they were right either....and where do conspiracy theories come it to it??:drunk-emoji:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: North York Moors
  • Location: North York Moors

Over the last 100 years similar warming occurred before the 1950s as since, that doesn't particularly support CO2 being a major driver.
It is known to have a logarithmic effect in other words you have to add more and more to get any further increase.
All the model based predictions are running way too hot despite being gradually revised downwards.

'Climate change' has become a major self-sustaining industry in itself, and the compliant media rush to exaggerate any possible warming related event with scant evidence to support any link.
In effect, you are all being brainwashed. It starts in schools and most of the media drip feed you reinforcement messages.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Beccles, Suffolk.
  • Weather Preferences: Thunder, snow, heat, sunshine...
  • Location: Beccles, Suffolk.

^^ Codswallop!:wallbash: It's nowt more than denialist obfuscation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Hull
  • Weather Preferences: Cold Snowy Winters, Hot Thundery Summers
  • Location: Hull
31 minutes ago, 4wd said:

Over the last 100 years similar warming occurred before the 1950s as since, that doesn't particularly support CO2 being a major driver.
It is known to have a logarithmic effect in other words you have to add more and more to get any further increase.
All the model based predictions are running way too hot despite being gradually revised downwards.

'Climate change' has become a major self-sustaining industry in itself, and the compliant media rush to exaggerate any possible warming related event with scant evidence to support any link.
In effect, you are all being brainwashed. It starts in schools and most of the media drip feed you reinforcement messages.

Maybe its a good time to take off your tin foil hat...

I have never read such utter rubbish in the climate forum...

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Sheffield South Yorkshire 160M Powering the Sheffield Shield
  • Weather Preferences: Any Extreme
  • Location: Sheffield South Yorkshire 160M Powering the Sheffield Shield

Reading this makes you wonder how science ever advances. Okay in the past it has stalled for years due to close minds.

From yes prime minister Hacker to Sir Humphrey "You mean, Your statistics are facts but my facts are just statistics?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Aviemore
  • Location: Aviemore
32 minutes ago, Ed Stone said:

^^ Codswallop!:wallbash: It's nowt more than denialist obfuscation.

 

26 minutes ago, Quicksilver1989 said:

Maybe its a good time to take off your tin foil hat...

I have never read such utter rubbish in the climate forum...

I'm not sure that's the way to counter those sort of views. Evidence and reason is surely the way forward. If people don't want to listen to that, then so be it. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Hull
  • Weather Preferences: Cold Snowy Winters, Hot Thundery Summers
  • Location: Hull
6 minutes ago, Paul said:

 

I'm not sure that's the way to counter those sort of views. Evidence and reason is surely the way forward. If people don't want to listen to that, then so be it. 

Problem is though these arguments have been put forward again and again despite trying to explain why they are wrong.. Some people just want to misinform and will never change their mind.

I used to be a climate change denier when I was 17 I know where you are coming from.. but whilst I wanted to learn more about the subject some people just want to confuse as they have come up with these posts on many occasions.

Edited by Quicksilver1989
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Longden, Shropshire
  • Location: Longden, Shropshire
7 hours ago, Earthshine said:

I would not be surprised if the 2020s will be the warmest decade on record.  Even now we are seeing disastrously low Arctic sea ice extents.

I’m of the belief that the 2020’s will be an eye opener......

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Mytholmroyd, West Yorks.......
  • Weather Preferences: Hot & Sunny, Cold & Snowy
  • Location: Mytholmroyd, West Yorks.......

As you see in London Paul some folk are at the end of their tethers and so become as 'tetchy' as you have ever seen in here ( not sure any of the contributors was willing to face arrest?)

There are those among us willing to 'blame' those who were active in denying the forcings we have placed/are pacing upon our climate system ,we are a 'weather' site....surely we have noticed the changes to our weather across the planet?

Or are we blinded by our '15 year' hold on 'what is normal'?

What have you seen over the past 15 years B.T.W.?

But , if this were my dam analogy, the water is now spurting out of the cracks ( but the dam still stands?) and the contrarians say 'the dam is fine ,it is still standing!'.......

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted
  • Location: Liphook
  • Location: Liphook
1 hour ago, 4wd said:

Over the last 100 years similar warming occurred before the 1950s as since, that doesn't particularly support CO2 being a major driver.
 

Well for a start that isn't even accurate:

spacer.png

Fair to say that since 1970 there has been quite a notable shift upwards compared with before for a much longer period of time than previous upticks.

In fact as I said yesterday, there is even a stalling of increases in Co2 emissions around 1940-1960 which does coincide quite nicely with that flatlining of temperatures on that chart. I'd say that actually rather neatly puts blame on Co2.

I think its really clear that whilst natural factors do play a part, to shift the average so massively above where it was previously over the last 30 years withut any hint of a decent drop that you'd expect in natural variability.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...