A Warming Climate Brings New Crops to Frigid Zones

[Woodznutz]

None of which have a thing to do with the climate.

Not one.

Sorry, I should have made a paragraph break after the first two sentences.

 

[Woodznutz]

We're going around in circles now & I'm afraid it's time to stop.

Where we got to is that we can not determine how much of a threat there is, and even if we could we don't know how to fix it, but now you're still insisting that we've already "succumbed to many of these threats" and all I can say is good for you and I'll see u around.

Cheers!

The point is that if we are unable to solve simple problems how do we address more challenging ones?

 

[westwall]

The point is that if we are unable to solve simple problems how do we address more challenging ones?

Climate isn't a problem. It just is. It does its merry thing regardless of what pitiful little us do. The only thing we can do is not build on flood plains, build better, more energy efficient buildings, not because it is good for the environment, but because it is smart to save money where you can. The benefits to the environment will naturally happen when we do that sort of thing.

 

[Crick]

[Ding, would you] Care to identify the datasets that would lead climate scientists to reject AGW?

Still waiting

 

[Sunsettommy]

Still waiting

LINK

===

El-Nino phases are the main cause of warming since 1979,

Cold & Warm Episodes by Season

LINK

===

Bob Tisdale

THE TRENBERTH GLOBAL WARMING STAIRCASE

LINK

===

Sun/Ocean dynamo drives the climate

 

[expat_panama]

The point is that if we are unable to solve simple problems how do we address more challenging ones?

We can agree on that.

 

[Crick]

So, your conclusion is that we should... give up?

 

[ding]

Care to identify the datasets that would lead climate scientists to reject AGW?

Sure. Do you care to address the data instead of attacking the character of the authors, Vladimir?

Scientists come to opposite conclusions about the causes of recent climate change depending on which datasets they consider. For instance, the panels on the left lead to the conclusion that global temperature changes since the mid-19th century have been mostly due to human-caused emissions, especially carbon dioxide (CO2), i.e., the conclusion reached by the UN IPCC reports. In contrast, the panels on the right lead to the exact opposite conclusion, i.e., that the global temperature changes since the mid-19th century have been mostly due to natural cycles, chiefly long-term changes in the energy emitted by the Sun.

Both sets of panels are based on published scientific data, but each uses different datasets and assumptions. On the left, it is assumed that the available temperature records are unaffected by the urban heat island problem, and so all stations are used, whether urban or rural. On the right, only rural stations are used. Meanwhile, on the left, solar output is modeled using the low variability dataset that has been chosen for the IPCC’s upcoming (in 2021/2022) 6th Assessment Reports. This implies zero contribution from natural factors to the long-term warming. On the right, solar output is modeled using a high variability dataset used by the team in charge of NASA’s ACRIM sun-monitoring satellites. This implies that most, if not all, of the long-term temperature changes are due to natural factors.

Here is the link to the full paper.
ShieldSquare Captcha

 

[ding]

Care to identify the datasets that would lead climate scientists to reject AGW?

You know... if you used the reply button I would get a notification. Are you scared of me or something?

 

[whitehall]

The Al Gore sponsored warming cult predicted disaster in twenty years from his presidential defeat in 2000. The earth barely burped. There is no evidence that semi-tropical vegetation is migrating into temperate zones even after twenty years of constant tax payer funded vigilance by none other than a dozen federal agencies. Man Made Global Warming is a extortion game promoted by Marxist anti-American activists.

 

[abu afak]

The Al Gor sponsored warming cult predicted disaster in twenty years from his presidential defeat in 2000. The earth barely burped. There is no evidence that semi-tropical vegetation is migrating into temperate zones even after twenty years of constant tax payer funded vigilance by none other than a dozen federal agencies. Man Made Global Warming is a extortion game promoted by Marxist anti-American activists.

Al Gore isn't a climate scientist, but he did have the trend right.
If elected he would have been the last one really able to do something.

Instead we got two-War Bush who spent Trillions on losing wars and the 2008 Crash.

`

 

[abu afak]

10F warmer would melt the poles/Greenland/all glaciers. (even 3F+ would)
Sea level would rise about 230'.
The end of our coastal cities and much further inland.
SkookerasBil would be under water long before that.

Do you have any brain at all?
No
You're stupid as a stone.
`````````

 

[abu afak]

The Al Gore sponsored warming cult predicted disaster in twenty years from his presidential defeat in 2000. The earth barely burped. There is no evidence that semi-tropical vegetation is migrating into temperate zones even after twenty years of constant tax payer funded vigilance by none other than a dozen federal agencies. Man Made Global Warming is a extortion game promoted by Marxist anti-American activists.

There is plenty of evidence, along with the marchn of other problems such as Mosquitos and forest beetles.
`

 

[expat_panama]

There is plenty of evidence, along with the marchn of other problems such as Mosquitos and forest beetles.
`

you sound very enthusiastic about the AGW cause and I'd dearly like to understand what the nut of the controversy is. As I understand it (and pse correct me if I misunderstand here) is that something is warming because of the greenhouse effect. Please tell me what is warming. You can't be saying it's the entire planet are u? If not, then which portion of the planet's mass is absorbing this energy?

 

[abu afak]

you sound very enthusiastic about the AGW cause and I'd dearly like to understand what the nut of the controversy is. As I understand it (and pse correct me if I misunderstand here) is that something is warming because of the greenhouse effect. Please tell me what is warming.
You Can't be saying it's the Entire planet are u? If not, then which portion of the planet's mass is absorbing this energy?

And I don't understand your question.
Nor do you.
If it is the Greenhouse effect, (and it is), it would be the whole planet as the atmosphere Mixes the gases equally, even those parts without emissions. (ie, Panama and the North pole have Both Gone from 280-410 PPM CO2 in the last 150 years).
The average temp of the lower atmosphere, Air temperature, Land, and Oceans, would all warm as the trapping affects of the GHGs are equally distributed across the planet. All would absorb and warm each other as well... as less of the Solar/Radiation is reflected back into space. Blocked from doing so at the exact spectral wavelengths of the GHGs.
(Probably the most/most noticeable in temperate or cold regions and less in tropical ones a the heat gets transferred by wind, etc)

All would basically keep their basic relationship and seasonality as the sun directly warms them at their respective latitudes as well, but all those/their Average Temps are getting warmer over time.
No, it doesn't get warmer every year due to ie, solar cycles, etc. And winters and summers have natural variation across the planet/regions in any given year (even decade) or short cycle within.
It can be exceptionally cold or hot across any region for a month, a year, or even 10, but over time it's warming on Average everywhere as the GHGs increase yearly.
Have you never see ie, a Temp/CO2 chart for say the last 100-150 years?


ie,

Which Mirrors....

`

 

[petro]

 

[westwall]

The most reliable indicator is ocean temperature, which is steadily rising. People mistake local weather conditions for global climate conditions, thus: "It's cold outside today therefore global warming is a hoax."

Climate Change Indicators: Sea Surface Temperature | US EPA

This indicator describes global trends in sea surface temperature.

www.epa.gov

Prove that it is rising. The actual raw data says otherwise

 

[Woodznutz]

Prove that it is rising. The actual raw data says otherwise

Where can one find that data?

 

[westwall]

Where can one find that data?

You have to go to the actual groups monitoring the instruments. They post the raw data, then the climatologists falsify it.

 

[Woodznutz]

You have to go to the actual groups monitoring the instruments. They post the raw data, then the climatologists falsify it.

Thanks.