Climate Change Gets Real For Americans

[Trakar]

I'm certain you're wrong; we have a 425,000 year data set showing CO2 lagging temperature both on the increase and decrease.

A modelled dataset depicting a period of warming that was forced primarily by one set of natural factors and conditions is not going to tell you much of anything about about climate change resulting from different set of forcing factors, and there are many different factors that can act as either feedbacks (amplifying or detractive) or forcings, dependent upon whether they are being driven by other influences or acting as primary influences all on their own. The data modelling upon which the older graphs you point to, were designed to reflect, need to be updated with more recent understandings.

 

[skookerasbil]

Climate Change Gets Real For Americans

Climate Change Gets Real For Americans : NPR

by Adam Frank


December 26, 2012 3:00 PM

December 26, 2012
javascript:NPR.Player.openPlayer(16....Action.PLAY_NOW, NPR.Player.Type.STORY, '0')
Listen to the Story

All Things Considered
3 min 9 sec

• Playlist
• Download

Something remarkable happened in 2012.


ROBERT SIEGEL, HOST:
Now to a scientist looking back at the year that's about to end. Commentator Adam Frank is an astrophysicist. And in the category of science, he is confident about the headline for 2012.

ADAM FRANK: Something remarkable has happened that may etch this year into history for centuries to come. 2012's importance comes not through elections, economic shifts or the new movements in art. No, 2012 may well be remembered for something far more elemental.
This was the year that climate change got real for Americans.
The scientific debate over climate change was settled years ago. The basic conclusion that the planet is warming, through fossil-fuel-based carbon dioxide release, is not in doubt. But that conclusion relied on technical arguments about things like greenhouse gas molecules and the interactions between the Earth's ocean, air and glacial systems.
Opponents of climate change used that technical complexity in the court of public opinion, to throw doubt on climate science via faux debates about hockey-stick diagrams, the influence of the sun or worse, false claims of manipulated data.
But after 2012 debates over technical abstractions lost their edge. That's because this year it finally became possible to see firsthand what climate change really means. The long summer of 2012 brought us heat waves that toppled records. Large sections of the U.S. remained trapped in extreme or even extraordinary drought for months. The summer's corn crop withered and cattle failed to find adequate grassland. It's now December and that drought has yet to abate.
Then, of course, came Hurricane Sandy. The storm surge pushed parts of New York underwater and cost tens of billions of dollars in damage. In its wake, government officials stated publicly what scientists had been saying in private for years. Climate change is happening now and from now on it must be built into all our plans for subways, for roads, sewers, and for electrical power distribution.
Even the question of attribution changed, as scientists developed methods providing quantitative links between any individual extreme weather event and the supercharged climate that comes from global warming.
In the end, 2012 brought a sea change in our understanding of climate change. The discussion shifted from the abstractions of scientific research to the concrete domain of visceral experience. The new normal has arrived.
SIEGEL: Commentator and astrophysicist Adam Frank reflecting on the year in science.

Shit s0n.......you are one naive mofu for an older guy. Im always fascinated by that kind of dynamic.


K00ks like you have been throwing bombs for almost 2 decades and what has it gotten you? The public doesnt give a crap about this stuff anymore, especially when it comes to having to open their wallet to contribute to k00k green causes. The wallet slams shut...........check any poll s0n!!! ANd if people really cared, we'd be getting tons of carbon reducing legislation but in the past 5 years, the best we've seen is banning incandescent light bulbs. What a fucking joke........fAiL s0n!!! Indeed........none of the "climate change consensus science" matters for shit if it is having zero influence on legislators. Executive fiat via the EPA dosent add up to dick. Meanwhile, you look across the water to Europe and they are moving in exactly the opposite direction as subsidies for renewables is also heading towards fossilization!!! Why? Because the scam has been exposed and the people dont want billions of tax dollars spent on what is essentially the equivelent of burning money in a bonfire.


But knock yourself out s0n...........

 

[skookerasbil]

 

[westwall]

Climate Change Gets Real For Americans

Climate Change Gets Real For Americans : NPR

by Adam Frank


December 26, 2012 3:00 PM

December 26, 2012
javascript:NPR.Player.openPlayer(16....Action.PLAY_NOW, NPR.Player.Type.STORY, '0')
Listen to the Story

All Things Considered
3 min 9 sec

• Playlist
• Download

Something remarkable happened in 2012.


ROBERT SIEGEL, HOST:
Now to a scientist looking back at the year that's about to end. Commentator Adam Frank is an astrophysicist. And in the category of science, he is confident about the headline for 2012.

ADAM FRANK: Something remarkable has happened that may etch this year into history for centuries to come. 2012's importance comes not through elections, economic shifts or the new movements in art. No, 2012 may well be remembered for something far more elemental.
This was the year that climate change got real for Americans.
The scientific debate over climate change was settled years ago. The basic conclusion that the planet is warming, through fossil-fuel-based carbon dioxide release, is not in doubt. But that conclusion relied on technical arguments about things like greenhouse gas molecules and the interactions between the Earth's ocean, air and glacial systems.
Opponents of climate change used that technical complexity in the court of public opinion, to throw doubt on climate science via faux debates about hockey-stick diagrams, the influence of the sun or worse, false claims of manipulated data.
But after 2012 debates over technical abstractions lost their edge. That's because this year it finally became possible to see firsthand what climate change really means. The long summer of 2012 brought us heat waves that toppled records. Large sections of the U.S. remained trapped in extreme or even extraordinary drought for months. The summer's corn crop withered and cattle failed to find adequate grassland. It's now December and that drought has yet to abate.
Then, of course, came Hurricane Sandy. The storm surge pushed parts of New York underwater and cost tens of billions of dollars in damage. In its wake, government officials stated publicly what scientists had been saying in private for years. Climate change is happening now and from now on it must be built into all our plans for subways, for roads, sewers, and for electrical power distribution.
Even the question of attribution changed, as scientists developed methods providing quantitative links between any individual extreme weather event and the supercharged climate that comes from global warming.
In the end, 2012 brought a sea change in our understanding of climate change. The discussion shifted from the abstractions of scientific research to the concrete domain of visceral experience. The new normal has arrived.
SIEGEL: Commentator and astrophysicist Adam Frank reflecting on the year in science.

Unfortunately, the major effects of climate change is yet to come.

I notice in the news that Iceland is changing it's name to something more appropriate, maybe Rockland. Iceland’s economy stands to benefit from the earth’s rapid transformation. The melting glaciers that feed Iceland’s rivers will be a boon to the country’s hydroelectric industry. Also a more temperate climate will attract more tourist. In the 22nd century, Iceland may be a premium retirement destination.

Yes, just like it was around 800 years ago. Iceland was pretty nice then too. Funny how you guys ignore history. Why is that? Mayhaps because it exposes your claims as the ludicrous nonsense they are?

 

[Trakar]

Unfortunately, the major effects of climate change is yet to come.

I notice in the news that Iceland is changing it's name to something more appropriate, maybe Rockland. Iceland’s economy stands to benefit from the earth’s rapid transformation. The melting glaciers that feed Iceland’s rivers will be a boon to the country’s hydroelectric industry. Also a more temperate climate will attract more tourist. In the 22nd century, Iceland may be a premium retirement destination.

LOL, well, Iceland's liable to get a lot warmer due factors other than warming air and sea.

"Hazardous responses of the solid Earth to a changing climate" - http://media.johnwiley.com.au/product_data/excerpt/57/04706586/0470658657-76.pdf

Iceland has a whole lot of hot rock shaking going on, it ought to be even more interesting once the shimmy-roll-slide action steps it up several notches.​

 

[Mr. H.]

Dude, you are font challenged.

 

[westwall]

Unfortunately, the major effects of climate change is yet to come.

I notice in the news that Iceland is changing it's name to something more appropriate, maybe Rockland. Iceland’s economy stands to benefit from the earth’s rapid transformation. The melting glaciers that feed Iceland’s rivers will be a boon to the country’s hydroelectric industry. Also a more temperate climate will attract more tourist. In the 22nd century, Iceland may be a premium retirement destination.

LOL, well, Iceland's liable to get a lot warmer due factors other than warming air and sea.

"Hazardous responses of the solid Earth to a changing climate" - http://media.johnwiley.com.au/product_data/excerpt/57/04706586/0470658657-76.pdf

Iceland has a whole lot of hot rock shaking going on, it ought to be even more interesting once the shimmy-roll-slide action steps it up several notches.​

What a joke. Geothermal gradient is well known and while atmospheric conditions can effect the top 200 feet of the ground, once you get below that level it is all geothermal gradient. At plate spreading areas and volcanic island arcs the rate can be as high as 11 degrees F per 100 feet.

In the stable continental cratons the gradient varies between .82 and 1.65 degrees per 100 feet based on tectonic conditions and rock type. The idea that atmospheric temps will affect fault lines MILES below the surface where the temps are measured in the thousands of degrees is simply ridiculous.

This paper is a pathetic attempt by a volcanologist to jump on the cash cow band wagon of global warming fraud to try and get a load of cash.

 

[Dubya]

Unfortunately, the major effects of climate change is yet to come.

I notice in the news that Iceland is changing it's name to something more appropriate, maybe Rockland. Iceland’s economy stands to benefit from the earth’s rapid transformation. The melting glaciers that feed Iceland’s rivers will be a boon to the country’s hydroelectric industry. Also a more temperate climate will attract more tourist. In the 22nd century, Iceland may be a premium retirement destination.

LOL, well, Iceland's liable to get a lot warmer due factors other than warming air and sea.

"Hazardous responses of the solid Earth to a changing climate" - http://media.johnwiley.com.au/product_data/excerpt/57/04706586/0470658657-76.pdf

Iceland has a whole lot of hot rock shaking going on, it ought to be even more interesting once the shimmy-roll-slide action steps it up several notches.​

What a joke. Geothermal gradient is well known and while atmospheric conditions can effect the top 200 feet of the ground, once you get below that level it is all geothermal gradient. At plate spreading areas and volcanic island arcs the rate can be as high as 11 degrees F per 100 feet.

In the stable continental cratons the gradient varies between .82 and 1.65 degrees per 100 feet based on tectonic conditions and rock type. The idea that atmospheric temps will affect fault lines MILES below the surface where the temps are measured in the thousands of degrees is simply ridiculous.

This paper is a pathetic attempt by a volcanologist to jump on the cash cow band wagon of global warming fraud to try and get a load of cash.

That's a nice theory, but what is the second most substance in the universe that can retain heat? We don't live on a land planet.

 

[westwall]

LOL, well, Iceland's liable to get a lot warmer due factors other than warming air and sea.

"Hazardous responses of the solid Earth to a changing climate" - http://media.johnwiley.com.au/product_data/excerpt/57/04706586/0470658657-76.pdf

Iceland has a whole lot of hot rock shaking going on, it ought to be even more interesting once the shimmy-roll-slide action steps it up several notches.​

What a joke. Geothermal gradient is well known and while atmospheric conditions can effect the top 200 feet of the ground, once you get below that level it is all geothermal gradient. At plate spreading areas and volcanic island arcs the rate can be as high as 11 degrees F per 100 feet.

In the stable continental cratons the gradient varies between .82 and 1.65 degrees per 100 feet based on tectonic conditions and rock type. The idea that atmospheric temps will affect fault lines MILES below the surface where the temps are measured in the thousands of degrees is simply ridiculous.

This paper is a pathetic attempt by a volcanologist to jump on the cash cow band wagon of global warming fraud to try and get a load of cash.

That's a nice theory, but what is the second most substance in the universe that can retain heat? We don't live on a land planet.

Yes , indeed that is true and let's look at the ocean depths shall we? Below the thermocline the temps vary between 1.5 C and 4.5 C depending on lattitude. Those temps don't change (neither does the salinity) no matter how deep you go, only the pressure increases. The thermocline is at a depth of around 100 fathoms so figure 600 feet. So over 90% of the ocean never changes temps no matter how hard you try and baffle the people with bullcrap.

The top 600 feet of the oceans do indeed have minor variations in temp and good old Trenberth is STILL trying to figure out how to hide warm water in all that cold water in defiance of the laws of physics. Where oh where is that missing heat?

 

[SSDD]

The top 600 feet of the oceans do indeed have minor variations in temp and good old Trenberth is STILL trying to figure out how to hide warm water in all that cold water in defiance of the laws of physics. Where oh where is that missing heat?

Best estimate is that it never was missing, because it never existed except within the boundries of is very poorly thought out energy budget.

 

[westwall]

The top 600 feet of the oceans do indeed have minor variations in temp and good old Trenberth is STILL trying to figure out how to hide warm water in all that cold water in defiance of the laws of physics. Where oh where is that missing heat?

Best estimate is that it never was missing, because it never existed except within the boundries of is very poorly thought out energy budget.

Of course it was never "missing", nor could it possibly hide in the depths of the oceans. That suggestion should give even a SUPER-GENIUS pause.

 

[Politico]

Hmm. No I don't feel any different than I did yesterday. What does this gettin' real feel like?

 

[Dubya]

What a joke. Geothermal gradient is well known and while atmospheric conditions can effect the top 200 feet of the ground, once you get below that level it is all geothermal gradient. At plate spreading areas and volcanic island arcs the rate can be as high as 11 degrees F per 100 feet.

In the stable continental cratons the gradient varies between .82 and 1.65 degrees per 100 feet based on tectonic conditions and rock type. The idea that atmospheric temps will affect fault lines MILES below the surface where the temps are measured in the thousands of degrees is simply ridiculous.

This paper is a pathetic attempt by a volcanologist to jump on the cash cow band wagon of global warming fraud to try and get a load of cash.

That's a nice theory, but what is the second most substance in the universe that can retain heat? We don't live on a land planet.

Yes , indeed that is true and let's look at the ocean depths shall we? Below the thermocline the temps vary between 1.5 C and 4.5 C depending on lattitude. Those temps don't change (neither does the salinity) no matter how deep you go, only the pressure increases. The thermocline is at a depth of around 100 fathoms so figure 600 feet. So over 90% of the ocean never changes temps no matter how hard you try and baffle the people with bullcrap.

The top 600 feet of the oceans do indeed have minor variations in temp and good old Trenberth is STILL trying to figure out how to hide warm water in all that cold water in defiance of the laws of physics. Where oh where is that missing heat?

Don't you know the Atlantic Ocean cooled once Panama connected North and South America?

The missing heat is melting ice, so figure it out. What happens when there is no ice to melt?

Do you know how much heat it takes to melt ice at 32 degrees F to 32 degrees F water?

Since you are so damned smart, what temperature will that 32 degree F water become if the same amount of heat is added after it melts?

 

[westwall]

That's a nice theory, but what is the second most substance in the universe that can retain heat? We don't live on a land planet.

Yes , indeed that is true and let's look at the ocean depths shall we? Below the thermocline the temps vary between 1.5 C and 4.5 C depending on lattitude. Those temps don't change (neither does the salinity) no matter how deep you go, only the pressure increases. The thermocline is at a depth of around 100 fathoms so figure 600 feet. So over 90% of the ocean never changes temps no matter how hard you try and baffle the people with bullcrap.

The top 600 feet of the oceans do indeed have minor variations in temp and good old Trenberth is STILL trying to figure out how to hide warm water in all that cold water in defiance of the laws of physics. Where oh where is that missing heat?

Don't you know the Atlantic Ocean cooled once Panama connected North and South America?

The missing heat is melting ice, so figure it out. What happens when there is no ice to melt?

Do you know how much heat it takes to melt ice at 32 degrees F to 32 degrees F water?

Since you are so damned smart, what temperature will that 32 degree F water become if the same amount of heat is added after it melts?

Sure it is dumbdumb. Care to delineate the variables a little better there, currently your question is un-answerable based on your parameters. I thought you were a SUPER DUPER GENIUS? I would expect a SUPER DUPER GENIUS to know how to frame a proper scientific question.

 

[SSDD]

Sure it is dumbdumb. Care to delineate the variables a little better there, currently your question is un-answerable based on your parameters. I thought you were a SUPER DUPER GENIUS? I would expect a SUPER DUPER GENIUS to know how to frame a proper scientific question.

Maybe he just feels like a super dooper genius because he stayed at a holiday inn express.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The missing heat is melting ice, so figure it out. What happens when there is no ice to melt? Comets are made of ice!!

 

[SSDD]

The missing heat is melting ice, so figure it out. What happens when there is no ice to melt? Comets are made of ice!!

Now all he needs to do is explain how that missing heat that is melting the arctic ice has somehow turned cold enough to freeze china. Heat that melts ice and causes ice.....imagine that.

 

[Dubya]

Yes , indeed that is true and let's look at the ocean depths shall we? Below the thermocline the temps vary between 1.5 C and 4.5 C depending on lattitude. Those temps don't change (neither does the salinity) no matter how deep you go, only the pressure increases. The thermocline is at a depth of around 100 fathoms so figure 600 feet. So over 90% of the ocean never changes temps no matter how hard you try and baffle the people with bullcrap.

The top 600 feet of the oceans do indeed have minor variations in temp and good old Trenberth is STILL trying to figure out how to hide warm water in all that cold water in defiance of the laws of physics. Where oh where is that missing heat?

Don't you know the Atlantic Ocean cooled once Panama connected North and South America?

The missing heat is melting ice, so figure it out. What happens when there is no ice to melt?

Do you know how much heat it takes to melt ice at 32 degrees F to 32 degrees F water?

Since you are so damned smart, what temperature will that 32 degree F water become if the same amount of heat is added after it melts?

Sure it is dumbdumb. Care to delineate the variables a little better there, currently your question is un-answerable based on your parameters. I thought you were a SUPER DUPER GENIUS? I would expect a SUPER DUPER GENIUS to know how to frame a proper scientific question.

The Atlantic Ocean cooled and the modern Gulf Stream started. The world changed and so did climate sensitivity. Now, because we send so much warmth and moisture to the north, we have Ice Ages, because of Milankovich Cycles.

What makes you think we want a cold world? We just want care taken in changing things when they are happening too rapidly. There are three major ice sheets on this planet and four if you count Patagonia, which is minor and melted in two. Wiping out all the coastal cities on Earth isn't a smart thing to do.

Now, if you want to pretend it can't happen, go ahead! I would bet in three years we are going to see major changes that will get the world's attention. Things like melting the arctic sea ice obviously didn't. When your ass is on the line, you'll care.

 

[Dubya]

The missing heat is melting ice, so figure it out. What happens when there is no ice to melt? Comets are made of ice!!

It's called stalling the jet stream. The jet stream is meandering further south causing persistent weather over a particular area. It should bring new weather systems from the west and it isn't.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The missing heat is melting ice, so figure it out. What happens when there is no ice to melt? Comets are made of ice!!

Now all he needs to do is explain how that missing heat that is melting the arctic ice has somehow turned cold enough to freeze china. Heat that melts ice and causes ice.....imagine that.

It's predicted by the AGW models

Hotter = AGW

Colder = AGW

See?