Global Warming 'Splained

[daveman]

Or get congress to pass an Individual Mandate for Reduced Kinetic Solar Activity.

We're going to need a Star Czar.

 

[RollingThunder]

Or get congress to pass an Individual Mandate for Reduced Kinetic Solar Activity.

We're going to need a Star Czar.

No, you're going to need a straitjacket.

And I mean ALL of you certifiable denier cult dingbats.

 

[daveman]

Or get congress to pass an Individual Mandate for Reduced Kinetic Solar Activity.

We're going to need a Star Czar.

No, you're going to need a straitjacket.

And I mean ALL of you certifiable denier cult dingbats.

Holy shit, you leftists have no damn humor at all, do you?

It must really suck to be you.

 

[Old Rocks]

Nobody said the 1% change in temperature over 110 billion years was perfectly linear, bub.

Sunspots and other solar activity do cause fluctuations, but in the long run, we're all going to be VAPORIZED.

And nobody stated that the warming would be perfectly linear, old gal.

However, April makes the 314 straight month that the global average has been above the average for the 20th century. And, in spite of a very strong La Nina, April was the seventh warmest April on record.

 

[RollingThunder]

We're going to need a Star Czar.

No, you're going to need a straitjacket.

And I mean ALL of you certifiable denier cult dingbats.

Holy shit, you leftists have no damn humor at all, do you?

It must really suck to be you.

No, actually I'm having a good time and I have a fine and subtle sense of humor. If you ever manage to intentionally say something remotely funny, I'll laugh, I'm sure. I admit I already find most of what you say pretty funny but that's not intentional humor on your part, it's just that you say such ridiculous, silly, pointless crap, it's hard not to laugh at you.

 

[daveman]

No, you're going to need a straitjacket.

And I mean ALL of you certifiable denier cult dingbats.

Holy shit, you leftists have no damn humor at all, do you?

It must really suck to be you.

No, actually I'm having a good time and I have a fine and subtle sense of humor. If you ever manage to intentionally say something remotely funny, I'll laugh, I'm sure. I admit I already find most of what you say pretty funny but that's not intentional humor on your part, it's just that you say such ridiculous, silly, pointless crap, it's hard not to laugh at you.

Okay, I got just the thing. Right up your alley. You'll bust a gut.

Bush is Hitler!!

 

[RollingThunder]

Holy shit, you leftists have no damn humor at all, do you?

It must really suck to be you.

No, actually I'm having a good time and I have a fine and subtle sense of humor. If you ever manage to intentionally say something remotely funny, I'll laugh, I'm sure. I admit I already find most of what you say pretty funny but that's not intentional humor on your part, it's just that you say such ridiculous, silly, pointless crap, it's hard not to laugh at you.

Okay, I got just the thing. Right up your alley. You'll bust a gut.

Bush is Hitler!!

I said "intentionally funny", not 'pointlessly retarded', daveboy. I'm beginning to suspect that you're not bright enough to tell the difference.

 

[skookerasbil]

Clearly there is a consensus!!!!

 

[daveman]

No, actually I'm having a good time and I have a fine and subtle sense of humor. If you ever manage to intentionally say something remotely funny, I'll laugh, I'm sure. I admit I already find most of what you say pretty funny but that's not intentional humor on your part, it's just that you say such ridiculous, silly, pointless crap, it's hard not to laugh at you.

Okay, I got just the thing. Right up your alley. You'll bust a gut.

Bush is Hitler!!

I said "intentionally funny", not 'pointlessly retarded', daveboy. I'm beginning to suspect that you're not bright enough to tell the difference.

Oh, wait, I understand now...you're one of those pretentious windbags who thinks that humor, an entirely subjective idea, can be quantized and judged on an absolute scale. Further, you think your opinion on the matter is fact.

Now THAT'S funny!

 

[konradv]

The Sun is getting hotter at the rate of 1% per 110 million years.

It is now 30% hotter than it was 4.57 billion years ago.

In another billion years (+/-) the sun will get SO HOT that life on earth will be pretty much vaporized (or as good as such as water will be turned into vapor).

So, instead of worrying about what kind of light bulbs and grocery sacks people use, how about we free the private sector to invent migration and homesteading appropriate technology for new planets?

Apocalypse Not Yet. You notice any new signs of the end of the world today? I have to say I got distracted and missed paying attention at the moment when it was all supposed to end. My neighborhood is quiet and peaceful. But religious belief is not the only source of predictions of the end of the world. A pair of astronomers say in about 1 billion years the output of our Sun will go up enough to evaporate the oceans and rivers into water vapor.

The story begins some 4.57 billion years ago, when the young sun's nuclear furnace ignited and stabilized. Back then, solar physicists estimate, the sun was 30 percent dimmer than it is today. As it has matured, it has brightened at a pace of about 1 percent every 110 million years.

Over that period, the two explain, Earth's climate system has adjusted to the increase in the sun's output, keeping the planet's average temperature within a livable range and with plenty of water on hand. Orbiting 93 million miles from the sun, Earth finds itself nicely placed in the sun's habitable zone.

But over the next billion years, the duo says, the sun's output will rise by another 10 percent.

Let us suppose sentient beings will still inhabit planet Earth hundreds of millions of years from now and beyond. What to do? I see a few choices:

Migrate to Mars.
Do climate engineering
Move Earth to a larger orbit (and thereby lengthen bond maturities too).
Leave the solar system.

FuturePundit: End Of World In 1 Billion Years?

This isn't really relevant to AGW, since we're talking about two completely different time scales. If you want to have an honest debate, let's at least talk about the same thing. AGW has NOTHING to do with long-term fluctuations on earth or the sun.

 

[konradv]

Yes, it will matter. A bit more warming will do wonders for improving the quality of human life just like it did during the Medieval Warming Period. The mini Ice Age ended in the mid 1880s, and the warming ever since has been very favorable to agriculture.

If all AGW was going to do, is bump the global temps up like the regional hemispheric bump Europe and the N. Atlantic region experienced in the MWP, I'd agree with you. Unfortunately, we have already more than doubled the warming experienced in the MWP and this is globally not regionally, and it is just the start of the warming not the end of it.

(http://www.usmessageboard.com/members/trakar-albums-agw-picture3532-temperature-pattern-mwp.html)

vs.

(http://www.usmessageboard.com/members/trakar-albums-agw-picture3533-temp-pattern-1999-2008-noaa.html)

And this is just the start, even if we could cease all open-cycle combustion of fossil fuels today, it would take a century or more before the planet equilibrates to the additional CO2 we have already added to the atmosphere, and several millenia before temperatures begin to decrease to where they would have been without mankind's atmospheric dumping. So far we seem to be stuck at (or near) the top end of (Business As Usual) which means not just continued emissions, but continued accelerating emission rates. If this continues unabated we could easily see a tripling of preindustrial atmospheric CO2 levels within the next 6-10 decades and an initiating of planetary conditions that will, over a few centuries, come more to resemble those of the PETM, rather than anything that has existed on this planet in the history of our species.

Unfortunately, you are sorely misinformed. The itsy bitsy amount of warming we have seen since end of the Little Ice Age is very moderate on a global, millenial scale.

... i.e. IRRELEVANT to the entire AGW debate!!!

 

[boedicca]

The Sun is getting hotter at the rate of 1% per 110 million years.

It is now 30% hotter than it was 4.57 billion years ago.

In another billion years (+/-) the sun will get SO HOT that life on earth will be pretty much vaporized (or as good as such as water will be turned into vapor).

So, instead of worrying about what kind of light bulbs and grocery sacks people use, how about we free the private sector to invent migration and homesteading appropriate technology for new planets?

Apocalypse Not Yet. You notice any new signs of the end of the world today? I have to say I got distracted and missed paying attention at the moment when it was all supposed to end. My neighborhood is quiet and peaceful. But religious belief is not the only source of predictions of the end of the world. A pair of astronomers say in about 1 billion years the output of our Sun will go up enough to evaporate the oceans and rivers into water vapor.

The story begins some 4.57 billion years ago, when the young sun's nuclear furnace ignited and stabilized. Back then, solar physicists estimate, the sun was 30 percent dimmer than it is today. As it has matured, it has brightened at a pace of about 1 percent every 110 million years.

Over that period, the two explain, Earth's climate system has adjusted to the increase in the sun's output, keeping the planet's average temperature within a livable range and with plenty of water on hand. Orbiting 93 million miles from the sun, Earth finds itself nicely placed in the sun's habitable zone.

But over the next billion years, the duo says, the sun's output will rise by another 10 percent.

Let us suppose sentient beings will still inhabit planet Earth hundreds of millions of years from now and beyond. What to do? I see a few choices:

Migrate to Mars.
Do climate engineering
Move Earth to a larger orbit (and thereby lengthen bond maturities too).
Leave the solar system.

FuturePundit: End Of World In 1 Billion Years?

This isn't really relevant to AGW, since we're talking about two completely different time scales. If you want to have an honest debate, let's at least talk about the same thing. AGW has NOTHING to do with long-term fluctuations on earth or the sun.

The time scale the AGW Mongers focus on is equally irrelevant. Yes, 110 million years is largely irrelevant to humanity...but 150 years is irrelevant for The Globe.

The time scales that are relevant have been posted repeatedly, and show that the current change is not unusual.

 

[konradv]

The Sun is getting hotter at the rate of 1% per 110 million years.

It is now 30% hotter than it was 4.57 billion years ago.

In another billion years (+/-) the sun will get SO HOT that life on earth will be pretty much vaporized (or as good as such as water will be turned into vapor).

So, instead of worrying about what kind of light bulbs and grocery sacks people use, how about we free the private sector to invent migration and homesteading appropriate technology for new planets?

Apocalypse Not Yet. You notice any new signs of the end of the world today? I have to say I got distracted and missed paying attention at the moment when it was all supposed to end. My neighborhood is quiet and peaceful. But religious belief is not the only source of predictions of the end of the world. A pair of astronomers say in about 1 billion years the output of our Sun will go up enough to evaporate the oceans and rivers into water vapor.

The story begins some 4.57 billion years ago, when the young sun's nuclear furnace ignited and stabilized. Back then, solar physicists estimate, the sun was 30 percent dimmer than it is today. As it has matured, it has brightened at a pace of about 1 percent every 110 million years.

Over that period, the two explain, Earth's climate system has adjusted to the increase in the sun's output, keeping the planet's average temperature within a livable range and with plenty of water on hand. Orbiting 93 million miles from the sun, Earth finds itself nicely placed in the sun's habitable zone.

But over the next billion years, the duo says, the sun's output will rise by another 10 percent.

Let us suppose sentient beings will still inhabit planet Earth hundreds of millions of years from now and beyond. What to do? I see a few choices:

Migrate to Mars.
Do climate engineering
Move Earth to a larger orbit (and thereby lengthen bond maturities too).
Leave the solar system.

FuturePundit: End Of World In 1 Billion Years?

This isn't really relevant to AGW, since we're talking about two completely different time scales. If you want to have an honest debate, let's at least talk about the same thing. AGW has NOTHING to do with long-term fluctuations on earth or the sun.

The time scale the AGW Mongers focus on is equally irrelevant. Yes, 110 million years is largely irrelevant to humanity...but 150 years is irrelevant for The Globe.
The time scales that are relevant have been posted repeatedly, and show that the current change is not unusual.

Well, there you have it!!! That's why your arguments are irrelevant. The point of AGW is that we're concerned about humanity. The globe, as we're constantly reminded though it's a given, will take care of itself in its own time. That kind of timescale is irrelevant, however, when what you're concerned about is the effect on man and civilization.

 

[boedicca]

And if you care about humanity, you will acknowledge that 150 years is an irrelevant sample, and Big Government doing things which decrease living standards by making energy more expensive is wrong.

 

[konradv]

And if you care about humanity, you will acknowledge that 150 years is an irrelevant sample, and Big Government doing things which decrease living standards by making energy more expensive is wrong.

NO, I will NOT say 150 years is an irrelevant sample, because on the human timescale it's VERY relevant. As for "Big Government" doing things, how about what it's doing to bring about change to a sustainable, non-polluting energy future? Perhaps you should read up before posting knee-jerk anti-government rants.

ITER - the way to new energy OR

Department of Energy - Fusion

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Nobody said the 1% change in temperature over 110 billion years was perfectly linear, bub.

Sunspots and other solar activity do cause fluctuations, but in the long run, we're all going to be VAPORIZED.

And nobody stated that the warming would be perfectly linear, old gal.

However, April makes the 314 straight month that the global average has been above the average for the 20th century. And, in spite of a very strong La Nina, April was the seventh warmest April on record.

Have you told Phil Jones about this?

Based on what altered data set?

 

[RollingThunder]

Nobody said the 1% change in temperature over 110 billion years was perfectly linear, bub.

Sunspots and other solar activity do cause fluctuations, but in the long run, we're all going to be VAPORIZED.

And nobody stated that the warming would be perfectly linear, old gal.

However, April makes the 314 straight month that the global average has been above the average for the 20th century. And, in spite of a very strong La Nina, April was the seventh warmest April on record.

Have you told Phil Jones about this?

Based on what altered data set?

You're lost in your own little delusional world of denier cult myths and so nothing you say on this forum makes any sense whatsoever. You are a worthless troll.

 

[boedicca]

Nobody said the 1% change in temperature over 110 billion years was perfectly linear, bub.

Sunspots and other solar activity do cause fluctuations, but in the long run, we're all going to be VAPORIZED.

And nobody stated that the warming would be perfectly linear, old gal.

However, April makes the 314 straight month that the global average has been above the average for the 20th century. And, in spite of a very strong La Nina, April was the seventh warmest April on record.

Have you told Phil Jones about this?

Based on what altered data set?

The parking lots in Las Vegas data set.

 

[boedicca]

You are a worthless troll.

You really should seek professional help for your projection issues.

An anonymous message board isn't proper therapy.

 

[RollingThunder]

You are a worthless troll.

You really should seek professional help for your projection issues.

An anonymous message board isn't proper therapy.

Noticing that you and ol' CrustyFrankfurter are ignorant denier cult trolls is simply being perceptive. You've both been bamboozled by the propaganda and misinformation that the fossil fuel industry has pumped into your heads. You both reject the testimony of the world science community and the mountains of evidence supporting anthropogenic global warming/climate changes and instead hold tight to the myths and lies fed to you by politically and economically motivated ideologues and stooges for the oil corps. You're both anti-science ignoramuses severely afflicted by the Dunning-Kruger Effect. Or, in simple language that you can understand, you don't know your ass from a hole in the ground.