Ocean rise and ice melt accelerating....

[Fort Fun Indiana]

John Abraham... AKA left wing AGW shill... and the Gaurdian.. another left wing bastion of bull shit...

As anyone knows, this is utterly irrelevant, as the guardian is merely reporting the facts of the work of scientists.

 

[polarbear]

None of these graphs include the last three years. If they did, you would see an even higher spike at the right on the graph.

Moron

Anyone can change the graphing to make it look like it correlates.. Now prove Causation...

You can get the same or even better "correlations" plotting it with the number of cellphone subscribers, facebook and Twitter users or illegal immigrants who managed to register as voters.

 

[Sunsettommy]

When you can separate the "natural" flooding from the "AGW" flooding, be sure to share your secret.

You are sharp as a marble, Todd-O! How could scientists EVER possibly measure the effects of sea level rise on flooding, when all they can do is just measure it year in and year out all over the planet? man, we should pray for them, right?

Apparently....you won't.

Zinger!

You are sharp as a marble, Todd-O! How could scientists EVER possibly measure the effects of sea level rise on flooding,

Are you one of the morons who thought the flooding in Texas last year was because of global warming?

Dumb ass, how the hell do you explain the fact that Houston had a 100 year flood in 2015, a 100 year flood in 2016, and then a 1000 year flood in 2017. Now what are the chances of that? Care to to a little statistical math? That says there was a forcing agent that changed the math of that happening. Now you answer what that forcing agent was.

Huston has been flooded many times since the founding back in the 1830's.

 

[skookerasbil]

When you can separate the "natural" flooding from the "AGW" flooding, be sure to share your secret.

You are sharp as a marble, Todd-O! How could scientists EVER possibly measure the effects of sea level rise on flooding, when all they can do is just measure it year in and year out all over the planet? man, we should pray for them, right?

Apparently....you won't.

Zinger!

You are sharp as a marble, Todd-O! How could scientists EVER possibly measure the effects of sea level rise on flooding,

Are you one of the morons who thought the flooding in Texas last year was because of global warming?

Dumb ass, how the hell do you explain the fact that Houston had a 100 year flood in 2015, a 100 year flood in 2016, and then a 1000 year flood in 2017. Now what are the chances of that? Care to to a little statistical math? That says there was a forcing agent that changed the math of that happening. Now you answer what that forcing agent was.

Hurricane Harvey stalled, dumped 60 inches of rain. Nothing to do with CO2. Idiot!

Yep..
A high pressure system in the north west and a low pressure system to the east trapped Harvey right over Houston.

Not according to the climate k00ks. Wait until you hear their explanation

 

[skookerasbil]

None of these graphs include the last three years. If they did, you would see an even higher spike at the right on the graph.

The obvious first flaw I see in looking at your charts is in the first one, it suggests CO2 heating began in the mid-1920s, a mere few decades after the rise of industrialization, when the scope and output of greenhouse gases at that time was far too little and the span of time just too short for the Earth to respond to it. It ignores how weak a greenhouse gas CO2 really is or how much CO2 the Earth has had in the past, which has been far higher.

Your second chart conflicts with the first, now claiming warming didn't actually begin to the 1980s, calling into question the accuracy of BOTH charts, and that flooding (melting) actually PRECEDED IT rather than lag it, as flooding would have to do.

Finally, your third chart conflicts the first two, suggesting another time (almost the 90s) for temperature changes to begin, and that they have been minor, and the resulting flooding from heating (variously charted to have begun either in the mid-20s, 1980s or 1990s) not to have really begun until 10-20 years ago; at best, showing no indication of effect until the late 80s. Worst of all, the charts show no data more than about a decade before the alleged rise of events---- too little to know the significance of the trend and suggests each chart, more than conflicting with the others, are each made to make a trend appear more significant and real than it really is, making all of them rejectable.

Swing and a miss.

....taking old rocks to the woodshed

 

[EGR one]

Climate-change–driven accelerated sea-level rise detected in the altimeter era

Observations show sea levels rising, and climate change is accelerating it - CNN

More accurate methods show us these things are happening faster than we thought. Now expected to pass 2 feet rise by 2100.

Sea levels have been rising since the apex of the last ice age. They will continue to rise until global cooling begins to lower sea levels again. Not a difficult concept to understand.

 

[EGR one]

If we spend a couple of trillion on windmills, we'll be saved!!!

No, Todd. See, we're collectively smarter than you are, and we can do better.

Happy to hear that. What can you do better, and when can you do it?

 

[westwall]

John Abraham... AKA left wing AGW shill... and the Gaurdian.. another left wing bastion of bull shit...

As anyone knows, this is utterly irrelevant, as the guardian is merely reporting the facts of the work of scientists.

By "work" you mean their computer derived fiction.....correct?

 

[EGR one]

You want us to spend trillions, and you can't show the benefit?

Hilarious!!!

I want to spend trillions?


Tooddsterinoroni, why do you go on the internet, invent fake characters, and debate them> This seems like freakish behavior, for a grown man.

Also... after all of this time prattling on about climate change... all of the time you've spent... how are you so fucking utterly ignorant of ANY of it?

I want to spend trillions?

You don't?

On windmills?

You tell me what you want us to waste our money on.......

Why? You can go piss up a rope, for all I care.

So much for that we are collectively smarter than you, and we con do better BS.

 

[EGR one]

The cost to taxpayers of flooding, the cost of rebuilding infrastructure, the cost of insurance rates, the cost of destroyed property...

You do know it will happen regardless, if man was here or not right??????

What a liar you are. Without the GHGs put in the atmosphere by man, the ocean levels would be very slowly decreasing as the glaciers received and retained more snow. It is the GHGs that are creating the present warming. That has repeatedly been proven by the scientists. Ignorant deniers like you have failed to show that this is not the case, and all you are capable of doing is flapping yap, and showing yourselves for fools and tools.

Did ocean levels decrease and glaciers increase before mankind began emitting GHGs into the atmosphere? Surely, they covered the climate cycle when you were in school.

 

[SSDD]

Climate-change–driven accelerated sea-level rise detected in the altimeter era

Observations show sea levels rising, and climate change is accelerating it - CNN

More accurate methods show us these things are happening faster than we thought. Now expected to pass 2 feet rise by 2100.

And the bullshit just keeps on coming from you doesn't it? Clearly you haven't bothered to actually double check on your sources...maybe you aren't bright enough..or maybe you don't care so long as what they are telling you jibes with your political leanings...

In either case, you couldn't be more wrong. The ice volume today is considerably greater than it was 10 years ago.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Climate-change–driven accelerated sea-level rise detected in the altimeter era

Observations show sea levels rising, and climate change is accelerating it - CNN

More accurate methods show us these things are happening faster than we thought. Now expected to pass 2 feet rise by 2100.

And the bullshit just keeps on coming from you doesn't it? Clearly you haven't bothered to actually double check on your sources...maybe you aren't bright enough..or maybe you don't care so long as what they are telling you jibes with your political leanings...

In either case, you couldn't be more wrong. The ice volume today is considerably greater than it was 10 years ago.

The ice volume today is considerably greater than it was 10 years ago.

Excellent!
But why did you post a chart that shows it is less than it was 10 years ago?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Huston has been flooded many times since the founding back in the 1830's.

Yep! And it has been hot before somewhere! Therfore...global warming is a hoax!

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Climate-change–driven accelerated sea-level rise detected in the altimeter era

Observations show sea levels rising, and climate change is accelerating it - CNN

More accurate methods show us these things are happening faster than we thought. Now expected to pass 2 feet rise by 2100.

And the bullshit just keeps on coming from you doesn't it? Clearly you haven't bothered to actually double check on your sources...maybe you aren't bright enough..or maybe you don't care so long as what they are telling you jibes with your political leanings...

In either case, you couldn't be more wrong. The ice volume today is considerably greater than it was 10 years ago.

None of that info is from me...it is all from published scientific work. You know, that important little element of scientific knowledge that you have done exactly NEVER. Oh wait...that equals the amount of denier science published in total!

What a coincidence!

And you don't even know how to read the charts you post. Youare an embarrassment...a loser squawking on a message board without a shred of education or experience in any of these fields... Damn son, get some self respect!

 

[EGR one]

Of course, an unprovable, untestable claim.

No it isn't. we know the mechanisms by which these stalls happen, and we can predict, measure, and verify the effects of warmer water and air on these mechanisms. You sure are behind the times!

Of course. Current levels caused 50 inches. Lower levels would have caused less.

of course, as any child who has learned about this topic knows, it's not CO2 molecules directly causing the effects of climate change, but rather the indirect effects of higher amounts of carbon compounds in our atmosphere, which itself causes (among other things) a more intense greenhouse effect, warming our atmosphere and oceans.

Is water vapor a green house gas? Does water vapor have a greater effect on global warming than CO2? As the earth warms, it supports more water vapor in the atmosphere, and this warms the earth even further. A positive feedback loop, and there isn't a damn thing we can do about it. There isn't much we can do about carbon in the atmosphere either, but that is a minor problem compared to water vapor.

The simple fact is this. The earth is getting warmer, and it will continue to get warmer. The only way to stop it is to start tossing virgins into volcanoes again.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Of course, an unprovable, untestable claim.

No it isn't. we know the mechanisms by which these stalls happen, and we can predict, measure, and verify the effects of warmer water and air on these mechanisms. You sure are behind the times!

Of course. Current levels caused 50 inches. Lower levels would have caused less.

of course, as any child who has learned about this topic knows, it's not CO2 molecules directly causing the effects of climate change, but rather the indirect effects of higher amounts of carbon compounds in our atmosphere, which itself causes (among other things) a more intense greenhouse effect, warming our atmosphere and oceans.

Is water vapor a green house gas? Does water vapor have a greater effect on global warming than CO2? As the earth warms, it supports more water vapor in the atmosphere, and this warms the earth even further. A positive feedback loop, and there isn't a damn thing we can do about it. There isn't much we can do about carbon in the atmosphere either, but that is a minor problem compared to water vapor.

The simple fact is this. The earth is getting warmer, and it will continue to get warmer. The only way to stop it is to start tossing virgins into volcanoes again.

Wow! I mean...wow! Amazing! Have you passed this VERY IMPORTANT INFORMATION along to all of the people who have dedicated their lives to these fields of science?!?!?

Imagine how embarrassed they will be to find they have been outsmarted by an uneducated slob with no experience or education on any of their fields!!!! Oh, to see the looks on their faces....

 

[EGR one]

Of course, an unprovable, untestable claim.

No it isn't. we know the mechanisms by which these stalls happen, and we can predict, measure, and verify the effects of warmer water and air on these mechanisms. You sure are behind the times!

Of course. Current levels caused 50 inches. Lower levels would have caused less.

of course, as any child who has learned about this topic knows, it's not CO2 molecules directly causing the effects of climate change, but rather the indirect effects of higher amounts of carbon compounds in our atmosphere, which itself causes (among other things) a more intense greenhouse effect, warming our atmosphere and oceans.

Is water vapor a green house gas? Does water vapor have a greater effect on global warming than CO2? As the earth warms, it supports more water vapor in the atmosphere, and this warms the earth even further. A positive feedback loop, and there isn't a damn thing we can do about it. There isn't much we can do about carbon in the atmosphere either, but that is a minor problem compared to water vapor.

The simple fact is this. The earth is getting warmer, and it will continue to get warmer. The only way to stop it is to start tossing virgins into volcanoes again.

Wow! I mean...wow! Amazing! Have you passed this VERY IMPORTANT INFORMATION along to all of the people who have dedicated their lives to these fields of science?!?!?

Imagine how embarrassed they will be to find they have been outsmarted by an uneducated slob with no experience or education on any of their fields!!!! Oh, to see the looks on their faces....

You could have just admitted you don't know the answer, and left it at that. Climate scientists know all about water vapor, and that water vapor comprises between 66 and 80 percent of greenhouse gasses while CO2 comprises between 6 and 26 percent of greenhouse gasses.

Greenhouse Gases | Monitoring References | National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI)
NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information.
Water Vapor is the most abundant greenhouse gas in the atmosphere, which is why it is addressed here first. However, changes in its concentration is also considered to be a result of climate feedbacks related to the warming of the atmosphere rather than a direct result of industrialization. The feedback loop in which water is involved is critically important to projecting future climate change, but as yet is still fairly poorly measured and understood.

 

[SSDD]

None of that info is from me...it is all from published scientific work. You know, that important little element of scientific knowledge that you have done exactly NEVER. Oh wait...that equals the amount of denier science published in total!

How many published papers that reflect the consensus scientific thinking of the time which turned out to be completely wrong would you like to see? I can safely say that you can name the topic because every branch of science has been wrong...such is the nature of science...climate science is no different.

And what a surprise, you can't read a chart...the graphic indicates an increase in the thickness of the ice in the arctic...am I surprised that you got it wrong? Not even a little.

 

[skookerasbil]

Huston has been flooded many times since the founding back in the 1830's.

Yep! And it has been hot before somewhere! Therfore...global warming is a hoax!

Hey s0n...do you realize that nobody who is a regular in this forum takes you seriously. IDK...we just wonder why you bother. The sophmoric banter is fairly prolific....even your climate crusader pals concur. Think you need more practice over at People.com s0n!! Just sayin'

 

[frigidweirdo]

Cool beans ..... I'll soon have beach front property!! ....

No, you won't.

Because all the people running away from the coast now will burn it down.