Scientist express horror as they see a 2.5 C increase in earth's temperature

[Woodznutz]

America has been fighting climate change for decades, apparently to no effect.

Maybe its time just to adapt to the weather instead of trying to fight it?

All of the accords that were signed, all of the conferences that have been held, all of the carbon credits that have been peddled,it looks like none of this has meant nothing.

Maybe after the Rapture, Almighty God will resolve the problem, and that won't be that long according to experts in the field.

Those in power are too busy profiting to be of much help. The people are also asleep at the switch. "Let George do it." Unfortunately "George" has left the building.

 

[Crick]

America has been fighting climate change for decades, apparently to no effect.

Maybe its time just to adapt to the weather instead of trying to fight it?

All of the accords that were signed, all of the conferences that have been held, all of the carbon credits that have been peddled,it looks like none of this has meant nothing.

Maybe after the Rapture, Almighty God will resolve the problem, and that won't be that long according to experts in the field.

We've taken 275 years of completely unchecked emissions to put ourselves in the situation we are currently in. Though US emissions have decreased, we and the rest of the planet are still adding to the totals. And since the extremely well-funded fossil fuel industry with the aid of their many friends in the RNC and MAGA, recognizes this as an existential threat to the industry and has spent billions fighting these efforts and given that the lifespan of CO2 in the atmosphere is measured in centuries, what the fuck were you expecting to see by this point?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

We've taken 275 years of completely unchecked emissions to put ourselves in the situation we are currently in. Though US emissions have decreased, we and the rest of the planet are still adding to the totals. And since the extremely well-funded fossil fuel industry with the aid of their many friends in the RNC and MAGA, recognizes this as an existential threat to the industry and has spent billions fighting these efforts and given that the lifespan of CO2 in the atmosphere is measured in centuries, what the fuck were you expecting to see by this point?

The fossil fuel industry has spent billions. Governments have spent trillions.
Yet, for some reason, lots of people are skeptical of the idea that they should stop
using cheap, reliable fossil fuels and replace them with expensive, unreliable wind and solar.

 

[Crick]

The fossil fuel industry has spent billions. Governments have spent trillions.
Yet, for some reason, lots of people are skeptical of the idea that they should stop
using cheap, reliable fossil fuels and replace them with expensive, unreliable wind and solar.

Your statement makes no sense except to suggest that the lies of the fossil fuel industry are winning the day. Is that your position? To favor the lies?

 

[Markle]

77% of Top Climate Scientists Think 2.5°C of Warming Is Coming—And They're Horrified | Common Dreams

"I expect a semi-dystopian future with substantial pain and suffering for the people of the Global South," one expert said.

www.commondreams.org

We are already seeing deadly weather extremes worldwide. Many world leaders are short sighted and ignoring the warnings. My children and grandchildren will suffer for that ignorance.

 

[Crick]

Are you willing to reject all of mainstream science without reason?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Your statement makes no sense except to suggest that the lies of the fossil fuel industry are winning the day. Is that your position? To favor the lies?

It's weird that your side is still untrusted, after trillions in spending
and all the data manipulation and really bad solutions.

No, I don't favor the green lies.

 

[EMH]

It's weird that your side is still untrusted, after trillions in spending
and all the data manipulation and really bad solutions.

No, I don't favor the green lies.

BULL FUCKING SHIT!!!

You do nothing except push idiot "skeptics" here to accept fudged data, FAUX "News" style...


You cannot refute one word of what's already here by EMH, but you reject it because you aren't really a skeptic, you are a LOW END MOSSAD who posts bullshit to keep morons accepting FUDGE....

Care to answer the questions or run and hide as usual...

Any honest media person with the courage to actually ask climate questions?

Apparently not. Not on Faux Not on RAV or OANN What questions will the media never ask? 1. Why does one Earth polar circle have 9+ times the ice of the other? 2. Why is there ice age glacier south of Arctic Circle on Greenland but no such ice age glacier north of Arctic Circle on Alaska...

www.usmessageboard.com

 

[EMH]

Are you willing to reject all of mainstream science without reason?

Fudge may be "mainstream" today but it isn't real and SURFACE AIR PRESSURE busts it cold....

NO WARMING
NO ONGOING NET ICE MELT

 

[Crick]

It's weird that your side is still untrusted, after trillions in spending
and all the data manipulation and really bad solutions.

No, I don't favor the green lies.

A majority of Americans and an even larger majority of everyone else on the planet accepts AGW as valid, believes that it represents a threat and that we should be acting to counter the problem. So, it is not my side of this argument that isn't trusted.

 

[Matted Joybeard]

 

[Sunsettommy]

Already addressed this at POST 32

It has already been 2 C warmer........, yet nothing terrible is going on today.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

BULL FUCKING SHIT!!!

You do nothing except push idiot "skeptics" here to accept fudged data, FAUX "News" style...


You cannot refute one word of what's already here by EMH, but you reject it because you aren't really a skeptic, you are a LOW END MOSSAD who posts bullshit to keep morons accepting FUDGE....

Care to answer the questions or run and hide as usual...

Any honest media person with the courage to actually ask climate questions?

Apparently not. Not on Faux Not on RAV or OANN What questions will the media never ask? 1. Why does one Earth polar circle have 9+ times the ice of the other? 2. Why is there ice age glacier south of Arctic Circle on Greenland but no such ice age glacier north of Arctic Circle on Alaska...

www.usmessageboard.com

You do nothing except push idiot "skeptics" here to accept fudged data, FAUX "News" style...

Link?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

A majority of Americans and an even larger majority of everyone else on the planet accepts AGW as valid, believes that it represents a threat and that we should be acting to counter the problem. So, it is not my side of this argument that isn't trusted.

Cool story.
What was the quickest 10-year rise in temperatures between 100,000 and 200,000 years ago?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

View attachment 950089

Now do 1882-1924

 

[Grumblenuts]

Berkely Earth shows it has already reached 2.0 C higher funny all those awesome overpaid "scientists" were not aware of it.......,

"Below in Figure 1 is the Berkeley Earth average surface temperature record for Europe since about 1780. Europe is a good location to analyze, because some of the longest continuous temperature records are from Europe. It shows that not just 1.5°C, but 2.0°C of warming has already occurred.

View attachment 945487

Figure 1. (click to enlarge) Berkeley Earth average European temperature showing a 2.0°C rise since about 1820. Source: http://berkeleyearth.lbl.gov/regions/europe

LINK

Opinions are worthless and there is no evidence of Climate Emergency at all just the usual warmist/alarmist bullcrap we have been reading and hearing for over 30 years now.

Where is the Climate Emergency?

LINK

The "usual warmist/alarmist bullcrap":

When the initial results were released, and found to support the existing consensus, the study was widely decried by deniers. Watts spoke to The New York Times, which wrote: "Mr. Watts ... contended that the study's methodology was flawed because it examined data over 60 years instead of the 30-year-one that was the basis for his research and some other peer-reviewed studies. He also noted that the report had not yet been peer-reviewed and cited spelling errors as proof of sloppiness."[18][19] Steven Mosher, a co-author of a book critical of climate scientists, also disapproved saying that the study still lacked transparency. He said: "I'm not happy until the code is released and released in a language that people can use freely."[18] Stephen McIntyre, editor of Climate Audit, a climate-skeptics blog, said that "the team deserves credit for going back to the primary data and doing the work" and even though he had not had an opportunity to read the papers in detail, he questioned the analyses of urban heating and weather station quality.[16][20]

By contrast, the study was well received by Muller's peers in climate science research. James Hansen, a leading climate scientist and head of NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies commented that he had not yet read the research papers but was glad Muller was looking at the issue. He said "It should help inform those who have honest skepticism about global warming."

Berkeley Earth - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Emphasis upon "honest skepticism."
Deniers remain the actual "alarmists."

 

[Markle]

Are you willing to reject all of mainstream science without reason?

Are you willing to accept all the proven false decades of prognostications concerning our weather? Did you know the fiction movie "An Inconvenient Truth" by Al Gore could only be shown in Great Britain if accompanied by a pamphlet pointing out NINE significant errors in the hoax?

In high school, we were being fed the lie that we were entering an ICE AGE.

No one wants dirty air or water. There is a major difference between cleaning up our environment and going "green."

Forecasting the end of our world because I don't drive an EV just further destroys your credibility every time you try.

Expecting us to change the Earth's temperature, up or down, is nonsensical.

If you believe the US cutting our CO2 TO ZERO will change the earth's temperature, you're just a fool. That would be like an ant drifting down the Mississippi River on a floating tree changing its direction.

 

[Crick]

Are you willing to accept all the proven false decades of prognostications concerning our weather?

You have bought in to a lie from the fossil fuel industry's misinformation campaign. Those many predictions you see listed all over the internet are not the predictions of mainstream science. Most of them are actually the statements of deniers. Mainstream science has predicted:

• CO2 levels in the atmosphere will continue to increase. True.
• With increasing CO2, global temperatures will continue to increase. True
• With increasing temperatures, snow and ice around the planet will melt. True
• With increasing temperatures and increased meltwater, sea levels will continue to rise. True
• With increasing CO2 in the atmosphere, the pH of the oceans will decline rapidly harming many marine species including coral, arthropods and molluscs who need to fix carbonate and many pelagic species whose reproductive chemistry are sensitive to their ambient pH. True
• Increasing temperatures will have detrimental effects on almost all life forms. True

Did you know the fiction movie "An Inconvenient Truth" by Al Gore could only be shown in Great Britain if accompanied by a pamphlet pointing out NINE significant errors in the hoax?

The decision of that UK court included the determination that it was NOT a hoax. You don't get to pick and choose fool.

In high school, we were being fed the lie that we were entering an ICE AGE.

No you weren't. You would have correctly been told that we are in an interglacial period and that the Earth will move into the next glacial period in the next 10,000 years or so. Don't blame the school system for your obvious educational failures.

No one wants dirty air or water.

I know many dogs that would disagree. ; - )

There is a major difference between cleaning up our environment and going "green."

Meaningless drivel.

Forecasting the end of our world because I don't drive an EV just further destroys your credibility every time you try.

No one is forecasting the end of the world, whatever that is actually supposed to mean. Science shows that unless we stop emitting greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, the planet will continue to warm which will cause a great deal of harm to almost every living thing on the planet.

Expecting us to change the Earth's temperature, up or down, is nonsensical.

No, it is not. It's just difficult. We're trying to counter 275 years of unchecked emissions of a compound with an atmospheric lifespan measured in centuries. That's not going to happen overnight. But, the longer we put it off, the worse the consequences will be. Problems are like that. Ignoring them doesn't make them go away and they almost always get worse with time.

If you believe the US cutting our CO2 TO ZERO will change the earth's temperature, you're just a fool. That would be like an ant drifting down the Mississippi River on a floating tree changing its direction.

I'm sorry your science education was so weak. There are resources available to rectify your situation. You really ought to make use of them.

 

[Markle]

You have bought in to a lie from the fossil fuel industry's misinformation campaign. Those many predictions you see listed all over the internet are not the predictions of mainstream science. Most of them are actually the statements of deniers. Mainstream science has predicted:

• CO2 levels in the atmosphere will continue to increase. True.
• With increasing CO2, global temperatures will continue to increase. True
• With increasing temperatures, snow and ice around the planet will melt. True
• With increasing temperatures and increased meltwater, sea levels will continue to rise. True
• With increasing CO2 in the atmosphere, the pH of the oceans will decline rapidly harming many marine species including coral, arthropods and molluscs who need to fix carbonate and many pelagic species whose reproductive chemistry are sensitive to their ambient pH. True
• Increasing temperatures will have detrimental effects on almost all life forms. True

The decision of that UK court included the determination that it was NOT a hoax. You don't get to pick and choose fool.

No you weren't. You would have correctly been told that we are in an interglacial period and that the Earth will move into the next glacial period in the next 10,000 years or so. Don't blame the school system for your obvious educational failures.

I know many dogs that would disagree. ; - )

Meaningless drivel.

No one is forecasting the end of the world, whatever that is actually supposed to mean. Science shows that unless we stop emitting greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, the planet will continue to warm which will cause a great deal of harm to almost every living thing on the planet.

No, it is not. It's just difficult. We're trying to counter 275 years of unchecked emissions of a compound with an atmospheric lifespan measured in centuries. That's not going to happen overnight. But, the longer we put it off, the worse the consequences will be. Problems are like that. Ignoring them doesn't make them go away and they almost always get worse with time.

I'm sorry your science education was so weak. There are resources available to rectify your situation. You really ought to make use of them.

I notice that you skipped the part about all the past forecasts proven to be totally false.

Says Al Gore said in 2009 that “the North Pole will be ice-free in the summer by 2013 because of man-made global warming.”

The nine points: fact or fallacy?​

· The film claimed that low-lying inhabited Pacific atolls "are being inundated because of anthropogenic global warming" - but there was no evidence of any evacuation occurring

· It spoke of global warming "shutting down the ocean conveyor" - the process by which the gulf stream is carried over the north Atlantic to western Europe. The judge said that, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, it was "very unlikely" that the conveyor would shut down in the future, though it might slow down


· Mr Gore had also claimed - by ridiculing the opposite view - that two graphs, one plotting a rise in C02 and the other the rise in temperature over a period of 650,000 years, showed "an exact fit". The judge said although scientists agreed there was a connection, "the two graphs do not establish what Mr Gore asserts"

· Mr Gore said the disappearance of snow on Mt Kilimanjaro was expressly attributable to human-induced climate change. The judge said the consensus was that that could not be established

· The drying up of Lake Chad was used as an example of global warming. The judge said: "It is apparently considered to be more likely to result from ... population increase, over-grazing and regional climate variability"

· Mr Gore ascribed Hurricane Katrina to global warming, but there was "insufficient evidence to show that"

· Mr Gore also referred to a study showing that polar bears were being found that had drowned "swimming long distances to find the ice". The judge said: "The only scientific study that either side before me can find is one which indicates that four polar bears have recently been found drowned because of a storm"

 

[JimH52]

I notice that you skipped the part about all the past forecasts proven to be totally false.

Says Al Gore said in 2009 that “the North Pole will be ice-free in the summer by 2013 because of man-made global warming.”

The nine points: fact or fallacy?​

· The film claimed that low-lying inhabited Pacific atolls "are being inundated because of anthropogenic global warming" - but there was no evidence of any evacuation occurring

· It spoke of global warming "shutting down the ocean conveyor" - the process by which the gulf stream is carried over the north Atlantic to western Europe. The judge said that, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, it was "very unlikely" that the conveyor would shut down in the future, though it might slow down


· Mr Gore had also claimed - by ridiculing the opposite view - that two graphs, one plotting a rise in C02 and the other the rise in temperature over a period of 650,000 years, showed "an exact fit". The judge said although scientists agreed there was a connection, "the two graphs do not establish what Mr Gore asserts"

· Mr Gore said the disappearance of snow on Mt Kilimanjaro was expressly attributable to human-induced climate change. The judge said the consensus was that that could not be established

· The drying up of Lake Chad was used as an example of global warming. The judge said: "It is apparently considered to be more likely to result from ... population increase, over-grazing and regional climate variability"

· Mr Gore ascribed Hurricane Katrina to global warming, but there was "insufficient evidence to show that"

· Mr Gore also referred to a study showing that polar bears were being found that had drowned "swimming long distances to find the ice". The judge said: "The only scientific study that either side before me can find is one which indicates that four polar bears have recently been found drowned because of a storm"

I just hope you do not live in Hurricane Alley. It is going to get worse each year.