global warming summit in France

[catatomic]

I might want to kill myself if I don't post something about the global warming summit. I have studied climate change. I have particularly studied the climate models. The temperature is definitely rising, definitely almost all human caused, it is catastrophic, and the best result of the France conference will be half enough to stop the worst effects.

I feel I could strongly argue for the importance of making this meeting a success. Talk to me.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Do you think Nuclear and possibly fusion is a better way to deal with it? Seriously, Solar appears to have too many weaknesses(doesn't work at night, needs storage, etc) and wind isn't really catching on.

I believe we're warming,, but how much do you believe we could get in the next 50 years?

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Oh yeah....weather is far more important than muslim terrorist.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Oh yeah....weather is far more important than muslim terrorist.

Not saying it is. Just that Nuclear, fusion and renewables are a good way to get off the middle eastern oil!

 

[basquebromance]

if president obama is so concerned about co2 emissions why did he fly air force 1 to paris & back putting out more co2 than a car will put out in 72 years?!

 

[catatomic]

I'm sure solar is good because it has no cons. Nuclear I need to study, but I'm sure it works at least as a stall tactic even if it isn't best. - Nuclear Power doesn't pollute, but the reactants are limited.

Terrorism is very important too. In fact I find that nukes and global warming are the top two most important things, but right now in these two weeks is the time for the climate summit. I can talk about nukes and terrorists some other time.

Politically important people need to fly around a lot so they can enact policy. Their speeches probably result in a net negative carbon footprint. If Al Gore hadn't flown around in expensive consumptive jets, fewer people would believe what needs to happen.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

PT Barnum was right.......

 

[catatomic]

Oh don't call me a su

Oh yeah....weather is far more important than muslim terrorist.

Oh don't call me a sucker... I am aware of this...
Australia Threatens International Boycott Over US Gun Violence

Check out the number of mass shootings in 2015 picture!

But if we don't act in these two weeks, what's going to happen if equatorial countries including India and China have to be massively displaced in the future?

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Oh don't call me a su

Oh yeah....weather is far more important than muslim terrorist.

Oh don't call me a sucker... I am aware of this...
Australia Threatens International Boycott Over US Gun Violence

Check out the number of mass shootings in 2015 picture!

But if we don't act in these two weeks, what's going to happen if equatorial countries including India and China have to be massively displaced in the future?

Holy crap you sound scripted!!!

 

[flacaltenn]

I might want to kill myself if I don't post something about the global warming summit. I have studied climate change. I have particularly studied the climate models. The temperature is definitely rising, definitely almost all human caused, it is catastrophic, and the best result of the France conference will be half enough to stop the worst effects.

I feel I could strongly argue for the importance of making this meeting a success. Talk to me.

If you've "studied the Climate models" -- than you are aware of how poorly they've done in predicting temperature rise in just the past 30 years or so. That's because the effects of man;'s emissions have been over-rated, because natural cycles have been under-rated and/or poorly understood -- and you also know that the CATASTROPHIC forecasts for 6 or 8degC by 2100 have been scaled WAY the hell back.

Climate science is not yet mature. We've only had reasonable space-borne instruments for about 20 years, and the field is just now understanding the roles of time delays and heat storage in the massive climate system.

Our little 0.5degC blip during your lifetime is NOT a crisis. And it's in no way unusual in the longer sense of climate history. And SOME SMALL fraction of that warming MAY be due man's effects on the climate. But the whole GWarming theory of a planet destroying itself over a 2degC change is silly..

 

[Billy_Bob]

I might want to kill myself if I don't post something about the global warming summit. I have studied climate change. I have particularly studied the climate models. The temperature is definitely rising, definitely almost all human caused, it is catastrophic, and the best result of the France conference will be half enough to stop the worst effects.

I feel I could strongly argue for the importance of making this meeting a success. Talk to me.

No it is not man caused. In fact, all of it can be attributed to natural variation.

Below are two rates of warming from the Hadcrut3 lower troposphere. One is from the period 1900 through 1950 and the the other is 1951 through 2000. Below each is the rate of warming.

The trend for the period 1900-1950 is 0.51 deg C or 0.103/decade

This trend occurred before CO2 became a rapidly increasing according to the IPCC and is near or is the Natural Variational rate.

The trend for 1951-2000 is 0.50 deg C or 0.100 deg C/decade.

This means that the two rates of warming are statistically insignificant DESPITE the rapid rise in CO2 and equal to NATURAL VARIATION..

So by simple observation we can see the problem with the hypothesis of runaway temp caused by CO2. During the time they claim runway rise it was nothing of the sort and even given the rise in CO2 there was no discernible increase in that natural rise.

This summit is about wealth redistribution and control of people it is not about climate anything.!

 

[Billy_Bob]

Oh don't call me a su

Oh yeah....weather is far more important than muslim terrorist.

Oh don't call me a sucker... I am aware of this...
Australia Threatens International Boycott Over US Gun Violence

Check out the number of mass shootings in 2015 picture!

But if we don't act in these two weeks, what's going to happen if equatorial countries including India and China have to be massively displaced in the future?

why do left wing nut cases blame the actions of thinking humans on inanimate objects... Are you going to lobby for removing hammers? pressure cookers? Steak knives?

 

[Billy_Bob]

I'm sure solar is good because it has no cons. Nuclear I need to study, but I'm sure it works at least as a stall tactic even if it isn't best. - Nuclear Power doesn't pollute, but the reactants are limited.

Terrorism is very important too. In fact I find that nukes and global warming are the top two most important things, but right now in these two weeks is the time for the climate summit. I can talk about nukes and terrorists some other time.

Politically important people need to fly around a lot so they can enact policy. Their speeches probably result in a net negative carbon footprint. If Al Gore hadn't flown around in expensive consumptive jets, fewer people would believe what needs to happen.

You dont have a fucking clue do you. Tell me what kinds of waste are created in building solar panels, batteries, and all the wires, oils and upkeep chemicals needed..

AL Gore is a fool and a liar... You really are a sucker that has no cognitive thinking skills..

Had you actually studied climate and the data you would not hold these fabricated views.

 

[catatomic]

Let me reply to a few of your reports and then tell you what I know. 50 natural and 50 natural+forcings models have been looked at. From the industrialization to 30 years ago, natural worked. Now, for 30 years it is humanity as the only explanation. Also the 6 to 8 degrees has not been scaled back. The thing about the 0.5 degree is that now its accelerating.

OK so here are some things that I know, in my own words.

Climate models do not just show the Arctic Ocean melting, the rain forests being cut down, or cities polluting the skies. They involve everything from the ground to the sky. They put cubes to cover the earth and add layers to get to the highest atmosphere.

Each cube is measured for how much heat it produces, how much it consumes, and how much it sends and receives heat from neighboring cubes.

This is called a huge set of differential equations. We cannot solve the equations but we can approximate them as close as we want, given time. Also, to account for cities some of the cubes could fit the cities. More cubes and better approximations keep coming with greater computer power.

But don’t worry about it being incorrect because the models already match the data. There were some 50 climate models that were looked at that included only natural forcings (only natural forces) and some 50 that included human forcings too. Both models were consistent with each other until about 30 years ago. In other words, the industrialization of the world did not have an impact until about 30 years ago. After 30 years, they have done all these models on 6 continents. In every continent, the temperature could only be explained by human models, and was virtually all due to humans. I say virtually just because one continent had all the natural and natural+human models intersect slightly. However the temperature is always only explained by humanity.

Better models will arise but we already know!

 

[catatomic]

Billy Bob, I don't care to talk to you.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Good luck Catatomic convincing anyone of reality. They're loserterians and want to go back to the pre-civilization times.

The honest truth is they believe global warming isn't happening at all and it is just a fraud. Yep, let's call every science organization on earth a fraud...lol.

A joke is what these people are.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Billy Bob, I don't care to talk to you.

Funny how i put forth facts, empirical evidence and you all run and hide.. Your story doesn't hold even one ounce of credibility and you can not defend your position.

Funny how that works.. You only want to lie to the cullible or is it the gullible..?

 

[Billy_Bob]

Good luck Catatomic convincing anyone of reality. They're loserterians and want to go back to the pre-civilization times.

The honest truth is they believe global warming isn't happening at all and it is just a fraud. Yep, let's call every science organization on earth a fraud...lol.

A joke is what these people are.

Unaltered data sets, The Satellite record... yep those pesky facts showing your position a lie and deceit aimed at control of the world.. Your just like your god/fool Obama who is spouting this lie while ignoring Radical Islam and terrorism.. IE: real threats to the world..

Your right in calling your own people a joke..fools... and ignorant..

 

[Billy_Bob]

Let me reply to a few of your reports and then tell you what I know. 50 natural and 50 natural+forcings models have been looked at. From the industrialization to 30 years ago, natural worked. Now, for 30 years it is humanity as the only explanation. Also the 6 to 8 degrees has not been scaled back. The thing about the 0.5 degree is that now its accelerating.

OK so here are some things that I know, in my own words.

Climate models do not just show the Arctic Ocean melting, the rain forests being cut down, or cities polluting the skies. They involve everything from the ground to the sky. They put cubes to cover the earth and add layers to get to the highest atmosphere.

Each cube is measured for how much heat it produces, how much it consumes, and how much it sends and receives heat from neighboring cubes.

This is called a huge set of differential equations. We cannot solve the equations but we can approximate them as close as we want, given time. Also, to account for cities some of the cubes could fit the cities. More cubes and better approximations keep coming with greater computer power.

But don’t worry about it being incorrect because the models already match the data. There were some 50 climate models that were looked at that included only natural forcings (only natural forces) and some 50 that included human forcings too. Both models were consistent with each other until about 30 years ago. In other words, the industrialization of the world did not have an impact until about 30 years ago. After 30 years, they have done all these models on 6 continents. In every continent, the temperature could only be explained by human models, and was virtually all due to humans. I say virtually just because one continent had all the natural and natural+human models intersect slightly. However the temperature is always only explained by humanity.

Better models will arise but we already know!

The model DO NOT MATCH THE EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE DATA.. only after +1.32 deg C adjustment do they match.. Funny how you fools adjust the empirical record to match your failed models instead of correcting your failed models.. What kind of fools are you? What you practice is NOT SCIENCE!

 

[Crick]

What models don't match what data? Let's see the source of your crap Billy.