Odds of climate change (for the worse)?

[KittenKoder]

What part of the country do you live? Some places have had colder than average temps, but most have had warmer than average temps. Anomalies are always going to happen, whether we're in a cooling or warming trend, and 1 or 2 cooling years does not make a trend.

Nor does 20-30 years when we're talking about 5,000,000,000 years..now does it?

We are not discussing 4.53 billion years. We are discussing the next 100 years.

Ye only using 10 years of data ... with only one type of science from only those scientists you agree with .... just keeps getting more and more limiting.

 

[Chris]

Nor does 20-30 years when we're talking about 5,000,000,000 years..now does it?

We are not discussing 4.53 billion years. We are discussing the next 100 years.

Ye only using 10 years of data ... with only one type of science from only those scientists you agree with .... just keeps getting more and more limiting.

Why do you lie?

We have CO2 data going back 600,000 years.

CO2 causes the earth to retain heat. Do you deny that?

 

[Meister]

What part of the country do you live? Some places have had colder than average temps, but most have had warmer than average temps. Anomalies are always going to happen, whether we're in a cooling or warming trend, and 1 or 2 cooling years does not make a trend.

Nor does 20-30 years when we're talking about 5,000,000,000 years..now does it?

We are not discussing 4.53 billion years. We are discussing the next 100 years.

453,000,000,000 years, 20-30 years, 1-2 years, or the next 100 years, they're all intertwined Old Rocks, and that would be with climate change.

 

[Old Rocks]

Nor does 20-30 years when we're talking about 5,000,000,000 years..now does it?

We are not discussing 4.53 billion years. We are discussing the next 100 years.

Ye only using 10 years of data ... with only one type of science from only those scientists you agree with .... just keeps getting more and more limiting.

No, ice core data to at least 650,000 years. Proxie data from geologist as far back as we have sedimentary rock. And good weather data for at least the last 150 years. Satellite data for the last 40 years.

Since the vast majority of scientists that are actually doing field research are finding data that supports AGW, that is what anyone posting science articles will be posting. And it is not a matter of agreeing with me. I would find it far more agreeable to find that we are not on the edge of a climatic disaster.

 

[KittenKoder]

We are not discussing 4.53 billion years. We are discussing the next 100 years.

Ye only using 10 years of data ... with only one type of science from only those scientists you agree with .... just keeps getting more and more limiting.

No, ice core data to at least 650,000 years. Proxie data from geologist as far back as we have sedimentary rock. And good weather data for at least the last 150 years. Satellite data for the last 40 years.

Since the vast majority of scientists that are actually doing field research are finding data that supports AGW, that is what anyone posting science articles will be posting. And it is not a matter of agreeing with me. I would find it far more agreeable to find that we are not on the edge of a climatic disaster.

Are you going to start parroting the ice cap crap again? Please don't, it still only accounts for a VERY small portion of the data and shows no clear connections to human influence, it's an effect with too many known causes.

 

[code1211]

What part of the country do you live? Some places have had colder than average temps, but most have had warmer than average temps. Anomalies are always going to happen, whether we're in a cooling or warming trend, and 1 or 2 cooling years does not make a trend.

Nor does 20-30 years when we're talking about 5,000,000,000 years..now does it?

We are not discussing 4.53 billion years. We are discussing the next 100 years.

If we had started the discussion in 2001, we'd be talking about cooling. Well, 7 years down and 93 to go.

 

[FactFinder]

Nor does 20-30 years when we're talking about 5,000,000,000 years..now does it?

We are not discussing 4.53 billion years. We are discussing the next 100 years.

If we had started the discussion in 2001, we'd be talking about cooling. Well, 7 years down and 93 to go.

They don't have a crap of an idea what will happen in the next 93 years. They were already wrong on the last seven.

But that don't stop Soft Rocks from talking as if he knows anything. Must be a genetic defect.

 

[Chris]

We are not discussing 4.53 billion years. We are discussing the next 100 years.

If we had started the discussion in 2001, we'd be talking about cooling. Well, 7 years down and 93 to go.

They don't have a crap of an idea what will happen in the next 93 years. They were already wrong on the last seven.

But that don't stop Soft Rocks from talking as if he knows anything. Must be a genetic defect.

Actually we have a very good idea what will happen.

We will continue to pump billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere every year, and the warming effect will be greater over time.

 

[KittenKoder]

If we had started the discussion in 2001, we'd be talking about cooling. Well, 7 years down and 93 to go.

They don't have a crap of an idea what will happen in the next 93 years. They were already wrong on the last seven.

But that don't stop Soft Rocks from talking as if he knows anything. Must be a genetic defect.

Actually we have a very good idea what will happen.

We will continue to pump billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere every year, and the warming effect will be greater over time.

A more likely result will be a new algae that will appear at the increased food supply, which will grow to balance the atmospheric levels like the ecosystem is suppose to ...

... oh wait, that was about to happen if only humans hadn't stopped it several times we wouldn't be seeing this "problem" now ... would we.

 

[Chris]

They don't have a crap of an idea what will happen in the next 93 years. They were already wrong on the last seven.

But that don't stop Soft Rocks from talking as if he knows anything. Must be a genetic defect.

Actually we have a very good idea what will happen.

We will continue to pump billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere every year, and the warming effect will be greater over time.

A more likely result will be a new algae that will appear at the increased food supply, which will grow to balance the atmospheric levels like the ecosystem is suppose to ...

... oh wait, that was about to happen if only humans hadn't stopped it several times we wouldn't be seeing this "problem" now ... would we.

Actually what we need to do is grow algae for fuel.

Algae are 50% oil.

 

[FactFinder]

If we had started the discussion in 2001, we'd be talking about cooling. Well, 7 years down and 93 to go.

They don't have a crap of an idea what will happen in the next 93 years. They were already wrong on the last seven.

But that don't stop Soft Rocks from talking as if he knows anything. Must be a genetic defect.

Actually we have a very good idea what will happen.

We will continue to pump billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere every year, and the warming effect will be greater over time.

Yeahhhhh! That's why we are cooling now...

 

[Chris]

They don't have a crap of an idea what will happen in the next 93 years. They were already wrong on the last seven.

But that don't stop Soft Rocks from talking as if he knows anything. Must be a genetic defect.

Actually we have a very good idea what will happen.

We will continue to pump billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere every year, and the warming effect will be greater over time.

Yeahhhhh! That's why we are cooling now...

I know you are not this dumb.

We are in the down part of the solar cycle. The Sun can always trump the effect of CO2. But the effect of CO2 grows stronger every day, and the Sun will soon head back up to the top of its cycle. Plus the positive feedback effects of the warming will kick in.

 

[Old Rocks]

They don't have a crap of an idea what will happen in the next 93 years. They were already wrong on the last seven.

But that don't stop Soft Rocks from talking as if he knows anything. Must be a genetic defect.

Actually we have a very good idea what will happen.

We will continue to pump billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere every year, and the warming effect will be greater over time.

A more likely result will be a new algae that will appear at the increased food supply, which will grow to balance the atmospheric levels like the ecosystem is suppose to ...

... oh wait, that was about to happen if only humans hadn't stopped it several times we wouldn't be seeing this "problem" now ... would we.

Quite on the contrary, that is exactly what did not happen in the PETM and the P-T extinctions.

 

[Old Rocks]

The odds of climate change are 100%. The chance of man having anything to do with it are near zero. Whether it is a good thing or bad will depend largely on where you live and how resourceful you are.

So you say. And every Scientific Society, every National Academy of Science, and every major University says just the opposite. Guess who has the most credibility?

 

[Old Rocks]

Nor does 20-30 years when we're talking about 5,000,000,000 years..now does it?

We are not discussing 4.53 billion years. We are discussing the next 100 years.

If we had started the discussion in 2001, we'd be talking about cooling. Well, 7 years down and 93 to go.

Since 2005 was nearly as warm, or actually warmer, depending on which data is used, how do you back that statement up?

 

[FactFinder]

The Sun can always trump the effect of CO2.

Nahhh, couldn't be. Your joshing me, heh?

 

[FactFinder]

The odds of climate change are 100%. The chance of man having anything to do with it are near zero. Whether it is a good thing or bad will depend largely on where you live and how resourceful you are.

So you say. And every Scientific Society, every National Academy of Science, and every major University says just the opposite. Guess who has the most credibility?

Me. cause I don't profit from the weather.

and it is not "every" I guess the Japanese or Australians or Russians or Chinese or Canadians don't exist in your narrow book, heh? The only people who matter is Hansen in the narrow department of Giss as it relates to NASA, heh? Guess what Hansen is not every Scientific Society, every National Academy of Science, and every major University

 

[Old Rocks]

I guess that you don't bother to read what the scientific societies in those nations actually say, do you. And below is just a very small list of those concurring with the fact of global warming.

Earth sciences

[edit] American Geophysical Union
The American Geophysical Union (AGU) statement, [36] adopted by the society in 2003 and revised in 2007, affirms that rising levels of greenhouse gases have caused and will continue to cause the global surface temperature to be warmer:

The Earth's climate is now clearly out of balance and is warming. Many components of the climate system—including the temperatures of the atmosphere, land and ocean, the extent of sea ice and mountain glaciers, the sea level, the distribution of precipitation, and the length of seasons—are now changing at rates and in patterns that are not natural and are best explained by the increased atmospheric abundances of greenhouse gases and aerosols generated by human activity during the 20th century. Global average surface temperatures increased on average by about 0.6°C over the period 1956–2006. As of 2006, eleven of the previous twelve years were warmer than any others since 1850. The observed rapid retreat of Arctic sea ice is expected to continue and lead to the disappearance of summertime ice within this century. Evidence from most oceans and all continents except Antarctica shows warming attributable to human activities. Recent changes in many physical and biological systems are linked with this regional climate change. A sustained research effort, involving many AGU members and summarized in the 2007 assessments of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, continues to improve our scientific understanding of the climate.

[edit] European Federation of Geologists
In 2008, the European Federation of Geologists (EFG) issued the position paper Carbon Capture and geological Storage :

The EFG recognizes the work of the IPCC and other organizations, and subscribes to the major findings that climate change is happening, is predominantly caused by anthropogenic emissions of CO2, and poses a significant threat to human civilization.
It is clear that major efforts are necessary to quickly and strongly reduce CO2 emissions. The EFG strongly advocates renewable and sustainable energy production, including geothermal energy, as well as the need for increasing energy efficiency.
CCS [Carbon Capture and geological Storage] should also be regarded as a bridging technology, facilitating the move towards a carbon free economy.[37]

Please Follow Copyright Guidelines
Scientific opinion on climate change - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[FactFinder]

I guess that you don't bother to read what the scientific societies in those nations actually say, do you. And below is just a very small list of those concurring with the fact of global warming.

Earth sciences

[edit] American Geophysical Union
The American Geophysical Union (AGU) statement, [36] adopted by the society in 2003 and revised in 2007, affirms that rising levels of greenhouse gases have caused and will continue to cause the global surface temperature to be warmer:

The Earth's climate is now clearly out of balance and is warming. Many components of the climate system—including the temperatures of the atmosphere, land and ocean, the extent of sea ice and mountain glaciers, the sea level, the distribution of precipitation, and the length of seasons—are now changing at rates and in patterns that are not natural and are best explained by the increased atmospheric abundances of greenhouse gases and aerosols generated by human activity during the 20th century. Global average surface temperatures increased on average by about 0.6°C over the period 1956–2006. As of 2006, eleven of the previous twelve years were warmer than any others since 1850. The observed rapid retreat of Arctic sea ice is expected to continue and lead to the disappearance of summertime ice within this century. Evidence from most oceans and all continents except Antarctica shows warming attributable to human activities. Recent changes in many physical and biological systems are linked with this regional climate change. A sustained research effort, involving many AGU members and summarized in the 2007 assessments of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, continues to improve our scientific understanding of the climate.

[edit] European Federation of Geologists
In 2008, the European Federation of Geologists (EFG) issued the position paper Carbon Capture and geological Storage :

The EFG recognizes the work of the IPCC and other organizations, and subscribes to the major findings that climate change is happening, is predominantly caused by anthropogenic emissions of CO2, and poses a significant threat to human civilization.
It is clear that major efforts are necessary to quickly and strongly reduce CO2 emissions. The EFG strongly advocates renewable and sustainable energy production, including geothermal energy, as well as the need for increasing energy efficiency.
CCS [Carbon Capture and geological Storage] should also be regarded as a bridging technology, facilitating the move towards a carbon free economy.[37]

[edit] European Geosciences Union
In 2005, the Divisions of Atmospheric and Climate Sciences of the European Geosciences Union (EGU) issued a position statement in support of the joint science academies’ statement on global response to climate change. The statement refers to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), as "the main representative of the global scientific community", and asserts that the IPCC “represents the state-of-the-art of climate science supported by the major science academies around the world and by the vast majority of science researchers and investigators as documented by the peer-reviewed scientific literature.”[38]

Additionally, in 2008, the EGU issued a position statement on ocean acidification which states, "Ocean acidification is already occurring today and will continue to intensify, closely tracking atmospheric CO2 increase. Given the potential threat to marine ecosystems and its ensuing impact on human society and economy, especially as it acts in conjunction with anthropogenic global warming, there is an urgent need for immediate action." The statement then advocates for strategies "to limit future release of CO2 to the atmosphere and/or enhance removal of excess CO2 from the atmosphere."[39]


[edit] Geological Society of America
In 2006, the Geological Society of America adopted a position statement on global climate change:

The Geological Society of America (GSA) supports the scientific conclusions that Earth’s climate is changing; the climate changes are due in part to human activities; and the probable consequences of the climate changes will be significant and blind to geopolitical boundaries. Furthermore, the potential implications of global climate change and the time scale over which such changes will likely occur require active, effective, long-term planning.[40]

[edit] International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics
In July 2007, the International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics (IUGG) adopted a resolution entitled “The Urgency of Addressing Climate Change”. In it, the IUGG concurs with the “comprehensive and widely accepted and endorsed scientific assessments carried out by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and regional and national bodies, which have firmly established, on the basis of scientific evidence, that human activities are the primary cause of recent climate change.” They state further that the “continuing reliance on combustion of fossil fuels as the world’s primary source of energy will lead to much higher atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gasses, which will, in turn, cause significant increases in surface temperature, sea level, ocean acidification, and their related consequences to the environment and society.”
Scientific opinion on climate change - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

These aren' t the Canadiens, Japanese, Russians, Chinese or Australians. Those are the wannabe elitist Europeans with the suck asses following. Not impressed. Not when they have an agenda that has nothing to do with humanities welfare and everything thing to do with trying to gain power.

 

[KittenKoder]

Oh yay ... more "peer pressured" sources.