What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Polar Ice Melting Is Proof of Manmade Climate Change

jc456

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2013
Messages
120,314
Reaction score
21,748
Points
2,180
OP
Weatherman2020

Weatherman2020

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
83,595
Reaction score
52,320
Points
2,605
Location
Left Coast, Classified
You've seen the graphs. The rate of cooling and warming at the beginning and ending of the LIA are absolutely trivial compared to the current rate of warming. Additionally, neither the LIA nor the MWP were global. Current warming is. Do you have an explanation?
And how much hotter is it than it was in the late 19th century when Glacier Bay glacier receded 60 miles in 90 years?
 

jc456

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2013
Messages
120,314
Reaction score
21,748
Points
2,180
Quite obviously, the target temperature is that extant before AGW. But we won't get their for centuries. Makes it a little pointless to think about. And the rhetorical nature of your query DOES make you sound like a denier. Are you?

PS, I am curious what you found amusing in my last post where you posted a laughing emoji.
before AGW? Were there records back 1000's of years ago?
 

Cellblock2429

Platinum Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2016
Messages
27,440
Reaction score
8,989
Points
910
Location
New York
Quite obviously, the target temperature is that extant before AGW. But we won't get their for centuries. Makes it a little pointless to think about. And the rhetorical nature of your query DOES make you sound like a denier. Are you?

PS, I am curious what you found amusing in my last post where you posted a laughing emoji.
/——/ I’m amused by your willingness to get sucked into that whole climate change hysteria. It started with global cooling in 1978. I’m still waiting to freeze to death.
4ED3420E-D991-4E96-A83C-D67ED2B5F37E.jpeg
 

Donald H

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2020
Messages
15,171
Reaction score
5,102
Points
208
You are correct, I know of no climate that has changed in my lifetime. But it's you all that says it has, and I'm really interested in where that is. Why are you afraid to report where climate changed?
I know I shouldn't with any of the confirmed denialists, but I will just once.


It always reliably sets them off!
 
OP
Weatherman2020

Weatherman2020

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
83,595
Reaction score
52,320
Points
2,605
Location
Left Coast, Classified
I know I shouldn't with any of the confirmed denialists, but I will just once.


It always reliably sets them off!
Climate change has been working since Genesis.
 

expat_panama

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2011
Messages
3,345
Reaction score
546
Points
130
The obvious conclusion to come to is that too many Americans are unable to understand the science of climate change.

The debate is best avoided, as the facts play out.
You know it and I know it, and at the same time there are soo many good people who maintain AGW as their working assumption proof or not.

My take: cognitive tribalism (aka "group think").
 

jc456

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2013
Messages
120,314
Reaction score
21,748
Points
2,180
I know I shouldn't with any of the confirmed denialists, but I will just once.


It always reliably sets them off!
With all due respects, that doesn't quite state where climate has changed in my lifetime.
 

expat_panama

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2011
Messages
3,345
Reaction score
546
Points
130
I know I shouldn't with any of the confirmed denialists, but I will just once.


It always reliably sets them off!
Interesting link, but what never ceases to amaze me is that no where in the piece do they say exactly what mass is heating nor do they present the current and past temperatures of this mysterious mass. Off hand, I'd have thought that if we don't know what's heating and we don't know what the temps are and have been, this would have stopped the discussion.

It hasn't .
 

Crick

Gold Member
Joined
May 10, 2014
Messages
19,070
Reaction score
2,998
Points
290
Location
N/A
/——/ I’m amused by your willingness to get sucked into that whole climate change hysteria. It started with global cooling in 1978. I’m still waiting to freeze to death.

Allow me to explain in small words.

Global warming started in about 1850 when the Industrial Revolution dramatically increased the burning of fossil fuels (coal and petroleum). That burning took carbon dioxide (CO2) that had been sequestered (trapped) in the ground and put it in the atmosphere.

When light from the sun shines on the surface of the Earth, it is absorbed there and warms the planet. The warm planet radiates away its heat as infrared light (IR). CO2 absorbs IR and slows its escape to space. On a planet with no CO2 in the atmosphere, that radiated IR would escape directly to space. If the Earth had no gases absorbing IR, the temperature would be almost 50 Fahrenheit degrees colder than it is. Instead, that warmed CO2 reradiates its energy as more IR which usually gets reabsorbed by other CO2 molecules and also transfers some of its thermal energy to other gases in the air as well as to the land and the ocean through direct conduction (contact). The IR energy eventually ends up either back in the Earth itself, or finally escapes to space. The more CO2 there is in the atmosphere, the longer it takes that IR to escape and the warmer the Earth will become.

From the time of the first appearance of humans 200,000 years ago till the Industrial Revolution, humans have lived on a planet with 280 ppm (parts per million) of CO2. CO2 released by burning coal and oil have now raised that value to 420 ppm. That additional CO2 in the atmosphere has caused the planet to warm significantly with more to come even if we were to immediately stop putting out CO2. That warming is having lots of different harmful effects that hurt plants and animals and humans in a variety of ways.

In a perfect example of the American Way, it has been proposed that businesses will do the best job of reducing and eliminating greenhouse gas emissions if we simply encourage them to move in that direction and then let them find their own means of doing so. That is the purpose of a carbon tax.

Questions?
 
Last edited:

Crick

Gold Member
Joined
May 10, 2014
Messages
19,070
Reaction score
2,998
Points
290
Location
N/A
Interesting link, but what never ceases to amaze me is that no where in the piece do they say exactly what mass is heating nor do they present the current and past temperatures of this mysterious mass. Off hand, I'd have thought that if we don't know what's heating and we don't know what the temps are and have been, this would have stopped the discussion.

It hasn't .
CO2 is heating and it is transferring that heat to everything else in the atmosphere and to the surfaces of the Earth and its oceans. The temperature prior to anthropogenic global warming is shown here. Those values on the vertical scale are changes from the 20th century average temperature of the planet which was 15.6C or 60.1F.

1664384540669.png
 

Donald H

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2020
Messages
15,171
Reaction score
5,102
Points
208
You know it and I know it, and at the same time there are soo many good people who maintain AGW as their working assumption proof or not.

My take: cognitive tribalism (aka "group think").
You make a valid point when you mention 'group think'.

The question has become political for most Americans and political success depends entirely on 'group think'.

Climate scientists provide the 'group' that is pro with their thinking, while other political forces provide the thinking for the con side.

Just a fair warning to you and others who have an interest in a logical discussion: I don't accept bad behaviour and spamming.
 

Donald H

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2020
Messages
15,171
Reaction score
5,102
Points
208
Interesting link, but what never ceases to amaze me is that no where in the piece do they say exactly what mass is heating nor do they present the current and past temperatures of this mysterious mass. Off hand, I'd have thought that if we don't know what's heating and we don't know what the temps are and have been, this would have stopped the discussion.

It hasn't .
If there are specific details missing in the link then you should do the research to find answers. The research can be as simple as asking some specific questions of the professionals.

Why should I need to tell you that?

I think I'm already starting to see some holes developing in your 'facade' of interest. If I'm wrong about that then I expect you to provide some questions that are relevant to the discussion, and then maybe tomorrow, some of the answers you receive from climate science experts.
 

jc456

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2013
Messages
120,314
Reaction score
21,748
Points
2,180
Climate scientists provide the 'group' that is pro with their thinking,
are you suggesting that there are no climate scientists with con arguments? I know the Pro's won't let them say anything out loud. censorship is large in AGW.
 
Last edited:

jc456

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2013
Messages
120,314
Reaction score
21,748
Points
2,180
CO2 is heating and it is transferring that heat to everything else in the atmosphere and to the surfaces of the Earth and its oceans. The temperature prior to anthropogenic global warming is shown here. Those values on the vertical scale are changes from the 20th century average temperature of the planet which was 15.6C or 60.1F.

View attachment 702680
cool, so hot is 120 PPM of CO2?
 

jc456

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2013
Messages
120,314
Reaction score
21,748
Points
2,180
Interesting link, but what never ceases to amaze me is that no where in the piece do they say exactly what mass is heating nor do they present the current and past temperatures of this mysterious mass. Off hand, I'd have thought that if we don't know what's heating and we don't know what the temps are and have been, this would have stopped the discussion.

It hasn't .
my question.
 

themirrorthief

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2021
Messages
4,129
Reaction score
3,058
Points
1,938
The obvious conclusion to come to is that too many Americans are unable to understand the science of climate change.

The debate is best avoided, as the facts play out.
the only fact that has ever come to light is the fact that not one scientist living or dead has ever PROVEN that climate change is man made
 

Crick

Gold Member
Joined
May 10, 2014
Messages
19,070
Reaction score
2,998
Points
290
Location
N/A
Interesting link, but what never ceases to amaze me is that no where in the piece do they say exactly what mass is heating nor do they present the current and past temperatures of this mysterious mass. Off hand, I'd have thought that if we don't know what's heating and we don't know what the temps are and have been, this would have stopped the discussion.

It hasn't .
Allow me to quote from the linked article

"Scientists are more than 95% certain that nearly all of global warming is caused by increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases (GHGs) and other human-caused emissions. Within the earth's atmosphere, accumulating greenhouse gases like water vapor, carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and ozone are the gases within the atmosphere that absorb and emit heat radiation. Increasing or decreasing amounts of greenhouse gases within the atmosphere act to either hold in or release more of the heat from the sun."

AND

"The eventual temperature range associated with triggering and marking the beginning of the runaway global warming processes is an increase in average global temperature of 2.2°-4° Celsius (4°-7.2° Fahrenheit) above preindustrial levels. "

So, it seems the problem may have been on your end.
 

Crick

Gold Member
Joined
May 10, 2014
Messages
19,070
Reaction score
2,998
Points
290
Location
N/A
the only fact that has ever come to light is the fact that not one scientist living or dead has ever PROVEN that climate change is man made
There ARE NO PROOFS in the natural sciences. There is only evidence but absolute mountains of evidence indicate that the observed warming over the last 50 years is due to human GHG emissions.
 

jc456

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2013
Messages
120,314
Reaction score
21,748
Points
2,180
the only fact that has ever come to light is the fact that not one scientist living or dead has ever PROVEN that climate change is man made
Ever, they will drink beers over their models and peer reviews of mumbo jumbo and yell, DENIER
 

💲 Amazon Deals 💲

Forum List

Top