Polar Ice Melting Is Proof of Manmade Climate Change

[ding]

The real problem talking with you - and it IS classic Dunning-Kruger - is that you don't seem to be the least bit aware of what you do not know. There is no single proxy that gives all the answers and you're a fool to think so.

You apparently don't have a clue what the dunning effect is. And if the region that is most affected by warming and cooling shows that 8,500 years of the past 10,000 years shows that it was warmer than the past decades and the global temperature reconstructions don't show that, the global temperature reconstructions are wrong.

There is no single proxy that gives all the answers? Says the fool behaving as if CO2 is the single component which decides the earth's temperature.

 

[jc456]

The planet's temperature does not change without cause.

why did temperatures warm to melt the ice sheets in North America?

 

[Crick]

You apparently don't have a clue what the dunning effect is.

The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias whereby people with low ability, expertise, or experience regarding a certain type of task or area of knowledge tend to overestimate their ability or knowledge. Some researchers also include in their definition the opposite effect for high performers: their tendency to underestimate their skills. Since its first publication, various criticisms of the effect and its explanation have been formulated. Dunning–Kruger effect - Wikipedia

And if the region that is most affected by warming and cooling shows that 8,500 years of the past 10,000 years shows that it was warmer than the past decades and the global temperature reconstructions don't show that, the global temperature reconstructions are wrong.

Maybe your rejection of the greenhouse effect isn't you low point. Have you read what you just said? The region "most affected" by warming, by definition, has gotten warmer than the rest of the planet. It is the LEAST representative of the planet as a whole.

There is no single proxy that gives all the answers? Says the fool behaving as if CO2 is the single component which decides the earth's temperature.

I have never made such a comment and you know it. I have repeatedly stated that global temperature is affected by numerous factors and you know that as well. However, increases in atmospheric CO2 is currently having the largest effect on the planet's temperature. That's the part you don't like and what I hope you like even less is that you don't have an iota of a shred of a sliver of evidence to support your view.

 

[ding]

The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias whereby people with low ability, expertise, or experience regarding a certain type of task or area of knowledge tend to overestimate their ability or knowledge. Some researchers also include in their definition the opposite effect for high performers: their tendency to underestimate their skills. Since its first publication, various criticisms of the effect and its explanation have been formulated. Dunning–Kruger effect - Wikipedia

Maybe your rejection of the greenhouse effect isn't you low point. Have you read what you just said? The region "most affected" by warming, by definition, has gotten warmer than the rest of the planet. It is the LEAST representative of the planet as a whole.

I have never made such a comment and you know it. I have repeatedly stated that global temperature is affected by numerous factors and you know that as well. However, increases in atmospheric CO2 is currently having the largest effect on the planet's temperature. That's the part you don't like and what I hope you like even less is that you don't have an iota of a shred of a sliver of evidence to support your view.

When you call people stupid that is a textbook example of the dunning effect.

I don't reject the GHG effect. I reject their piling on unsubstantiated feedbacks which are 2 to 3 times the GHG effect. I reject the notion that CO2 drives climate change because the GHG effect of CO2 alone can't do it.

 

[Crick]

When you call people stupid that is a textbook example of the dunning effect.

Not when I demonstrate the validity of the characterization.

I don't reject the GHG effect. I reject their piling on unsubstantiated feedbacks which are 2 to 3 times the GHG effect. I reject the notion that CO2 drives climate change because the GHG effect of CO2 alone can't do it.

Why do reject feedbacks?

 

[ding]

Not when I demonstrate the validity of the characterization.

Why do reject feedbacks?

That's idiotic. You get frustrated and you can't control yourself so you make personal attacks. Of course you are going to rationalize that's not what you are doing. You have no accountability.

I reject their silly feedbacks for two reasons; the magnitude of the feedbacks which are 2 to 3 times the GHG effect of CO2 and the uncertainty surrounding the net effect of evaporation, cloud formation and precipitation. When Roy Spencer - who I trust - agrees with their feedbacks, I probably will too. But only after I evaluate the basis for his beliefs and determine they make sense.

 

[jc456]

Not when I demonstrate the validity of the characterization

That statement alone puts you at dunning k thinking you’re smarter than others ! Hahaha can’t help yourself

 

[Crick]

That's idiotic. You get frustrated and you can't control yourself so you make personal attacks. Of course you are going to rationalize that's not what you are doing. You have no accountability.

The only thing about you that frustrates me is how you cling to your ignorance

I reject their silly feedbacks for two reasons; the magnitude of the feedbacks which are 2 to 3 times the GHG effect of CO2 and the uncertainty surrounding the net effect of evaporation, cloud formation and precipitation. When Roy Spencer - who I trust - agrees with their feedbacks, I probably will too. But only after I evaluate the basis for his beliefs and determine they make sense.

Have you *evaluated* the basis for the belief of the many scientists who have concluded that ECS falls in the range of 2.5C - 4.0C?

 

[westwall]

The Left hate science and are too stupid to think and use basic logic.

Red Planet Heats Up: Ice Age Ending on Mars​

Red Planet Heats Up: Ice Age Ending on Mars

Mars is emerging from an ice age, a finding that could shed light on the past and future climates of both Mars and Earth, researchers say.

www.space.com

And if by chance anyone is interested in science and not being a submissive sheeple to Greta:

The Little Ice Age was a period of regionally cold conditions between roughly AD 1300 and 1850. Since then the earth has been warming back up and the accumulated ice built up over that time period has been melting.

The Little Ice Age was a GLOBAL event, the anti science types claim it was regional.

 

[Crick]

The Little Ice Age was a GLOBAL event, the anti science types claim it was regional.

The Little Ice Age (LIA) was a period of regional cooling, particularly pronounced in the North Atlantic region.[2] It was not a true ice age of global extent.[3] The term was introduced into scientific literature by François E. Matthes in 1939.[4] The period has been conventionally defined as extending from the 16th to the 19th centuries,[5][6][7] but some experts prefer an alternative timespan from about 1300[8] to about 1850.[9][10][11] - Little Ice Age - Wikipedia

References[edit]​

1. ^ Hawkins, Ed (30 January 2020). "2019 years". climate-lab-book.ac.uk. Archived from the original on 2 February 2020. ("The data show that the modern period is very different to what occurred in the past. The often quoted Medieval Warm Period and Little Ice Age are real phenomena, but small compared to the recent changes.")
2. ^ Ladurie, Emmanuel Le Roy (1971). Times of Feast, Times of Famine: a History of Climate Since the Year 1000. Barbara Bray. Garden City, NY: Doubleday. ISBN 978-0-374-52122-6. OCLC 164590.
3. ^ Jump up to:a b c "Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis". UNEP/GRID-Arendal. Archived from the original on 29 May 2006. Retrieved 2 August 2007.
4. ^ Matthes, François E. (1939). "Report of Committee on Glaciers, April 1939". Transactions, American Geophysical Union. 20 (4): 518. Bibcode:1939TrAGU..20..518M. doi:10.1029/TR020i004p00518. Matthes described glaciers in the Sierra Nevada of California that he believed could not have survived the hypsithermal; his usage of "Little Ice Age" has been superseded by "Neoglaciation".
5. ^ Jump up to:a b Mann, Michael (2003). "Little Ice Age" (PDF). In Michael C MacCracken; John S Perry (eds.). Encyclopedia of Global Environmental Change, Volume 1, The Earth System: Physical and Chemical Dimensions of Global Environmental Change. John Wiley & Sons. Archived (PDF) from the original on 9 October 2022. Retrieved 17 November 2012.
6. ^ Lamb, HH (1972). "The cold Little Ice Age climate of about 1550 to 1800". Climate: present, past and future. London: Methuen. p. 107. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.408.1689. ISBN 978-0-416-11530-7. (noted in Grove 2004:4).
7. ^ Jump up to:a b "Earth observatory Glossary L-N". NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Green Belt MD: NASA. Retrieved 17 July 2015.
8. ^ Jump up to:a b c d e Miller, Gifford H.; Geirsdóttir, Áslaug; Zhong, Yafang; Larsen, Darren J.; Otto-Bliesner, Bette L.; Holland, Marika M.; Bailey, David A.; Refsnider, Kurt A.; Lehman, Scott J.; Southon, John R.; Anderson, Chance; Björnsson, Helgi; Thordarson, Thorvaldur (30 January 2012). "Abrupt onset of the Little Ice Age triggered by volcanism and sustained by sea-ice/ocean feedbacks". Geophysical Research Letters. 39 (2): n/a. Bibcode:2012GeoRL..39.2708M. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.639.9076. doi:10.1029/2011GL050168. S2CID 15313398.
9. ^ Grove, J.M., Little Ice Ages: Ancient and Modern, Routledge, London (2 volumes) 2004.
10. ^ Matthews, John A.; Briffa, Keith R. (2005). "The 'little ice age': Re‐evaluation of an evolving concept". Geografiska Annaler: Series A, Physical Geography. 87: 17–36. doi:10.1111/j.0435-3676.2005.00242.x. S2CID 4832081.
11. ^ "1.4.3 Solar Variability and the Total Solar Irradiance – AR4 WGI Chapter 1: Historical Overview of Climate Change Science". Ipcc.ch. Retrieved 24 June 2013.
12. ^ Jump up to:a b

 

[ding]

The only thing about you that frustrates me is how you cling to your ignorance


Have you *evaluated* the basis for the belief of the many scientists who have concluded that ECS falls in the range of 2.5C - 4.0C?

Still the dunning effect. What am I ignorant about?

They may all be concluding the same thing simply because they’re all tending to do the same thing wrong. Specifically misinterpretation of cloud behavior. Net feedbacks in the real climate system are negative which is why the planet transitioned from a greenhouse planet to an icehouse planet.

 

[Crick]

Still the dunning effect. What am I ignorant about?

Science.

They may all be concluding the same thing simply because they’re all tending to do the same thing wrong. Specifically misinterpretation of cloud behavior. Net feedbacks in the real climate system are negative which is why the planet transitioned from a greenhouse planet to an icehouse planet.

So, you know better than all those scientsts. And you've figured out the whole cloud issue that's boggled all their minds for decades. I expect to be seeing your picture on the cover of Scientific American. "D-K of the Year ! ! !"

 

[ding]

Science.

So, you know better than all those scientsts. And you've figured out the whole cloud issue that's boggled all their minds for decades. I expect to be seeing your picture on the cover of Scientific American. "D-K of the Year ! ! !"

I understand science better than you do. As evidenced by your emotional response.

 

[Crick]

I understand science better than you do. As evidenced by your emotional response.

So you credit your knowledge of science for your lack of concern about the great whales being driven extinct?

I understand science better than you do. As evidenced by your emotional response.

I'm easy. I'm not a scientist. But you've just claimed to know better than a whole lot of actively researching, published, PhDs on several large subjects that I bet you haven't actually spent more than a half hour thinking about total.

 

[westwall]

The Little Ice Age (LIA) was a period of regional cooling, particularly pronounced in the North Atlantic region.[2] It was not a true ice age of global extent.[3] The term was introduced into scientific literature by François E. Matthes in 1939.[4] The period has been conventionally defined as extending from the 16th to the 19th centuries,[5][6][7] but some experts prefer an alternative timespan from about 1300[8] to about 1850.[9][10][11] - Little Ice Age - Wikipedia

References[edit]​

1. ^ Hawkins, Ed (30 January 2020). "2019 years". climate-lab-book.ac.uk. Archived from the original on 2 February 2020. ("The data show that the modern period is very different to what occurred in the past. The often quoted Medieval Warm Period and Little Ice Age are real phenomena, but small compared to the recent changes.")
2. ^ Ladurie, Emmanuel Le Roy (1971). Times of Feast, Times of Famine: a History of Climate Since the Year 1000. Barbara Bray. Garden City, NY: Doubleday. ISBN 978-0-374-52122-6. OCLC 164590.
3. ^ Jump up to:a b c "Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis". UNEP/GRID-Arendal. Archived from the original on 29 May 2006. Retrieved 2 August 2007.
4. ^ Matthes, François E. (1939). "Report of Committee on Glaciers, April 1939". Transactions, American Geophysical Union. 20 (4): 518. Bibcode:1939TrAGU..20..518M. doi:10.1029/TR020i004p00518. Matthes described glaciers in the Sierra Nevada of California that he believed could not have survived the hypsithermal; his usage of "Little Ice Age" has been superseded by "Neoglaciation".
5. ^ Jump up to:a b Mann, Michael (2003). "Little Ice Age" (PDF). In Michael C MacCracken; John S Perry (eds.). Encyclopedia of Global Environmental Change, Volume 1, The Earth System: Physical and Chemical Dimensions of Global Environmental Change. John Wiley & Sons. Archived (PDF) from the original on 9 October 2022. Retrieved 17 November 2012.
6. ^ Lamb, HH (1972). "The cold Little Ice Age climate of about 1550 to 1800". Climate: present, past and future. London: Methuen. p. 107. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.408.1689. ISBN 978-0-416-11530-7. (noted in Grove 2004:4).
7. ^ Jump up to:a b "Earth observatory Glossary L-N". NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Green Belt MD: NASA. Retrieved 17 July 2015.
8. ^ Jump up to:a b c d e Miller, Gifford H.; Geirsdóttir, Áslaug; Zhong, Yafang; Larsen, Darren J.; Otto-Bliesner, Bette L.; Holland, Marika M.; Bailey, David A.; Refsnider, Kurt A.; Lehman, Scott J.; Southon, John R.; Anderson, Chance; Björnsson, Helgi; Thordarson, Thorvaldur (30 January 2012). "Abrupt onset of the Little Ice Age triggered by volcanism and sustained by sea-ice/ocean feedbacks". Geophysical Research Letters. 39 (2): n/a. Bibcode:2012GeoRL..39.2708M. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.639.9076. doi:10.1029/2011GL050168. S2CID 15313398.
9. ^ Grove, J.M., Little Ice Ages: Ancient and Modern, Routledge, London (2 volumes) 2004.
10. ^ Matthews, John A.; Briffa, Keith R. (2005). "The 'little ice age': Re‐evaluation of an evolving concept". Geografiska Annaler: Series A, Physical Geography. 87: 17–36. doi:10.1111/j.0435-3676.2005.00242.x. S2CID 4832081.
11. ^ "1.4.3 Solar Variability and the Total Solar Irradiance – AR4 WGI Chapter 1: Historical Overview of Climate Change Science". Ipcc.ch. Retrieved 24 June 2013.
12. ^ Jump up to:a b

Extract from Plimer
"The Little Ice Age was not really an ice age. In reality, it was a cool interval within the current interglacial. What made the Little Ice Age particularly difficult was that there had been hundreds of years of warmth in the Medieval Warming and the increased population was supported by subsistence farming. Subsistence farming was later replaced in Britain by specialist farming to support city populations. The Northern Hemisphere had adapted to warm times and was not prepared for the sudden onset of cold times. This created an environmental catastrophe. There was massive depopulation. This catastrophe was global. Pacific Island populations were greatly reduced at the beginning of the Little Ice Age.300 Other parts of the world were cold and dry, especially during the Spörer and Maunder Minima.301 Not only was it cold during the Little Ice Age, but there were rapid fluctuations in temperature and precipitation. During the Maunder Minimum, a year of record cold temperatures (1683–1684) was followed by a year of record heat (1685–1686). Change to glacial climate is characterised by drastic changes in temperature, storminess and precipitation without warming. These changes were local, global and rapid. They had a profound effect on human society.302"

Effects of the Little Ice Age in the Pacific Islands and Hawaii​

In the Pacific Islands, the earliest signs of the Little Ice Age's effects were felt as sea levels decreased between 1270 and 1475, caused by a a drop in temperatures. Further information from the analysis of coral reef records revealed that intensified fluctuating heating sea temperatures, known as El-Nino Southern Oscillations, reached its extremes sometime in the mid-seventeenth century.

There has been a longstanding debate amongst scholars and archaeologists in Hawaii, as they attempt to discover when and why its statehood came about. Some suggest that the Little Ice Age did in fact have a massive effect on the social politics of its people in the late 15 th century. Von Kirsch has surmised that it may have given rise to Hawaii's transformation from a chiefdom to a state due to shifts in climate and rainfall patterns.

The climatic shift allowed for the expansion of agricultural production. With the fruitful fertility brought about by the fluctuation of warm and dry weather followed by long heavy rains, it may have provided an ample excess of food which allowed Hawaiian society further develop specification among its crafts, trades, food, and culture. This in turn, argues Von Kirsch, led to the rise of its states and its firm organizational structure and governmental systems that remained intact until 1893.

The Little Ice Age and Its Giant Impact on Human History

The Little Ice Age is a period tentatively defined as running from the 14th to the 19th century in which the northern hemisphere of Earth endured a limited but substantial cooling period. Now please be forewarned, the Little Ice Age (LIA) should not be confused with the Medieval Warm Period, or...

www.ancient-origins.net

Climate response to the Samalas volcanic eruption in 1257 revealed by proxy records - Nature Geoscience

The climatic response to the 1257 Samalas eruption is unclear. Analyses of proxy data and medieval archives suggest that the eruption triggered some of the coldest summers of the past millennium, but only in some Northern Hemisphere regions.

www.nature.com

https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1307520110

Ricardo, Villalba. 1994. "Tree-ring and glacial evidence for the medieval warm epoch and the little ice age in Southern South America." In Climatic change (Springer Science and Business Media LLC) 26 (2-3): 183-197.

Russel, J.M., and T.C Johnson. 2007. "Little Ice Age drought in equatorial Africa: Intertropical Convergence Zone migrations and El Nino - Southern Oscillation Variability." Geological Society of America (Geology) 35 (1): 21-24.

Von Kirch, Patrick. 2012. A Shark Going Inland Is My Chief The island civilization of Ancient Hawai'i . Los Angeles: University of California Press.

 

[westwall]

So you credit your knowledge of science for your lack of concern about the great whales being driven extinct?

I'm easy. I'm not a scientist. But you've just claimed to know better than a whole lot of actively researching, published, PhDs on several large subjects that I bet you haven't actually spent more than a half hour thinking about total.

You are clearly not a scientist. In fact you are a scientific illiterate. The whales are being driven to extinction through hunting, not climate change.

 

[ding]

So you credit your knowledge of science for your lack of concern about the great whales being driven extinct?

I'm easy. I'm not a scientist. But you've just claimed to know better than a whole lot of actively researching, published, PhDs on several large subjects that I bet you haven't actually spent more than a half hour thinking about total.

No. I credit my knowledge based upon the fact that 99.999999% of all species has gone extinct.

No. I just claimed I know science better than you. Computer models aren't science. I don't believe their computer models are correct. I believe they vastly overstate the feedbacks. I believe the feedbacks are negative and not positive. And I believe the transition from a greenhouse planet to an icehouse planet proves the feedbacks are negative. Why else would the planet have cooled?

 

[Crick]

No. I credit my knowledge based upon the fact that 99.999999% of all species has gone extinct.

That does not excuse your lack of compassion or concern.

No. I just claimed I know science better than you.

You do not.

Computer models aren't science.

Of course they are.

I don't believe their computer models are correct.

You have neither the knowledge nor expertise in atmospheric physics, thermodynamics or climate modeling to make that argument.

I believe they vastly overstate the feedbacks.

But you have no evidence to support such a belief.*

I believe the feedbacks are negative and not positive.

You have no evidence to support that belief either.*

And I believe the transition from a greenhouse planet to an icehouse planet proves the feedbacks are negative. Why else would the planet have cooled?

Orbital cycles. Global temperatures hung a U-turn in 1900, reversing a 5,000-year chill-down

* - A claim that something unexplained happened in the past is not evidence to support your claims

 

[westwall]

That does not excuse your lack of compassion or concern.

You do not.

Of course they are.

You have neither the knowledge nor expertise in atmospheric physics, thermodynamics or climate modeling to make that argument.

But you have no evidence to support such a belief.*

You have no evidence to support that belief either.*

Orbital cycles. Global temperatures hung a U-turn in 1900, reversing a 5,000-year chill-down

* - A claim that something unexplained happened in the past is not evidence to support your claims

Actually, it is. It is a fundamental PRINCIPLE OF SCIENCE. It is called UNIFORMITARIANISM.

Look it up.

 

[Crick]

Actually, it is. It is a fundamental PRINCIPLE OF SCIENCE. It is called UNIFORMITARIANISM.

Look it up.

What in my post is uniformatarianism