Royal Society special issue details ‘hellish vision’ of 7°F (4°C) world — which we ma

[Old Rocks]

you mean no one else noticed this?

7°F does NOT equal 4°C
4°C would be ABOVE freezing and 7°F would be several(25 in fact) degrees below freezing

Are you the only one that does not get that they are speaking of that much increase?

 

[DiveCon]

you mean no one else noticed this?

7°F does NOT equal 4°C
4°C would be ABOVE freezing and 7°F would be several(25 in fact) degrees below freezing

Are you the only one that does not get that they are speaking of that much increase?

if thats the case, it still makes no sense

 

[Old Rocks]

Uniformitarianism handles nice slow geological processes quite well. It does not handle rapid events like the Bretz Floods, or volcanic eruptions well at all. There are rapid events, just as the extinction events that were driven by extreme and rapid climate change are rapid events.

Earth's five mass extinction events

One other point, the Royal Society, the AGU, and the AGS all agree that AGW is a fact and a clear and present danger. One faux geologist on an internet message board doesn't seem to have much influence in real science.

Completely untrue as befits a person who has no grasp of geologic processes. EVERYTHING that is occuring now has occured in the past, every single thing. Everything that will happen in the future has happened in the past...every single thing. Look through any publication dealing with geology and you see the same patterns occuring time and time again. If you think a hundred years or two decades is quick, try one day for a major volcanic eruption.

That's how long it takes for it's effect to become apparent so don't give me this horse crap about man caused global warming which is going to take decades to occur and then will take 100,000 years to be cured bullshit!

Since we are discussing the publications of the Geologists that publish in the Royal Society, it is not I that is giving you the information, it is real scientists.

Your link to the extinctions also points out that the only thing that has ever been substantiated with empirical data is cold weather is the only climatological effect that has ever resulted in a catastrophe. Warmth has never been proven to be bad. In fact the opposite is true.

What a truly dumb ass you are to even state such an ignorant thing. The proxy data for the P-T extinction shows very well that there was a very rapid warming, just one of the factors that led to a dieoff of over 90% of the species of that time.

You can insult people all you wish olfraud but you are the only one looking like a fool. All of your pithy arguments have been proven false. Every single one. You are a one trick pony with no knowledge of what you speak and are incapable of understanding real scientific discussions of any type whatsoever.

Yap, yap, yap! I link to people that are prominent in that field of study, you link to a undegreed ex-TV weatherman.

 

[Old Rocks]

you mean no one else noticed this?

7°F does NOT equal 4°C
4°C would be ABOVE freezing and 7°F would be several(25 in fact) degrees below freezing

Are you the only one that does not get that they are speaking of that much increase?

if thats the case, it still makes no sense

Not to the willfully ignorant.

 

[Sallow]

It's curious how the right (Well not so curious really, big oil has funded a new crop of "Scientists" to refute or dilute some good science) become pointed headed dexters on this topic.

Quite simply if you belch filth into the environment..bad things will happen. Instead of realizing this very simple concept..the right choose to defend the belching of filth over seeking common sense alternatives.

Thus the anti-science science crowd completely confuses the argument..again.

 

[DiveCon]

Are you the only one that does not get that they are speaking of that much increase?

if thats the case, it still makes no sense

Not to the willfully ignorant.

you are the willfully ignorant, so i will have to take your word on that

 

[Old Rocks]

Uniformitarianism handles nice slow geological processes quite well. It does not handle rapid events like the Bretz Floods, or volcanic eruptions well at all. There are rapid events, just as the extinction events that were driven by extreme and rapid climate change are rapid events.

Earth's five mass extinction events

One other point, the Royal Society, the AGU, and the AGS all agree that AGW is a fact and a clear and present danger. One faux geologist on an internet message board doesn't seem to have much influence in real science.

Do you really believe that the earth could warm 4c in 49 years? We would need to see a huge increase in the rate of the warming.

Mathew, one of the very disturbing points in this discussion is that the 'alarmists scientists' have been wrong in their past predictions. They failed to predict the rapid melt of the Arctic polar ice. They failed to predict the starting of the clathrate outgassing in the Arctic Ocean. They predicted that the Anarctic Ice Cap would gain mass because of more precip from a warming ocean. What happened instead, is while the precip came, the glaciers started dumping faster, and several ice shelves broke up, resulting in a decrease in Antarctic ice mass.

Thus far, the scientists predictions have been far to conservative.

 

[Old Rocks]

if thats the case, it still makes no sense

Not to the willfully ignorant.

you are the willfully ignorant, so i will have to take your word on that

Sure fellow. Yet you have read nothing on the problem, just take talking points from a junkie radio jock. Fools like you are fucking over your children and grandchildren bigtime. Not that you care.

 

[DiveCon]

Not to the willfully ignorant.

you are the willfully ignorant, so i will have to take your word on that

Sure fellow. Yet you have read nothing on the problem, just take talking points from a junkie radio jock. Fools like you are fucking over your children and grandchildren bigtime. Not that you care.

really??? and what radio jock would that be?
and you will need proof that i listen to anyone

 

[westwall]

Uniformitarianism handles nice slow geological processes quite well. It does not handle rapid events like the Bretz Floods, or volcanic eruptions well at all. There are rapid events, just as the extinction events that were driven by extreme and rapid climate change are rapid events.

Earth's five mass extinction events

One other point, the Royal Society, the AGU, and the AGS all agree that AGW is a fact and a clear and present danger. One faux geologist on an internet message board doesn't seem to have much influence in real science.

Completely untrue as befits a person who has no grasp of geologic processes. EVERYTHING that is occuring now has occured in the past, every single thing. Everything that will happen in the future has happened in the past...every single thing. Look through any publication dealing with geology and you see the same patterns occuring time and time again. If you think a hundred years or two decades is quick, try one day for a major volcanic eruption.

That's how long it takes for it's effect to become apparent so don't give me this horse crap about man caused global warming which is going to take decades to occur and then will take 100,000 years to be cured bullshit!

Since we are discussing the publications of the Geologists that publish in the Royal Society, it is not I that is giving you the information, it is real scientists.

Your link to the extinctions also points out that the only thing that has ever been substantiated with empirical data is cold weather is the only climatological effect that has ever resulted in a catastrophe. Warmth has never been proven to be bad. In fact the opposite is true.

What a truly dumb ass you are to even state such an ignorant thing. The proxy data for the P-T extinction shows very well that there was a very rapid warming, just one of the factors that led to a dieoff of over 90% of the species of that time.

You can insult people all you wish olfraud but you are the only one looking like a fool. All of your pithy arguments have been proven false. Every single one. You are a one trick pony with no knowledge of what you speak and are incapable of understanding real scientific discussions of any type whatsoever.

Yap, yap, yap! I link to people that are prominent in that field of study, you link to a undegreed ex-TV weatherman.

Yes, you do link to "degreed scientists" in their field. Of course you fail to mention that they have been caught repeatedly violating the protocols of science. they have debased the peer review methodology and engaged in a conspiracy to deny voice to scientists who had valid papers that refuted their claims.

You also fail to mention that the links I post to WUWT are guest posts by DEGREED SCIENTISTS IN THEIR FIELD that have not been caught manufacturing data or abusing the peer review process. In other words olfraud you're a failure.

 

[westwall]

It's curious how the right (Well not so curious really, big oil has funded a new crop of "Scientists" to refute or dilute some good science) become pointed headed dexters on this topic.

Quite simply if you belch filth into the environment..bad things will happen. Instead of realizing this very simple concept..the right choose to defend the belching of filth over seeking common sense alternatives.

Thus the anti-science science crowd completely confuses the argument..again.

You need to get your facts straight Sallow, BIG OIL is pushing this new paradigm. Kyoto (I am sure you're familiar with that agreement) was heavily influenced by ENRON, hopefully yoyu havn't forgotten that scurillous bunch of bastards. Likewise all of the green legislation is keeping the price of oil high which once again benefits the oil companies. This is not about lefties or righties (I am probably more lefty than you) this is about scientific fraud and the bastards who are screwing the poor to enrich themselves and their cronies...who happen to be wealthy oil men among others.

Get a clue, follow the money. The only people benefitting from the legislation are the wealthy.

 

[westwall]

Uniformitarianism handles nice slow geological processes quite well. It does not handle rapid events like the Bretz Floods, or volcanic eruptions well at all. There are rapid events, just as the extinction events that were driven by extreme and rapid climate change are rapid events.

Earth's five mass extinction events

One other point, the Royal Society, the AGU, and the AGS all agree that AGW is a fact and a clear and present danger. One faux geologist on an internet message board doesn't seem to have much influence in real science.

Do you really believe that the earth could warm 4c in 49 years? We would need to see a huge increase in the rate of the warming.

Mathew, one of the very disturbing points in this discussion is that the 'alarmists scientists' have been wrong in their past predictions. They failed to predict the rapid melt of the Arctic polar ice. They failed to predict the starting of the clathrate outgassing in the Arctic Ocean. They predicted that the Anarctic Ice Cap would gain mass because of more precip from a warming ocean. What happened instead, is while the precip came, the glaciers started dumping faster, and several ice shelves broke up, resulting in a decrease in Antarctic ice mass.

Thus far, the scientists predictions have been far to conservative.

Once again olfraud lies through his teeth, smoething he is well qualified to do. So let's look at just one of his assertions, Antarctica has decreased its ice mass....WRONG! Currently the Antarctic ice mass is 3 orders of magnitude above "normal" and this is in the spring down there.

Sea Ice Page | Watts Up With That?

All of olfrauds claims are likewise untrue. Just look for yourself. Don't believe anybody but do your own research.

 

[westwall]

Not to the willfully ignorant.

you are the willfully ignorant, so i will have to take your word on that

Sure fellow. Yet you have read nothing on the problem, just take talking points from a junkie radio jock. Fools like you are fucking over your children and grandchildren bigtime. Not that you care.

So says the asshat who works for a steel company notorious for polluting the land wherever it is. Go look in the mirror you hypocritical jackass.

 

[Sallow]

It's curious how the right (Well not so curious really, big oil has funded a new crop of "Scientists" to refute or dilute some good science) become pointed headed dexters on this topic.

Quite simply if you belch filth into the environment..bad things will happen. Instead of realizing this very simple concept..the right choose to defend the belching of filth over seeking common sense alternatives.

Thus the anti-science science crowd completely confuses the argument..again.

You need to get your facts straight Sallow, BIG OIL is pushing this new paradigm. Kyoto (I am sure you're familiar with that agreement) was heavily influenced by ENRON, hopefully yoyu havn't forgotten that scurillous bunch of bastards. Likewise all of the green legislation is keeping the price of oil high which once again benefits the oil companies. This is not about lefties or righties (I am probably more lefty than you) this is about scientific fraud and the bastards who are screwing the poor to enrich themselves and their cronies...who happen to be wealthy oil men among others.

Get a clue, follow the money. The only people benefitting from the legislation are the wealthy.

And Iraq was not about Oil..right?

Big Oil is not pushing the "new paradigm". But they aren't sitting on their hands either..you can bet your bottom dollar that if fossil fuels are more regulated then they currently are..they will roll out some "new" energy source.

 

[jillian]

More hyperbole from a bunch of scientific frauds who are heavily invested in getting legislation passed to steal your money.

Just read the history of the world during the MWP. It was an average of 5 degreesC warmer and lo and behold no one had a problem. Quite the opposite in point of fact.

while i can understand asking questions and beling skeptical, i do have to wonder what vested interest you have in there being no climate change

 

[daveman]

It's curious how the right (Well not so curious really, big oil has funded a new crop of "Scientists" to refute or dilute some good science) become pointed headed dexters on this topic.

Quite simply if you belch filth into the environment..bad things will happen. Instead of realizing this very simple concept..the right choose to defend the belching of filth over seeking common sense alternatives.

Thus the anti-science science crowd completely confuses the argument..again.

Note: Crippling the economies of the entire western world and giving third-world nations a free pass to pollute as much as they want is not a "common sense alternative".

Just thought you should know.

 

[westwall]

It's curious how the right (Well not so curious really, big oil has funded a new crop of "Scientists" to refute or dilute some good science) become pointed headed dexters on this topic.

Quite simply if you belch filth into the environment..bad things will happen. Instead of realizing this very simple concept..the right choose to defend the belching of filth over seeking common sense alternatives.

Thus the anti-science science crowd completely confuses the argument..again.

You need to get your facts straight Sallow, BIG OIL is pushing this new paradigm. Kyoto (I am sure you're familiar with that agreement) was heavily influenced by ENRON, hopefully yoyu havn't forgotten that scurillous bunch of bastards. Likewise all of the green legislation is keeping the price of oil high which once again benefits the oil companies. This is not about lefties or righties (I am probably more lefty than you) this is about scientific fraud and the bastards who are screwing the poor to enrich themselves and their cronies...who happen to be wealthy oil men among others.

Get a clue, follow the money. The only people benefitting from the legislation are the wealthy.

And Iraq was not about Oil..right?

Big Oil is not pushing the "new paradigm". But they aren't sitting on their hands either..you can bet your bottom dollar that if fossil fuels are more regulated then they currently are..they will roll out some "new" energy source.

If Iraq was about oil don't you think we should have gotten some? The only people who got any oil out of that fiasco was the British. You will notice I hope that BP is a huge investor in green tech and has many board members who are also members of various green organisations.

 

[westwall]

More hyperbole from a bunch of scientific frauds who are heavily invested in getting legislation passed to steal your money.

Just read the history of the world during the MWP. It was an average of 5 degreesC warmer and lo and behold no one had a problem. Quite the opposite in point of fact.

while i can understand asking questions and beling skeptical, i do have to wonder what vested interest you have in there being no climate change

It's simple Jillian. There is climate change. I have never denied this one bit. I have merely pointed out that it is completely natural. I care about the poor people who are getting screwed over by the wealthy and those who will get screwed over. I actually am a lefty in most things which means I don't like to see the little guy get screwed and that is the only group that is going to. Also the middle class is going to suffer.

Unlike olfraud who's never seen a tree he didn't want to cut down or a stream he didn't want to pollute, I actually clean up other peoples messes. I care about the environment. The environment is suffering because the people invested in the fraud are stealing money that could otherwise be used to fix the very real things that man has done.

Man cannot control the climate. It is far beyond his power. Man can destroy rainforests worldwide that will have major detrimental affects downstream. Those rainforests need to be protected. Man can pollute the crap out of streams and rivers. Just ask olfraud, he works for EVRAZ a Russian metals conglomerate who is under investigation for pollution on every continent it operates..including olfrauds plant in Oregon.

Man has dug enormous holes in the ground and then left them to fester (those are primarily what I deal with) and while they are for the most part not a huge deal they are enormous eyesores and given time will be major problems.

Man can do and does enormous damage. Fix that which we can. Controlling the climate is a power man fortunately doesn't have. However as I have stated before, so far 100 billion dollars has been sqaunderd down the rathole of "GW research" which has been discoverd to be fraught with fraud and scientific malfeasance.

You really want to keep giving them money?

 

[jillian]

More hyperbole from a bunch of scientific frauds who are heavily invested in getting legislation passed to steal your money.

Just read the history of the world during the MWP. It was an average of 5 degreesC warmer and lo and behold no one had a problem. Quite the opposite in point of fact.

while i can understand asking questions and beling skeptical, i do have to wonder what vested interest you have in there being no climate change

It's simple Jillian. There is climate change. I have never denied this one bit. I have merely pointed out that it is completely natural. I care about the poor people who are getting screwed over by the wealthy and those who will get screwed over. I actually am a lefty in most things which means I don't like to see the little guy get screwed and that is the only group that is going to. Also the middle class is going to suffer.

Unlike olfraud who's never seen a tree he didn't want to cut down or a stream he didn't want to pollute, I actually clean up other peoples messes. I care about the environment. The environment is suffering because the people invested in the fraud are stealing money that could otherwise be used to fix the very real things that man has done.

Man cannot control the climate. It is far beyond his power. Man can destroy rainforests worldwide that will have major detrimental affects downstream. Those rainforests need to be protected. Man can pollute the crap out of streams and rivers. Just ask olfraud, he works for EVRAZ a Russian metals conglomerate who is under investigation for pollution on every continent it operates..including olfrauds plant in Oregon.

Man has dug enormous holes in the ground and then left them to fester (those are primarily what I deal with) and while they are for the most part not a huge deal they are enormous eyesores and given time will be major problems.

Man can do and does enormous damage. Fix that which we can. Controlling the climate is a power man fortunately doesn't have. However as I have stated before, so far 100 billion dollars has been sqaunderd down the rathole of "GW research" which has been discoverd to be fraught with fraud and scientific malfeasance.

You really want to keep giving them money?

i'm afraid that it's clear man is not wholly responsible for climate change. but it's also clear that we are having an impact and it's important to address the things that can be addressed without being hysterics.

That's my opinion. And I don't go with the "giving them money" or that it's somehow a conspiracy because the flip side is listening to people paid for by people with vested interests who make an awful lot of money by ignoring their environmental impact. (again, not all, but many).

So it seems there is a middle ground without celebrating each hint, however biased, that man doesn't share any responsibility for the environment. That's simply silly given that we have a great impact on ecosystems and their balance

 

[westwall]

while i can understand asking questions and beling skeptical, i do have to wonder what vested interest you have in there being no climate change

It's simple Jillian. There is climate change. I have never denied this one bit. I have merely pointed out that it is completely natural. I care about the poor people who are getting screwed over by the wealthy and those who will get screwed over. I actually am a lefty in most things which means I don't like to see the little guy get screwed and that is the only group that is going to. Also the middle class is going to suffer.

Unlike olfraud who's never seen a tree he didn't want to cut down or a stream he didn't want to pollute, I actually clean up other peoples messes. I care about the environment. The environment is suffering because the people invested in the fraud are stealing money that could otherwise be used to fix the very real things that man has done.

Man cannot control the climate. It is far beyond his power. Man can destroy rainforests worldwide that will have major detrimental affects downstream. Those rainforests need to be protected. Man can pollute the crap out of streams and rivers. Just ask olfraud, he works for EVRAZ a Russian metals conglomerate who is under investigation for pollution on every continent it operates..including olfrauds plant in Oregon.

Man has dug enormous holes in the ground and then left them to fester (those are primarily what I deal with) and while they are for the most part not a huge deal they are enormous eyesores and given time will be major problems.

Man can do and does enormous damage. Fix that which we can. Controlling the climate is a power man fortunately doesn't have. However as I have stated before, so far 100 billion dollars has been sqaunderd down the rathole of "GW research" which has been discoverd to be fraught with fraud and scientific malfeasance.

You really want to keep giving them money?

i'm afraid that it's clear man is not wholly responsible for climate change. but it's also clear that we are having an impact and it's important to address the things that can be addressed without being hysterics.

That's my opinion. And I don't go with the "giving them money" or that it's somehow a conspiracy because the flip side is listening to people paid for by people with vested interests who make an awful lot of money by ignoring their environmental impact. (again, not all, but many).

So it seems there is a middle ground without celebrating each hint, however biased, that man doesn't share any responsibility for the environment. That's simply silly given that we have a great impact on ecosystems and their balance

Yes there is a middle ground. Think globally act locally. Remember that mantra? It actually works. If you get enough people angry over the environmental destruction around them they fix it and prevent more. That is happening here in the US. All empirical data shows that man has no discernible impact on climate. The IPCC's own report says that after the expenditure of 100 billion dollars a year for the next 60 years, the effect will be to drop the temperature rise by one degree. One degree. Doesn't that sound insane to you? Here in Nevada we have temperature swings of 30 degrees in a night! They want to piss away trillions of dollars for one degree!

And to your other point, the people making the money can do so only by passing legislation that is onerous to the western economies. It is not a case of them listening to one side or the other. One side is actively pushing for legislation to be passed that punishes the west and enriches the "developing nations". There are many cases where greenies are on record stipulating that it is about wealth redistribution. Of course the developing nations aren't capable of taking care of that largesse themselves, so that's where the big banks come in. Goldman Sachs, the architects of the housing bubble and the dot com bubble before that and numerous other bubbles before those is also one of the major players in this fraud.

Get real Jillian, at some point you have to figure there is a much better use for that money don't you?