Yes, 2021 was a record breaking year

[westwall]

Again, the point is that for the whole world 2021 was a record year for extreme weather events. The 1862 flood involved only a small part of the world.

The "record" only exists in the computer model created by climate reanalyzer. A group that takes raw data and falsifys it.


And the Great Flood of 1862 was more powerful than ALL of the storms last year.

Combined.

You moronic clod.

 

[gipper]

Damn, but you remain one dumb ass. This is an article from a USGS scientist for the American Geophysical Union;

"Which emits more carbon dioxide (CO2): Earth’s volcanoes or human activities? Research findings indicate unequivocally that the answer to this frequently asked question is human activities. However, most people, including some Earth scientists working in fields outside volcanology, are surprised by this answer. The climate change debate has revived and reinforced the belief, widespread among climate skeptics, that volcanoes emit more CO2 than human activities [Gerlach, 2010; Plimer, 2009]. In fact, present-day volcanoes emit relatively modest amounts of CO2, about as much annually as states like Florida, Michigan, and Ohio."

https://volcanoes.usgs.gov/vsc/file_mngr/file-154/Gerlach-2011-EOS_AGU.pdf

Okay old man it looks like you’re right. However we know should volcanic activity greatly increase, we’re likely to experience global cooling. I suppose you’d like that even though a cooling climate will kill far more humans and other species, than global warming.

 

[Old Rocks]

Okay old man it looks like you’re right. However we know should volcanic activity greatly increase, we’re likely to experience global cooling. I suppose you’d like that even though a cooling climate will kill far more humans and other species, than global warming.

In the Ordovician there a rapid drop in CO2 that caused a very rapid cooling, and an extinction event. Rapid change in either direction is not good for life.

 

[ding]

In the Ordovician there a rapid drop in CO2 that caused a very rapid cooling, and an extinction event. Rapid change in either direction is not good for life.

How exactly did this drop in CO2 occur, dummy?

Cause you got that backwards. Temperatures cooled and the oceans absorbed more CO2 due to the increase solubility of CO2 in oceans at decreased temperature, dummy.

 

[Captain Caveman]

Many records were set in 2021, here are some of them;

The top 10 global weather and climate change events of 2021 » Yale Climate Connections

The most extreme heat wave in modern history, a record four $20 billion-plus weather disasters, and the hottest month on record globally highlighted a remarkable year in weather.

yaleclimateconnections.org

Because people like yourself won't follow your own rhetoric. As you believe in running an ICE vehicle, not having solar and a powerwall, you've caused this problem.

 

[skookerasbil]

So...outside of a few internet message boards and a couple of Bernie Sanders social media groups on FACEBOOK, where is there any evidence that the public cares about floods? Where exactly?

Here in NYC, for decades a handful of lunatics go off every so often about the noise from JFK Airport over Queens neighborhoods. In the paper for one day....then nothing for months or years. Nothing changes ever.

Because nobody cares about "the records". They have quite enough to worry about.
When you live in the middle of the Sierra Nevada forests, a rowboat capsizing in a lake is huge news!

A handful of people get head explosions when there is flooding somewhere. 99% of the public yawns. That's the way it is.....dOy

 

[westwall]

In the Ordovician there a rapid drop in CO2 that caused a very rapid cooling, and an extinction event. Rapid change in either direction is not good for life.

No, not really. The evidence shows that CO2 lagged temp, as always.

 

[Crick]

Westwall's Mistake

This myth misses the mark for a number of reasons:​

1. It presents a false dichotomy by claiming that if atmospheric CO2 increased before temperature, then an increase in temperature cannot cause an increase in CO2. In fact, both of these causal relationships are true.
2. It doesn’t distinguish between Antarctic and global temperature. Antarctic ice cores give a measure of Antarctic temperature, which increased before global CO2 levels. However, global temperature, as estimated from records all over the planet, increased after rises in CO2.
3. It conflates past climate changes with present climate change. Though it’s true that we can learn a lot about Earth’s climate from studying the past, we cannot assume that changes that occurred in the past are the same as changes occurring today. In fact, ice core data shows us that present climate change is fundamentally different from past climate changes. Past changes were driven by small changes in Earth’s orbit, while current climate change is driven by human emissions of CO2.
4. It is based on old data. While the old data aren’t wrong, newer ice cores with higher-resolution data show that the changes in CO2 and Antarctic temperature occurred so close together, that we cannot fully distinguish which happened first.

CO2 lags temperature - what does it mean?

<p>When the Earth comes out of an ice age, the warming is not initiated by CO2 but by changes in the Earth's orbit. The warming causes the oceans to give up CO2. The CO2 amplifies the warming and mixes through the atmosphere, spreading warming throughout the planet. So CO2 causes warming...

skepticalscience.com

And, if you've got any balls, you'll try to logically refute these rather than rejecting them out of hand.

 

[whitehall]

Proof that the (theory) of man made global warming has reached the status of a religion to the true believers. You have to disregard your senses and have faith that cold weather is actually part of global warming and the earth is warming up while you are freezing your ass off. Part time pervert Al Gore won a Nobel Prize for inventing a way for foreign governments and American socialists to blackmail (only) the U.S. for it's decadence.

 

[westwall]

Westwall's Mistake

This myth misses the mark for a number of reasons:​

1. It presents a false dichotomy by claiming that if atmospheric CO2 increased before temperature, then an increase in temperature cannot cause an increase in CO2. In fact, both of these causal relationships are true.
2. It doesn’t distinguish between Antarctic and global temperature. Antarctic ice cores give a measure of Antarctic temperature, which increased before global CO2 levels. However, global temperature, as estimated from records all over the planet, increased after rises in CO2.
3. It conflates past climate changes with present climate change. Though it’s true that we can learn a lot about Earth’s climate from studying the past, we cannot assume that changes that occurred in the past are the same as changes occurring today. In fact, ice core data shows us that present climate change is fundamentally different from past climate changes. Past changes were driven by small changes in Earth’s orbit, while current climate change is driven by human emissions of CO2.
4. It is based on old data. While the old data aren’t wrong, newer ice cores with higher-resolution data show that the changes in CO2 and Antarctic temperature occurred so close together, that we cannot fully distinguish which happened first.

CO2 lags temperature - what does it mean?

<p>When the Earth comes out of an ice age, the warming is not initiated by CO2 but by changes in the Earth's orbit. The warming causes the oceans to give up CO2. The CO2 amplifies the warming and mixes through the atmosphere, spreading warming throughout the planet. So CO2 causes warming...

skepticalscience.com

And, if you've got any balls, you'll try to logically refute these rather than rejecting them out of hand.

No, there is NO empirical data that supports the claim that CO2 affects temperatures. None. The data that does exist shows that CO2 lags behind temperature increases by up to 800 years. So your claim that Temp and CO2 rises are closely coupled is an outright lie. There are over 100 peer reviewed papers FROM ALL OVER THE WORLD, that show temperature increases, and then hundreds of years CO2 levels increased. You rely on a fantasy that Antarctic climates exist independently from the rest of the world.

You made the same claims as regards the Medieval Warming period, and those claims were demolished decades ago, by, once again, hundreds of peer reviewed papers from all over the world.

Present day climate change is THE SAME as past climate change. The scientific axiom of UNIFORMITARIANISM, long established as an integral part of the scientific method, DEMANDS that if you make a claim as extraordinary as you have made, then YOU MUST PRESENT EXTRAORDINARLY LEVELS OF SUPPORT FOR YOUR CLAIM.

To date you have not. You have trotted out computer models of not just dubious quality, but demonstrably USELESS value to try and support your anti scientific claims.

You have no new data. You have climate reanalyzer falsified data. Which means your data is a lie.

You have been shown all of these things before, but like the good little parrot you are, you keep trotting out the same tired old, debunked claims.

 

[whitehall]

As long as the grant money keeps rolling in and good old Uncle keeps handing out money to failing "alternate energy" companies, nothing will change while we pretend that weather records are broken every year.

 

[skookerasbil]

Westwall's Mistake

This myth misses the mark for a number of reasons:​

1. It presents a false dichotomy by claiming that if atmospheric CO2 increased before temperature, then an increase in temperature cannot cause an increase in CO2. In fact, both of these causal relationships are true.
2. It doesn’t distinguish between Antarctic and global temperature. Antarctic ice cores give a measure of Antarctic temperature, which increased before global CO2 levels. However, global temperature, as estimated from records all over the planet, increased after rises in CO2.
3. It conflates past climate changes with present climate change. Though it’s true that we can learn a lot about Earth’s climate from studying the past, we cannot assume that changes that occurred in the past are the same as changes occurring today. In fact, ice core data shows us that present climate change is fundamentally different from past climate changes. Past changes were driven by small changes in Earth’s orbit, while current climate change is driven by human emissions of CO2.
4. It is based on old data. While the old data aren’t wrong, newer ice cores with higher-resolution data show that the changes in CO2 and Antarctic temperature occurred so close together, that we cannot fully distinguish which happened first.

CO2 lags temperature - what does it mean?

<p>When the Earth comes out of an ice age, the warming is not initiated by CO2 but by changes in the Earth's orbit. The warming causes the oceans to give up CO2. The CO2 amplifies the warming and mixes through the atmosphere, spreading warming throughout the planet. So CO2 causes warming...

skepticalscience.com

And, if you've got any balls, you'll try to logically refute these rather than rejecting them out of hand.

Dude....you still don't get it. You will never get it.

This is and has never been about a science debate. People who make energy policy in the western world could not possibly be any less interested in your science lectures. Might as well be giving a dissertation on the subject of navel gazing.

If the "science" doesn't transcend anywhere outside its own field, it is nothing more than a nice little hobby for bored people to engage in.

Fossil fuels run the world...in many ways beyond energy. All hedge investment is based upon fossil fuels.

Indeed, every mofu on this thread will be in their box for a long, long time before that dynamic ever changes!!

 

[MisterBeale]

As usual, you post a half truth to conceal a lie. Every bit of that natural emission will be sequestered by the uptake of CO2 by plants and the oceans. So that 3.5% represents the amount increasing every year. Most of that is absorbed by the oceans, where it is acidifying the water and interfering with the very basis of the food chain. The rest remains in the atmosphere, where it is rapidly warming our globe, and creating a changing climate.

See?

This is the illogical lie.

You claim that only natural CO2 is sequestered, and the extra amount produced by humans isn't? How do scientists know this?

PROVE IT!

This is the biggest load of crap. Do natural systems discriminate, is there some intrinsic difference between naturally produced CO2, and man made CO2? This is the most absurd thing ever. . . even a junior high school student can see through that deception.

The amount of CO2 that is bad for the planet. . . the percent, just happens to be the amount the people create? Are you serious with that bullshit? As if we can't allow natural systems to deal with it. . . seriously?

You can't expect folks to be this gullible. . .

. . . or maybe you have a financial incentive, like your buddy Al Gore to get folks to believe that crap.

 

[skookerasbil]

Old Rocks and the other climate obsessed bozos in here have one HUGE ASS problem....the debate goes waaaaaaay past that of the "science". I mean....these are the most naive mofu's walking the planet. How do we know that?

After 20 years of "but 97% of climate scientists agree", solar and wind are still a joke on the energy landscape.

Meanwhile, investment in fossil fuels continues to be monsterous

For example..........

UChicago's Investments are Tied to Fossil Fuels, Deforestation, and Weapons Manufacturers

More evidence....the climate crusaders navigate in a makey- uppey world!! We are all real proud of them

 

[skookerasbil]

Nobody is caring about the science

 

[Sunsettommy]

View attachment 588589

Is Antarctica melting? â Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet

Latest data show net loss since 2002

climate.nasa.gov

 

[abu afak]

Westwall's Mistake

This myth misses the mark for a number of reasons:​

1. It presents a false dichotomy by claiming that if atmospheric CO2 increased before temperature, then an increase in temperature cannot cause an increase in CO2. In fact, both of these causal relationships are true.
2. It doesn’t distinguish between Antarctic and global temperature. Antarctic ice cores give a measure of Antarctic temperature, which increased before global CO2 levels. However, global temperature, as estimated from records all over the planet, increased after rises in CO2.
3. It conflates past climate changes with present climate change. Though it’s true that we can learn a lot about Earth’s climate from studying the past, we cannot assume that changes that occurred in the past are the same as changes occurring today. In fact, ice core data shows us that present climate change is fundamentally different from past climate changes. Past changes were driven by small changes in Earth’s orbit, while current climate change is driven by human emissions of CO2.
4. It is based on old data. While the old data aren’t wrong, newer ice cores with higher-resolution data show that the changes in CO2 and Antarctic temperature occurred so close together, that we cannot fully distinguish which happened first.

CO2 lags temperature - what does it mean?

<p>When the Earth comes out of an ice age, the warming is not initiated by CO2 but by changes in the Earth's orbit. The warming causes the oceans to give up CO2. The CO2 amplifies the warming and mixes through the atmosphere, spreading warming throughout the planet. So CO2 causes warming...

skepticalscience.com

And, if you've got any balls, you'll try to logically refute these rather than rejecting them out of hand.

A lot of people screw up because of Hockey Team like politics.

 

[ding]

Simple question.... were these temperature swings caused by CO2?

GISP2 ice core for the past 10,000 years.

 

[ding]

Were these temperature swings caused by CO2?