Climate Change Mega Thread

[Drip_Torch]

.

[77TA]

Overall, we rate Climate Change Dispatch as a Conspiracy and Quackery level Pseudoscience source for the promotion of false or misleading information that is not in line with the consensus of science and several failed fact checks. (Updated (02/02/2024)

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/climate-change-dispatch

Par for the course.

Yes, it's par for the course that a biasedfactcheck won't agree with anything that is "not in line"(lol) as stated. Checking the fact checker always finds something like this.

it is now very likely that global mean Sea Surface Temperature changed by 0.88°C from 1850-1900 to 2011-2020, and 0.60°C from 1980 to 2020.

So because it "likely" there has been a possible minute change, any other theories are conspiracies right? I didn't bother going further into the silly fact check but perhaps it was full of absolute certainties when you read through their methods of conclusion determination.

[Drip_Torch]

.

[77TA]

When posting up fact checks that call out quackery because the information is "not in line", I must wonder how good the science can be when the conclusion can only be labeled as "likely". I prefer not to fall in line because of a chart showing some sea surface variance within about 1 degree range over 50 yrs or so. Do you really see a confirmed trend? Could you show 2017 18 19 21and 22? Why aren't those years colored? Nevermind, I don't care what the short term chart watchers think because the science obviously isn't settled.

[Jlabute]

I see a trend. Can you see a trend?

Never mind, that was rhetorical. I really don't care what the Castanet Climate Panel sees or thinks. I'm good with the science. I'm really not trying to convince you of anything.

Take it or leave it. I'm not telling you to eat crickets or put up a windmill - you do you.

What is the recent climate trend and why is it happening? Please point out the quackery in the article. We are all good with the science.

This sudden, anomalous, and inexplicable change in ocean surface temperature has left scientists who support the climate change theory baffled because it doesn’t support the conclusions of their current ocean climate models.

[Drip_Torch]

.

[Drip_Torch]

.

[77TA]

When posting up fact checks that call out quackery because the information is "not in line", I must wonder how good the science can be when the conclusion can only be labeled as "likely". I prefer not to fall in line because of a chart showing some sea surface variance within about 1 degree range over 50 yrs or so.

1 times 360 million square kilometers, is still a big number.

To give you some idea of the energy involved - we're talking about a little more than 5 (could be as high as 7) Hiroshima's per second being absorbed by the Oceans. If you want to do the math yourself, our EEI is currently around 1.6 watts/sq meter (conservative estimate based on the 36 month running mean), so multiply that big number above by 1,000,000 and then again by 1.6.

Just take that big number you get, don't worry if you lose a few zeroes along the way, it's still going to be unimaginably big, and divide it by one Hiroshima bomb - 1.5x10^13 joules. Viola.

I'd do it for you, but I suck at maths. What it all comes down to is, our oceans are currently absorbing the energy equivalent of around 475,200 Hiroshima bombs per day.

There really isn't anyone "baffled" around why our oceans are warming.

So the oceans are big and absorb a lot of energy OK then, that's not very baffling. The chaotic and complex way in which this massive amount of energy is absorbed and released on a planetary scale is not fully understood. Anyone worth listening to, (always a great statement with no metric) that says it is fully understood, is lying. Now, why they would lie like this is not "baffling" at all and it has nothing to do with lots of scary Hiroshima bombs.

[Drip_Torch]

.

[Catsumi]

*removed*

[The Green Barbarian]

No one, worth listening to, will tell you they are baffled by the degree of warming starting to appear in the Oceans.

You said it - and it's quite clear that the warming has nothing to do whatsoever with the man-made climate change hoax. No one worth listening to is still beating that stupid drum.

[Jlabute]

No one, worth listening to, will tell you they are baffled by the degree of warming starting to appear in the Oceans.

You said it - and it's quite clear that the warming has nothing to do whatsoever with the man-made climate change hoax. No one worth listening to is still beating that stupid drum.

Exactly.

Mediabias - The same site that says John Cook's skepticalscience and other ridiculous sites are highly pro-science. Mediabias supports the 'consensus' which has been long debunked. SkepticalScience "NEVER failed a fact check" although that isn't true. All the climate justice groups and doomsayers are also highly pro-science. LOL. The article contributor James Kamis is a climate geologist, so "someone" is off target.

https://www.amazon.ca/Geological-Impact ... B0C6W46Y7W



Climate science is already upside-down and Hansen's and Mann's old views should be taken seriously? I'm afraid no one will learn anything from them. The original progenitors and fakesters of doom, whose work is proprietary and has always been doubted and scrutinized. Their views aren't the only views. The IPCC says about half of warming is natural. It is a matter of understanding the natural means of warming in a time when politicians are only interested to be our climate saviors and paying for more studies on CO2.

Either way, the worst-case fraudsters assume the ocean heat is driven by CO2 and gently diminishing SO2. Sunlight is the main contributor to ocean warming, plus unknowns. An imbalance? No one knows when if any imbalance existed or began. Can small changes in SO2 and lower global productivity after a pandemic cause a highly punctuated warming? Not likely. There are a lot of extra unaccounted atomic bombs (hilarious and meaningless measurement standard). More heat than what can be accounted for by slightly less SO2.

Scientists who support the human-caused climate change theory are having a very difficult time explaining an extremely large temperature increase in Earth’s surface temperatures. This is because their climate models don’t accurately represent this change.

They have stated that this change is the result of human-made forces. However, the most plausible alternative explanation for these changes is massive, short-period pulses of heat emitted from ocean geological features.

[Glacier]

Never mind, that was rhetorical. I really don't care what the Castanet Climate Panel sees or thinks. I'm good with the science. I'm really not trying to convince you of anything.

Take it or leave it. I'm not telling you to eat crickets or put up a windmill - you do you.

Do you trust this science that says in just 26 years Penticton will have hotter summers than 98% of the US including Tucson, AZ?

Do you really think temperature will do this?

pentictonmean2.png

And precipitation something like this?

precipitationPent5icton.png

If so, I bet you a case of beer the mean average July temperature in Penticton in the 2050s will be under 26.

[The Green Barbarian]

I'm good with the science. I'm really not trying to convince you of anything.

If this were actually true, you'd know that this man-made climate change thing is an exaggerated hoax. "Science".

[Drip_Torch]

.