Climate Change Mega Thread

[Omnitheo]

Cool, but the temperature changes aren't unprecedented. It warmed up just as fast in the 1920s,1930s and 1940s as it has over the past 30 years...

accel.png

It also warmed up as fast yesterday morning as it did this morning! Nice try though.

https://www.climate.gov/news-features/u ... emperature

[Relentless]

https://www.castanet.net/edition/news-s ... htm#251672

So it appears that we now have many groups of brainwashed souls fighting to save the planet.
Because you know, we only have 12 more years, and it's all over!

It's really hard to imagine how these kids got brainwashed into believing in a Scam created by the Wealthy.
Do they not know the truth? Where have they been? Everyone knows that the Global Warming "caused by humans" Scam to justify an extortion of Carbon tax revenue is a farce, and the scientists were paid to produce studies to support this scam.

Were these creatures too busy texting on their phones over the last couple of years, and forgot to verify their beliefs?
Did they not ever consider the other theory? The theory that disproves all the formulas and lack of evidence used to prepare the studies to support this Myth?

I can't believe that a group of people who are totally reliant on Fossil fuels could be such hypocrites!
What do they suppose the solution is? Stop heating our homes and freeze? Stop driving to work, or to run errands?
Maybe we can all get horses and ride to do our business. No, that won't work, we aren't allowed.
What do these clowns propose is a solution? Billions of people in the world, and no one has a solution, but they some how realize there is a serious problem that needs serious attention.

I wonder if these groups know that all the Carbon Tax money collected goes into "General Revenue" to be used for anything but what it was intended for? I bet they don't. I bet they believe it's being used to create alternative magical energy sources from outer space!

I put them all in the same class as the Flat Earthers', you know, the ones that discredited two centuries of scientific proof to only state that the earth is still flat, and so are the planets!

My Goodness....What in the World is happening to the people? They have all gone crazy!

And for those of you who still believe this Myth, watch this! Warning Adult content!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NjlC02NsIt0

[CapitalB]

Ahh yes youtube famous for its prescient scientific community and common sense. Thats where I get all my information too. Not from those trashy scientists at universities.

/s

[rekabis]

Ancient Plants Reveal Arctic Summers Haven't Been This Hot in 115,000 Years

The latest sign of just how screwed the Arctic is: moss that hasn’t seen the light of day in at least 40,000 years is tumbling out of ice caps on Canada’s Baffin Island thanks to increasingly balmy summers. Based on that and other lines of evidence, research published in Nature Communications on Friday suggests that Canadian Arctic summers haven’t been this warm in 115,000 years or more.

Even in the wild world of statistics about how climate change is transforming the Arctic, this one stands out.

“This study indicates that wow, we’re exposing landscapes that are 120,000 years old,” lead study author Simon Pendleton of the University of Colorado’s Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research told Earther. “Our last century of warmth is likely is greater than any century in the last 120,000 years.”

To reach that conclusion, Pendleton and his colleagues relied on Baffin Island’s ice and the bizarre quirks of geography that have allowed it to reveal its secrets. The island is home to deep fjords and high plateaus, the latter of which are covered in ice caps. Ice caps are huge hunks of ice much like glaciers, but there’s one key difference. Where glaciers flow and grind down on the earth beneath them, ice caps are static. That means whatever’s on the ground when they form gets preserved rather than getting ground to dust.

For ages, ice has occupied the plateaus and walls of Baffin Island. In some summers, there would be melt, but in general low temperatures and snow has kept things pretty much at equilibrium. Now, climate change has upset that equilibrium, causing the Arctic to heat up at twice the rate as the rest of the world. That’s led to more summer melt, which has exposed moss and lichen at the margins of the ice caps.

Pendleton and others collected samples from around 30 ice caps and conducted radiocarbon dating to determine their age. The findings show the mosses are at least 40,000 years old (and on a wild side note, some of the mosses have been taken back to labs and brought back to life as Arctic zombie plants).

But here’s the thing: 40,000 years is close to the edge of history you can probe with from radiocarbon dating. It also happens to be smack in the middle of a glacial period. That led Pendleton and his colleagues to scour other records, including nearby ice measurements from Greenland. By cross-referencing with the plants, they show that the area has been covered by ice a lot longer than 40,000 years and that summers of our new climate are likely more blistering than anything in roughly 115,000-120,000 years.

As ice caps recede even further, they could expose even more ancient landscapes. By refining their measurements, scientists can then predict how the Arctic will look as climate change continues to reshape it. Pendleton said even without the radiocarbon dating, it’s clear how rapidly Baffin Island is shifting into a new state. Each year, changes become more visible to the naked eye.

“To be able to see it and walk on the ice cap and understand we’re in a time that’s exposing landscapes that haven’t seen sunlight in possibly 120,000 years, that has a profound effect,” he said.

[rekabis]

Scientists Are 99.9999 Percent Sure Humans Caused Climate Change

"The narrative out there that scientists don’t know the cause of climate change is wrong. We do."

No, We’re Sure

New analysis of 40 years’ worth of satellite data shows that it’s a near-certainty that humanity is actively causing global climate change.

Climate deniers often claim, in the face of overwhelming evidence, that the planet is heating up and natural disasters are becoming more intense and common just because that’s the way it is — incorrectly insisting that humanity’s love affair with fossil fuels has nothing to do with it. Now, scientists say the chances that that’s true are just one in a million.

Yep, Pretty Sure

According to the research by scientists at California’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, that’s because climate data has now reached a so-called “gold standard” of scientific evidence — there’s only a one in a million chance that ongoing climate change could have been caused by anything other than humanity, reports Reuters.

“The narrative out there that scientists don’t know the cause of climate change is wrong,” Benjamin Santer, the scientist who led the research, told Reuters. “We do.”

No Uncertainty

The scientific research process almost never eradicates uncertainty: researchers test their hypotheses to get a better understanding of the world, but there’s almost always some other factor out there that could have impacted their findings. In other words, a gold standard is not something that’s taken lightly.

The new analysis looked at the three largest satellite data sets used by climate scientists. It shows that two of those data sets reached the gold standard of certainty that humanity causes climate change back in 2005, and the third did in 2016.

That level of certainty, highly uncommon in scientific research, makes humanity’s impact on the planet very clear. And now we have to figure out what to do about it.

“Humanity cannot afford to ignore such clear signals,” reads the analysis.

[Glacier]

Cool, but the temperature changes aren't unprecedented. It warmed up just as fast in the 1920s,1930s and 1940s as it has over the past 30 years...

accel.png

It also warmed up as fast yesterday morning as it did this morning! Nice try though.

https://www.climate.gov/news-features/u ... emperature

Here is the basic fact that the IPCC and skeptics agree on: the warming prior to 1950 was natural because human emissions were not high enough before then to have a measurable impect.

Now, the warming over the past 30 years is slightly higher than the 30 years prior to 1950, but it's hardly much of a difference.

You make it sound like it's a rate of warming not seen in 10,000 years, which is an anti-science statement of faith. The instrument record only goes back to the 1600s, so any data prior to then cannot have the same degree of resolution and precision to confirm or deny your statement of religious faith.

[Relentless]

Ahh yes youtube famous for its prescient scientific community and common sense. Thats where I get all my information too. Not from those trashy scientists at universities.

/s

You do know that Scientists are funded by Government, Governments are corrupt, and produce whatever they want you to know and believe! You ever heard of Fake News? Well this is part of a Fake News Production, started by Al Gore in 1993, when they created a way for the rich corrupt people to get richer......
I sure hope you don't think OxFam and the Clinton Foundation are both sincere Organizations, because if you did, I could see how you would believe in this Climate Change/Human Caused Global Warming stuff.

[Omnitheo]

Interesting how scientists from other governments as well as privately funded scientists (including those from Exxon) reached the same conclusions. Because science is science and isn’t partisan.

Climate change has been an understood issue for several decades, long before Gore or Clinton ever spoke about it. In fact one of the first people to bring attention to the issue was Conservative prime minister Margaret Thatcher. Because climate change has the potential to severely drain global GDP.

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

[d0nb]

Scientists Are 99.9999 Percent Sure Humans Caused Climate Change

Oh, my. The earth trembled and quaked; the foundations of the mountains shook and behold, a mouse - or an old Ivory soap commercial.

It should come as a surprise to no one that the activities of billions of people have an effect on the climate. The extent of that effect and what can or should be done to deal with it remains an open question.

For example: so far, the most easily quantified consequence of more CO2 is a greener, healthier planet with a more abundant supply of food for all its creatures. Of course, one of the negatives of increased plant life is the attendant increase in brush and forest fires. In order to avoid the kind of damage we saw in Fort McMurray and now so often in California and Australia, we will have to do more to assure that interface zones around communities are properly cleared and maintained.

But in light of the fact that atmospheric CO2 is predicted to rise to only a fraction of the level that life on this planet evolved and flourished in, perhaps we should dare to consider the drawbacks of implementing hugely costly and disruptive measures to address a problem that exists primarily in the fevered imaginations of misinformed ideologues like AOC, Beto, Trudeau and other products of the irrational groupthink so prevalent in our schools and media.

[The Green Barbarian]

Climate deniers

as soon as I see someone use this silly term to describe anyone who disagrees with them it's obvious they have no clue what they are talking about and are just barfing up talking points from the eco-lunatic side of the ledger.

[Jlabute]

An interesting article on the suns influence.

https://www.thegwpf.org/content/uploads/2019/03/SvensmarkSolar2019-1.pdf

Summary
"Over the last twenty years there has been good progress in understanding the solar influence on climate. In particular, many scientific studies have shown that changes in solar activity have impacted climate over the whole Holocene period (approximately the last 10,000 years). A well-known example is the existence of high solar activity during the Medieval Warm Period, around the year 1000AD, and the subsequent low levels of solar activity during the cold period, now called The Little Ice Age (1300–1850 AD). An important scientific task has been to quantify the solar impact on climate, and it has been found that over the eleven-year solar cycle the energy that enters the Earth’s system is of the order of 1.0–1.5 W/m2.This is nearly an order of magnitude larger than what would be expected from solar irradiance alone, and suggests that solar activity is getting amplified by some atmospheric process.Three main theories have been put forward to explain the solar–climate link, which are: solar ultraviolet changes, the atmospheric-electric-field effect on cloud cover, cloud changes produced by solar-modulated galactic cosmic rays (energetic particles originating from inter stellar space and ending in our atmosphere). Significant efforts has gone into understanding possible mechanisms, and at the moment cosmic ray modulation of Earth’s cloud cover seems rather promising in explaining the size of solar impact. This theory suggests that solar activity has had a significant impact on climate during the Holocene period. This understanding is in contrast to the official consensus from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, where it is estimated that the change in solar radiative forcing between 1750 and 2011 was around 0.05 W/m2,a value which is entirely negligible relative to the effect of greenhouse gases, estimated at around 2.3 W/m2. However, the existence of an atmospheric solar-amplification mechanism would have implications for the estimated climate sensitivity to carbon dioxide, suggesting that it is much lower than currently thought. In summary, the impact of solar activity on climate is much larger than the official consensus suggests. This is therefore an important scientific question that needs to be addressed by the scientific community."

[Omnitheo]

Interesting how everything you provides comes from lobby groups or individuals funded by fossil fuel organizations.

Why do you treat obviously biased findings by groups heavily criticized for poor methodology and bad science as more credible than actual scientific studies both public and private who's findings are corroborated across multiple fields?

It honestly feels like you're grasping for straws. Desperate to find any shred of doubt to hide behind to avoid dealing with the reality of climate change.

[The Green Barbarian]

Interesting how everything you provides comes from lobby groups or individuals funded by fossil fuel organizations.

.

Even more interesting - every time any counter-argument is introduced, the AGW apocalyptic types immediately attack the source, and ignore how their claims of global Armageddon are being refuted and are complete bunk. EVERY TIME!!

[rustled]

Interesting how everything you provides comes from lobby groups or individuals funded by fossil fuel organizations.

.

Even more interesting - every time any counter-argument is introduced, the AGW apocalyptic types immediately attack the source, and ignore how their claims of global Armageddon are being refuted and are complete bunk. EVERY TIME!!

Interesting, too, that these same folk routinely rely on lobby groups and individuals funded by organizations with agendas, but can't seem to see that's what they're doing.

It's unfortunate the science was hijacked by alarmists like Gore and Cook for political purposes. We need to make good policy decisions based on reality, not on the hackneyed fear-mongering hyperbole formulated by those intent on pushing public policy in a specific direction regardless of outcomes.

[The Green Barbarian]