Pessimistic about climate

[foenix]

I would expect more warm peaks to follow as they did 120,000 years back in the last interglacial. Don't worry though, if you want cooler temperatures, they will eventually occur.

A world of only 'natural drivers' does not give you a flat unchanging climate. That is biased modelling. A result of too much trust in models when the science is not understood.

The most important thing to remember about climate models which are used to project future global warming is that they were “tuned” with the assumption: that the climate system is in a natural state of energy balance, and that there is no long-term climate change unless humans cause it.

This is an arbitrary and illogical assumption. The climate system is an example of a “nonlinear dynamical system”, which means it can change all by itself. For example, slow changes in the rate of vertical overturning of the world’s oceans can cause global warming (or global cooling) with no “external forcing” of the climate system whatsoever.

Instead, the climate models are “tuned” to not produce natural climate change. If a 100-year run of the model produces change, the model is adjusted to removed the “drift”. The models do not produce global energy balance from “first physical principles”, because none of the processes controlling that balance are known to sufficient accuracy. Instead, the models are “fudged” to produce energy balance, based upon the modelers’ assumption of no natural climate change. Then, the models are used as “proof” that only increasing CO2 has caused recent warming.

sealevel.PNG

How about the link where you got this info.....it's wasn't whatsupwiththat by any chance would it?

Yeah but according to the Milankovitch cycle that you guys believe in, we should be in a mini-glacier period, so what happened to that model?

[foenix]

One can look at certain regions and argue, yeah but the ice sheets are "increasing" but if one was to look at the overall pictures instead of cherry picking the data, then we get news like this......

Earth is now losing 1.2 trillion tons of ice each year. And it’s going to get worse.

Global ice loss has increased rapidly over the past two decades, and scientists are still underestimating just how much sea levels could rise, according to alarming new research published this month.

From the thin ice shield covering most of the Arctic Ocean to the mile-thick mantle of the polar ice sheets, ice losses have soared from about 760 billion tons per year in the 1990s to more than 1.2 trillion tons per year in the 2010s, a new study released Monday shows. That is an increase of more than 60 percent, equating to 28 trillion tons of melted ice in total — and it means that roughly 3 percent of all the extra energy trapped within Earth’s system by climate change has gone toward turning ice into water.

“That’s like more than 10,000 ‘Back to the Future’ lightning strikes per second of energy melting ice around-the-clock since 1994,” said William Colgan, an ice-sheet expert at the Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland. “That is just a bonkers amount of energy.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate- ... -glaciers/

[foenix]

Here's more.....

So Much Ice Has Melted, That the Earth’s Crust Is Shifting in Weird, New Ways

Both the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets—the world’s two largest bodies of ice—are melting at an alarming rate, causing major problems for local ecosystems and coastal communities alike. Now, in yet more evidence that the climate crisis is changing everything in bizarre and profound ways, new research suggests that the meltdown is warping the Earth’s crust.

The new study, published in the journal Geophysical Research Letters last month, analyzes satellite data of ice melt from 2003 to 2018. The authors paired this data with a model showing how changes in ice mass affect the crust. The model showed that much of the northern hemisphere moved horizontally because of melting ice in Greenland and the Arctic.

This happens because the planet’s outermost layer has a little more slack than you might think. When ice sheets build up, their weight causes the crust underpinning them to sink in order to compensate. When the ice melts, as it’s doing at a record rate due to rising temperatures, there’s less weight for the crust to bear so it rebounds.

https://gizmodo.com/so-much-ice-has-mel ... 1847754514

Vanishing ice is warping Earth's crust

The melting of Earth's polar ice is warping the planet's crust.

This shape change is subtle, but it occurs many hundreds of miles away from the ice sheets. Researchers may be able to monitor the shift as part of research to understand how climate change will affect sea level; understanding the warping is also important, because scientists need to be able to correct for this ground motion when measuring other types of geological processes, the study authors wrote in the August issue of the journal Geophysical Research Letters.

Scientists already knew that when ice disappears, the crust underneath changes. Imagine lifting your head from a memory foam pillow: As the weight of your head is lifted, the pillow gradually fluffs back up, still moving after you've vacated the bed. Something similar happens when a glacier retreats. The crust beneath, no longer under all that weight, slowly pops back up. This is called isostatic rebound, and it's very slow indeed. In some high-latitude regions, the ground is still rebounding from the retreat of the ice sheets during the end of the last ice age.

https://www.livescience.com/melting-ice ... arth-crust

[The Green Barbarian]

It's stupid articles like this one that get me riled up. "People aren't even aware of why they should be constantly consumed by fear of the man-made climate change bogey-man". This kind of crapola should just be laughed at and disregarded as fear-mongering nonsense.

Climate Change Could Impact So Many Canadians Who Are 'Unaware' That They're At Risk

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/weather/topst ... d=msedgntp

Just pure garbage.

[rustled]

It's stupid articles like this one that get me riled up. "People aren't even aware of why they should be constantly consumed by fear of the man-made climate change bogey-man". This kind of crapola should just be laughed at and disregarded as fear-mongering nonsense.

Climate Change Could Impact So Many Canadians Who Are 'Unaware' That They're At Risk

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/weather/topst ... d=msedgntp

Just pure garbage.

What's great about this piece is the comments. Most readers are no longer buying what the author's selling. Here are a couple:

When you cover everywhere in concrete and channel rainwater efficiently into storm drains you are more likely to get flash floods when the drainage system can't cope.
That isn't climate change. That is bad urban planning.

If flooding is increasing in cities it is much more likely to be due to rapid urbanization, poor urban planning and development, increasing population, unchecked immigration, and a lack of investment in infrastructure to meet the growing demands of the rising number of people in urban environments. Blaming it on climate change is the biggest cop out ever!

[Jlabute]

It is record breaking because Peter Ridd's chart (which is the sum of the three charts) at 2020 is greater than 1986.

How can the sum be greater when the other 3 charts don't indicate "record breaking" levels? That's called sleight of hand voodoo statistics (made up).

The voodoo used is called averaging with each region weighted by its size. 2011 and 2012 were big years for cyclones.
You’re not out there planting polyps are you?

[fluffy]

FACT-CHECKED: Barrier Reef coral health claims made by Dr Peter Ridd

"When contacted by AAP FactCheck, Dr Ridd said his claim was based on the Australian Institute of Marine Science's (AIMS) annual survey of the Great Barrier Reef, which has been conducted every year since 1985.

AIMS, a Commonwealth statutory authority, claims the survey is the most comprehensive available record on the reef's condition.

Its most recent monitoring report, from a survey conducted between September 2019 and June 2020, showed hard coral cover had fluctuated markedly since records began in 1985, but overall it had declined.

Hard coral cover was "a simple and robust measure of reef health" as it was a "critical ecosystem engineer" in coral reef systems, the report said."

https://www.thecourier.com.au/story/706 ... oral-reef/

The fact that the clip posted above came from Sky News Australia, founded by Rupert Murdoch of Fox News fame, should have been enough of a reason to fact check the story for anyone.

[foenix]

How can the sum be greater when the other 3 charts don't indicate "record breaking" levels? That's called sleight of hand voodoo statistics (made up).

The voodoo used is called averaging with each region weighted by its size. 2011 and 2012 were big years for cyclones.
You’re not out there planting polyps are you?

That still doesn't explain the fact, none of those 3 graphs of the areas the voodoo scientist averaged were not at "record" growth levels to begin with.... That certainly didn't stop RIdd from making his graph look historic "record" breaking tho'.

[hobbyguy]

The "argument" over "man made climate change is real" will never be resolved for some. Just as there are folks still fighting over evolution as being real. In essence it is the same type of argument that has been going on since the "enlightenment" and people like Galileo. Observable fact versus dogma.

In general such "arguments" boil down to the old 80/20 rule. There will always be 20% +/- who choose to go the wrong way - and inevitably the 20% will be very vocal, mistaking belligerence, ignorance and loudness for real discussion.

There is still an active "Flat Earth" society. There are creationist theme parks. etc. Often there are crossovers to other issues.

The simple fact is that all species affect the ecology of the earth, and in very complex ways. Dominant species even more so.

Humans are, at this evolutionary moment, the dominant species in most systems. We constantly change the ecosystems, and in both unintended and intended ways. To assume that we are not affecting the ecosystems with our large and significant exploitation of fossil fuels is just hubris.

That simple reality will not stop the self interested and myopic 20% from ignoring reality, and there is little point in strengthening their antics by giving them any credence in discussion.

The important thing is that the 80% take action, and do so while ignoring the 20%. Eventually the 20% will become the 15%, then 10%, then 5% and finally the crank 1% that will always be with us. If Charlie Crank wants to carry on driving a jacked up pick up truck and "rolling coal" - meh!. Charlie Crank will soon be part of the 1% at the fringe - the crazy uncle at the Thanksgiving dinner party.

Part of taking action is to realize that the vested interests will continue to "do a big tobacco" and Charlie Crank and his buddies will happily go along with them.

The most important part of taking climate change action will be to provide something better, and something that suits the self interests of many. That is the essence of collective action. Transit systems are something we can do now. Transitioning away from coal fired power plants is something we can do now. Transitioning to BEVs is something we can do now that will work for about 50% of people. Developing hydrogen technologies may give us a better option just as one area of potential. Restorative agriculture has potential. Etc.

A steady drumbeat of better options, a change here, a change there. Each of them perhaps minor, but adding up to greater whole.

The 80% that want a better future can build it, individually, a step at a time, like building a savings account - the first $50 doesn't amount to much, but if you keep adding, and adding, and adding it becomes something significant.

[The Green Barbarian]

The "argument" over "man made climate change is real" will never be resolved for some. Just as there are folks still fighting over evolution as being real. In essence it is the same type of argument that has been going on since the "enlightenment" and people like Galileo. Observable fact versus dogma.

I 100% agree. There are those who can "follow the science" on evolution and understand the theories, and then there are the gullible fools who buy into science fiction like the man-made climate change myth. These people want to have warm tummies, and therefore allow politics to be their driving force for decision-making, rather than actual science. If they listened to actual science, they'd know that the man-made climate change myth is total bunk. And we'd have no stupid "carbon" taxes, and poor people wouldn't suffer because of such dumb policy. Follow the science - man made climate change is a hoax.

[foenix]

..... If they listened to actual science, they'd know that the man-made climate change myth is total bunk.

Now that sounds like science fiction.

[JLives]

The "argument" over "man made climate change is real" will never be resolved for some. Just as there are folks still fighting over evolution as being real. In essence it is the same type of argument that has been going on since the "enlightenment" and people like Galileo. Observable fact versus dogma.

I 100% agree. There are those who can "follow the science" on evolution and understand the theories, and then there are the gullible fools who buy into science fiction like the man-made climate change myth. These people want to have warm tummies, and therefore allow politics to be their driving force for decision-making, rather than actual science. If they listened to actual science, they'd know that the man-made climate change myth is total bunk. And we'd have no stupid "carbon" taxes, and poor people wouldn't suffer because of such dumb policy. Follow the science - man made climate change is a hoax.

You're thinking of blogs, not real science. Which team won the Nobel Prize for Physics this year and what did they win it for? Those are real scientists.

There is a plethora of real climate science to be found here: https://www.ipcc.ch/ and here: https://climate.nasa.gov/

[Jlabute]

Nobel prizes are almost worthless amid their scandals. Obama, Al Gore, and Jimmy Carter have one. Wangari Maathai who said the USA created AIDS to depopulate Africa got a Nobel. Many people who would had been better candidates like Ghandi were never considered.

Appears as though the Psychlones will have to blow harder to convince people the world is ending. Most people tend towards climate realism.

https://climatechangedispatch.com/clima ... as-failed/

The argument hasn't started for climate change. Our planets climate is so complex it is literally beyond understanding at this point in time. We have too few accurate air and sea temperature measurements over too short a time period. Unfortunately all we hear about are models. As good a tool models are at helping us scratch the surface of understand the dynamics, they are only as good as our understanding which is mostly incomplete. Climate models shouldn't be used for policy yet, as they are provided with invisible error bars.

The case for natural climate change I also present an analysis of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation which shows that most climate change might well be the result of….the climate system itself! Because small, chaotic fluctuations in atmospheric and oceanic circulation systems can cause small changes in global average cloudiness, this is all that is necessary to cause climate change.

[The Green Barbarian]

You're thinking of blogs, not real science.

And you're thinking of politics, not "real" science.

There is a plethora of real climate science to be found here: https://www.ipcc.ch/ and here: https://climate.nasa.gov/

And yet when you click on those links, you don't find any. Why is that?

[hobbyguy]

The "argument" over "man made climate change is real" will never be resolved for some. Just as there are folks still fighting over evolution as being real. In essence it is the same type of argument that has been going on since the "enlightenment" and people like Galileo. Observable fact versus dogma.

I 100% agree. There are those who can "follow the science" on evolution and understand the theories, and then there are the gullible fools who buy into science fiction like the man-made climate change myth. These people want to have warm tummies, and therefore allow politics to be their driving force for decision-making, rather than actual science. If they listened to actual science, they'd know that the man-made climate change myth is total bunk. And we'd have no stupid "carbon" taxes, and poor people wouldn't suffer because of such dumb policy. Follow the science - man made climate change is a hoax.

You miss the point. https://www.ipsos.com/en-ca/news-and-po ... oronavirus

"Three-quarters (77%) of Canadians agree that human activities contribute to climate change. On the other hand, as many as one in ten (11%) do not believe that human activities have any meaningful impact on our climate."

The hard core 11% of deniers are already irrelevant in our democracy. The world is moving to transition to a net zero low carbon economy. Canada included.

Man made climate change is real, and we are moving on to deal with it. Electric cars, hydrogen cars maybe, safe nuclear energy etc. etc. will all be pursued as we shift away from fossil fuels.