Climate Change Report

#2,402
#2,402
LouderVol said:
Because we know climate has changed in the past due to a lot of different reasons. I would expect that we would want to know how this time is different if we want to say we are the ones doing it this time. If that's the case we would need to be able to look at the data now and compare it to the extrapolated data from back then that were all computed via the same methods.

We are counting molecules of CO2 in the air to compare to the various decomposition of different elements in the ground from a long time ago.
Click to expand...

If you choose to allude to the numerous other ways climate change can happen then you need to show why the climate is changing due to one of these other reasons in the same way that someone who believes in anthropogenic climate change is expected to. It would also be helpful to include a discussion as to why the various scientific papers which may contradict your position are mistaken.

That said, there are numerous resources where it is explained how we can have confidence that the warming we're seeing is due to human activity. I've linked at least one of them in this thread.

I'm not sure what you're saying with regard to CO2.
 
#2,403
#2,403
Wafflestomper said:
If you choose to allude to the numerous other ways climate change can happen then you need to show why the climate is changing due to one of these other reasons in the same way that someone who believes in anthropogenic climate change is expected to. It would also be helpful to include a discussion as to why the various scientific papers which may contradict your position are mistaken.

That said, there are numerous resources where it is explained how we can have confidence that the warming we're seeing is due to human activity. I've linked at least one of them in this thread.

I'm not sure what you're saying with regard to CO2.
Click to expand...
I dont doubt that mankind is helping with the warming of this planet. There is no physical way we arent.

I disagree on a couple other facets, 1. How much. 2. How we respond. 3. How we are dividing the blame on various human factors.

1. How much: bart posted a quote saying they know we are responsible for just over 50%. Considering we are in a cooling trend, what is the less than 50? Again I struggle with the methods they use. Going to the C02 comment my point was we look at various isotopes in the ground to judge what it was like in the past. Why arent we doing that for current times as well? The change of method bothers me. Even if what we use for the now aspect makes sense, the inconsticency bothers me.
2. What we should do. The last thing we should do is turn into oprah. You get a pv panel, you get a pv panel. Everybody gets a PV panel!. That approach has been proven not to work. We can just look at our nations recent past on this subject. And we are going to handle it better than developing nations.
3. Human factor is an interesting one imo. There are any number of things we do that at least imo, effect global warming, that dont seem to be addressed. I have posted at length here before about this. We produce heat. The stuff we use produces heat. The earth is a relatively closed system. You cant introduce more and more heat into the equation and expect a balance. In buildings we get to cheat we heat exchanges, we dump the heat from inside outside. The earth does a little bit of this but it's a fairly constant rate. In buildings humans are tiny pieces of the puzzle that can drastically change the loading on a heating/cooling unit. I dont see how we dont ch ge the earth the same way. Again we are dealing with tiny decimals but we are having to address climate change on a hundred year scale to get to a degree of change iirc. Seems like any bit helps/hurts. Then you add in resource management and land mass coverage and you have added additional changes to the equation. That add up pretty quickly to the scale of our population and history of the world.

And yet despite all of that we seem to only address the energy sector. And not all that well imo. It's just the easy target to blame because all the other stuff points back to each and everyone one of us, and leans towards the more developed. Better to just blame the bad rich people.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40
#2,411
#2,411
LouderVol said:
The way I read that is that we are only responsible for a little more than half of the CHANGE.
Click to expand...

LouderVol said:
bart posted a quote saying they know we are responsible for just over 50%.
Click to expand...
No, you've misunderstood. If you reread my post and the text still isn't clear, refer to the figure in the ipcc report linked in that post, showing we're responsible for ~100%:

fig105.jpg


While you're on the topic, here is a similar figure from the WG1 SPM for your reference:

ipcc_rad_forc_ar5.jpg


I thought we had taken a look at anthropogenic heat flux (waste heat) already somewhat recently? If you google it you will see that there is significant research on the topic and that estimates are generally in the range of 0.01-0.03 W/m2 globally. Which if you compare it to numbers in the figure above, you see that's on the order of 1% of the heat flux from GHGs. It does have some local effects (the urban heat island effect) but is not significant globally.
 
Last edited:
#2,414
#2,414
BartW said:
No, you've misunderstood. If you reread my post and the text still isn't clear, refer to the figure in the ipcc report linked in that post, showing we're responsible for ~100%:

fig105.jpg


While you're on the topic, here is a similar figure from the WG1 SPM for your reference:

ipcc_rad_forc_ar5.jpg


I thought we had taken a look at anthropogenic heat flux (waste heat) already somewhat recently? If you google it you will see that there is significant research on the topic and that estimates are generally in the range of 0.1-0.2 W/m2 globally. Which if you compare it to numbers in the figure above, you see that's on the order of 1% of the heat flux from GHGs. It does have some local effects (the urban heat island effect) but is not significant globally.
Click to expand...
Read the last sentence in figure 10.5.

5-95% uncertainty. Uhm what?

I dont know how you spell settled science but it doesnt include a error factor of a possible 95%. Even if you split it that chart has an "uncertainity" of nearly 50%.

And again on the waste heat, arent we talking about terribly small fraction of growth? That's the whole point. Green house gasses dont create heat themselves (the burning does). We people create heat. We are adding heat and "insulation" to the equation. Even if you remove the insulation we still have a heat problem.
 
#2,416
#2,416
LouderVol said:
Read the last sentence in figure 10.5.

5-95% uncertainty. Uhm what?

I dont know how you spell settled science but it doesnt include a error factor of a possible 95%. Even if you split it that chart has an "uncertainity" of nearly 50%.
Click to expand...
Awkwardly worded again I’ll agree, but what that means is there is about 5% chance that the real value falls above or below the whiskers in the box and whisker plot.

HADCRUT4 is a global temperature dataset. So the figure shows that their observed global temperature change from 1951-2010 was about 0.65C +/- 0.05C with 95% confidence.

LouderVol said:
And again on the waste heat, arent we talking about terribly small fraction of growth? That's the whole point. Green house gasses dont create heat themselves (the burning does). We people create heat. We are adding heat and "insulation" to the equation. Even if you remove the insulation we still have a heat problem.
Click to expand...
It's just not significant on the scale of global energy flow. I was off by a decimal on my previous post. Estimates for waste heat are 0.01-0.03 W/m2 averaged globally. Incoming solar radiation and, consequently, infrared emission from the surface and atmosphere, is on the order of 300 W/m2, or over 10,000 times greater than waste heat. Average waste heat flux is actually even less than the average geothermal heat flux (~0.1 W/m2, from radioactive decay of isotopes in the mantle and crust). The change in heat flux from the added CO2, from the figure in my previous post, is 1.68 W/m2.

The amount of heat from the sun that is being trapped by GHGs (and the amount of added heat trapped by the added GHGs) dwarfs the amount of waste heat we people create directly. Our heat is not the problem. The sun's heat plus our added insulation is the problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mick
#2,417
#2,417
Low Solar Activity to Cause Temperatures to Plummet, Say Scientists



The Sun is entering a period of “solar minimum” that could cause temperatures to plummet by up to 2C over 20 years and trigger a global famine, according to experts.

Solar activity has entered a deep decline with scientists saying there have already been 100 days this year where the sun has displayed zero sunspots.

NASA boffins say this means that the earth could be about to experience a new “Dalton Minimum,” the period between 1790 and 1830 which led to a severe prolonged cold snap and massive volcanic eruptions.

“This means were could be entering one of the deepest period of sunshine recession which could trigger long periods of cold, famine and other issues,” reports the Daily Star.



giphy-facebook_s.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40, CagleMtnVol and McDad
#2,418
#2,418
Orange_Vol1321 said:
Low Solar Activity to Cause Temperatures to Plummet, Say Scientists



The Sun is entering a period of “solar minimum” that could cause temperatures to plummet by up to 2C over 20 years and trigger a global famine, according to experts.

Solar activity has entered a deep decline with scientists saying there have already been 100 days this year where the sun has displayed zero sunspots.

NASA boffins say this means that the earth could be about to experience a new “Dalton Minimum,” the period between 1790 and 1830 which led to a severe prolonged cold snap and massive volcanic eruptions.

“This means were could be entering one of the deepest period of sunshine recession which could trigger long periods of cold, famine and other issues,” reports the Daily Star.
Click to expand...

They must have dire, gloom and doom, apocalyptic warnings as part of their reports to media so as to gain attention with the sensationalism. Otherwise, I cannot understand why every climate change prediction leads to the same end point of [possible] catastrophic death.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DC_Vol, BigOrangeD, Rickyvol77 and 1 other person
#2,421
#2,421
McDad said:
They must have dire, gloom and doom, apocalyptic warnings as part of their reports to media so as to gain attention with the sensationalism. Otherwise, I cannot understand why every climate change prediction leads to the same end point of [possible] catastrophic death.
Click to expand...

From what we know about the conditions on other planets in our solar system and those we have been able to observe beyond, not to mention the apocalyptic natural history of Earth up until now, catastrophic death is nearly a best case scenario. Even that means you actually experienced the brief miracle of life.

People need to take a step back and get some perspective, but of course that isn't going to happen.

Still, I guess if we did not have this crippling collective anxiety and strife our ancestors would have let their guard down and become the lunch of some giant wolf or sabre-toothed cat. I bet many a good spear was broken because someone saw a rock hidden in the grass.

If cave paintings didn't take years to complete, maybe the cave walls would read like our current spates of "news". "Tonight we lead with Spear-Gate, again. Is Chief Thag fit to lead if he can't tell a rock from a boar? Let's go to our panel."
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: BartW and BigOrangeD
#2,422
#2,422
Rifleman said:
From what we know about the conditions on other planets in our solar system and those we have been able to observe beyond, not to mention the apocalyptic natural history of Earth up until now, catastrophic death is nearly a best case scenario. Even that means you actually experienced the brief miracle of life.

People need to take a step back and get some perspective, but of course that isn't going to happen.

Still, I guess if we did not have this crippling collective anxiety and strife our ancestors would have let their guard down and become the lunch of some giant wolf or sabre-toothed cat. I bet many a good spear was broken because someone saw a rock hidden in the grass.

If cave paintings didn't take years to complete, maybe the cave walls would read like our current spates of "news". "Tonight we lead with Spear-Gate, again. Is Chief Thag fit to lead if he can't tell a rock from a boar? Let's go to our panel."
Click to expand...
You okay, man? You're all over the place with this post. Wild ride.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orange_Vol1321, BigOrangeD, LouderVol and 1 other person
#2,424
#2,424
Orange_Vol1321 said:
Low Solar Activity to Cause Temperatures to Plummet, Say Scientists



The Sun is entering a period of “solar minimum” that could cause temperatures to plummet by up to 2C over 20 years and trigger a global famine, according to experts.

Solar activity has entered a deep decline with scientists saying there have already been 100 days this year where the sun has displayed zero sunspots.

NASA boffins say this means that the earth could be about to experience a new “Dalton Minimum,” the period between 1790 and 1830 which led to a severe prolonged cold snap and massive volcanic eruptions.

“This means were could be entering one of the deepest period of sunshine recession which could trigger long periods of cold, famine and other issues,” reports the Daily Star.



View attachment 279506
Click to expand...
A guy I follow on YouTube for homesteading/prepping has been talking about this for a year.

Go read up on the year without a summer I think it was around 1815 or 1816.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orange_Vol1321 and Orangeburst
#2,425
#2,425
McDad said:
You okay, man? You're all over the place with this post. Wild ride.
Click to expand...

Thanks! The flashback passed after I listened to three Grateful Dead songs backwards.

Shorter version: I've accepted that people are always going to be too crazy to get along or agree, but we should all be amazed more often at the beauty of the world we live on because on the cosmic scale (as far as we can see) what we have here is incredibly rare.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: BigOrangeD, McDad and LouderVol
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top