Loss of sea ice leads to unprecedented Arctic warming

[Crick]

the CO2 in earth's atmosphere is .039% virtually the same as it was 50,000 years ago according to ice cores and fossils. what you are seeing is water vapor, is water now a pollutant?

Still a fucking idiot.

The Keeling Curve

The Keeling Curve is a daily record of global atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration maintained by Scripps Institution of Oceanography at UC San Diego.

keelingcurve.ucsd.edu

 

[Redfish]

Unable to read. Unsurprising.

2022 is higher than 2020 and the average is constant. your own chart disproves your claim. you are an idiot.

 

[Redfish]

Still a fucking idiot.
View attachment 737240

The Keeling Curve

The Keeling Curve is a daily record of global atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration maintained by Scripps Institution of Oceanography at UC San Diego.

keelingcurve.ucsd.edu

do you understand what parts per million means? .031 to .043 is not a significant change and those small fluctuations have been happening for millions of years

charts don't lie, but liars make charts.

 

[Crick]

2022 is higher than 2020 and the average is constant. your own chart disproves your claim. you are an idiot.

What the chart does is disprove YOUR claim, but you're just too fucking stupid to see it.

 

[Crick]

do you understand what parts per million means? .031 to .043 is not a significant change and those small fluctuations have been happening for millions of years

charts don't lie, but liars make charts.

I bet their's a needlepoint forum on USMB. You like needlepoint don't you? Calms the nerves. Wiles away the hours between visits from your nurse.

PS: The actual baseline was 0.028 and the data here show a 53.6% increase. I guess what this chart showed was that, Yes, you're a fucking idiot.

 

[Redfish]

I bet their's a needlepoint forum on USMB. You like needlepoint don't you? Calms the nerves. Wiles away the hours between visits from your nurse.

answer the question, dingleberry. do you understand what parts per million means? put the same data on a parts per thousand and it is a straight line, its a charting game and you are too dumb to understand that you are being duped.

 

[Crick]

answer the question, dingleberry. do you understand what parts per million means? put the same data on a parts per thousand and it is a straight line, its a charting game and you are too dumb to understand that you are being duped.

"A straight line"? Really? Tell me, what happens to that 53.6% increase when you change the scale to parts per thousand?

My god are you stupid.

 

[Redfish]

"A straight line"? Really? Tell me, what happens to that 53.6% increase when you change the scale to parts per thousand?

My god are you stupid.

the change in CO2 is insignificant no matter what scale you use, and those kinds of fluctuations have been happening for much longer than man has been on earth. But cry "run for the hills" if it makes you somehow feel worthy. no one is listening to your meaningless rants or the rants of algore and the little girl from Sweden or Norway. Its not happening, man is not causing climate change, man cannot stop it , reduce it, or reverse it. Stop the nonsense. Man is polluting the air and water and if you libs really cared about the earth your rants would be about stopping pollution, but your friends in China are the worst polluters and you can't say anything bad about them because most of the DC elites are on China's payroll.

 

[Crick]

the change in CO2 is insignificant no matter what scale you use,

And you base this on what? "Everyone knows"?

and those kinds of fluctuations have been happening for much longer than man has been on earth.

The fluctuation in CO2 levels that has taken place since the Industrial Revoluiton has NOT taken place at any point in the prior history of homo sapiens.

But cry "run for the hills" if it makes you somehow feel worthy.

My cry is "pay attention to the science and have the balls to do what it actually tells us we need to do.

no one is listening to your meaningless rants

Fortunately, the world's government and a large majority of the world's population ARE listening to the science on which my comments are based. They certainly aren't listening to you. The problem we face isn't that not enough people accept the science, it's that far too many are cowards like you when it comes to actually acting in a committed and decisive manner to deal with real problems.

or the rants of algore and the little girl from Sweden or Norway.

Neither Al Gore nor Greta Thunberg (of Sweden) are scientists. I applaud the work both of them have been doing but I do not go to them for science. No one does. But you and yours go there and pretend that's the case. That would be a strawman fallacy.

Its not happening, man is not causing climate change, man cannot stop it , reduce it, or reverse it.

Show us the evidence on which this claim is based.

Stop the nonsense.

Stop the nonsense.

Man is polluting the air and water and if you libs really cared about the earth your rants would be about stopping pollution,

We do care about the Earth and we are working to stop pollution. That you think - or that you choose to argue - that both cannot be accomplished at the same time is simply another of your many falsehoods.

but your friends in China are the worst polluters and you can't say anything bad about them because most of the DC elites are on China's payroll.

Doesn't it ever occur to you that your complete failure to discuss the science behind this topic is a major and obvious failing on your part?

 

[Redfish]

And you base this on what? "Everyone knows"?

The fluctuation in CO2 levels that has taken place since the Industrial Revoluiton has NOT taken place at any point in the prior history of homo sapiens.

My cry is "pay attention to the science and have the balls to do what it actually tells us we need to do.

Fortunately, the world's government and a large majority of the world's population ARE listening to the science on which my comments are based. They certainly aren't listening to you. The problem we face isn't that not enough people accept the science, it's that far too many are cowards like you when it comes to actually acting in a committed and decisive manner to deal with real problems.

Neither Al Gore nor Greta Thunberg (of Sweden) are scientists. I applaud the work both of them have been doing but I do not go to them for science. No one does. But you and yours go there and pretend that's the case. That would be a strawman fallacy.

Show us the evidence on which this claim is based.

Stop the nonsense.

We do care about the Earth and we are working to stop pollution. That you think - or that you choose to argue - that both cannot be accomplished at the same time is simply another of your many falsehoods.

Doesn't it ever occur to you that your complete failure to discuss the science behind this topic is a major and obvious failing on your part?

nice try and good effort, but the truth is that the climate of our planet is controlled by the sun, slight wobbles of earth on its axis, and changes in ocean currents and prevailing winds. none of which can be controlled or stopped by human actions. I just don't understand why you libs must take the "climate change" route when the real problem is pollution. Why can't you focus your efforts on pollution? you don't need a questionable link between pollution and climate to attack pollution. Could it be that the identity of the polluters stops you from going after them?

 

[Crick]

nice try and good effort, but the truth is that the climate of our planet is controlled by the sun, slight wobbles of earth on its axis, and changes in ocean currents and prevailing winds. none of which can be controlled or stopped by human actions. I just don't understand why you libs must take the "climate change" route when the real problem is pollution. Why can't you focus your efforts on pollution? you don't need a questionable link between pollution and climate to attack pollution. Could it be that the identity of the polluters stops you from going after them?

The warming observed since the Industrial Revolution and most notably in the last 50 years is due to human greenhouse gas emissions, which CAN be controlled and stopped by humans. Pollution IS another problem and it has been dealt with for many years. That is why we have the EPA and the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts and all the many additions they've accumulated. It is why we have far cleaner burning cars and power plants than we once had. It is why the chemicals industries are allowed to put into our air and water are more and more tightly controlled. Things are not perfect, but the regulations controlling pollution in this country and most of the industrialized west have made tremendous improvements over the last 50 years. The identity of the polluters - aside from the fact that America can only bring regulatory power to bear against American entities - is irrelevant.

 

[Redfish]

The warming observed since the Industrial Revolution and most notably in the last 50 years is due to human greenhouse gas emissions, which CAN be controlled and stopped by humans. Pollution IS another problem and it has been dealt with for many years. That is why we have the EPA and the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts and all the many additions they've accumulated. It is why we have far cleaner burning cars and power plants than we once had. It is why the chemicals industries are allowed to put into our air and water are more and more tightly controlled. Things are not perfect, but the regulations controlling pollution in this country and most of the industrialized west have made tremendous improvements over the last 50 years. The identity of the polluters - aside from the fact that America can only bring regulatory power to bear against American entities - is irrelevant.

yes, we have reduced pollution in the last 50 years or so, and that is good. My issue with you libs is that you rely on a false link between pollution and climate and refuse to say anything negative about the biggest polluters on earth--------China and India. There has been no significant warming of earth in the last 500 years. small cycles that have nothing to do with human activity, caused by sun spot activity, wobbles of earth on its axis by a degree or two and changes in ocean currents. Al Gore said that Florida would be under water by now----------------is it? I rest my case.

 

[ReinyDays]

You ask, "What could supercede this". As we have to wait a several decades to a century or two.......

ist means, "A person who has learnt the current theories". So a physicist has learnt the current theories on physics. Some theories are tweaked/updated within a short period of time, others like E=mc2 take decades and centuries.

I agree ... different parts of theories get tweeked all the time ... we completely upended the Big Bang Theory recently ... but we're also confirming parts all the time ... and these parts stay put ...

What you're posting is the mathematical form of the Law of Conservation of Mass/Energy ... and in Modern Physics, there's no real distinction between mass and energy ... these two things we have from Classical Physics appear to be one in the same stuff ... and we have enourmous amounts of physical evidence to confirm the fact that mass and energy are different forms of the same stuff ... that this stuff is conserved ... and are interchangable by the ratio E = 10^16 m ... the 10^16 value has been determined in the lab ...

∂E/∂r = 2mc
∂m/∂r = -3E/c

That's not solvable so your guess is as good as mine ...

 

[Crick]

yes, we have reduced pollution in the last 50 years or so, and that is good. My issue with you libs is that you rely on a false link between pollution and climate and refuse to say anything negative about the biggest polluters on earth--------China and India.

Those of us who follow and accept mainstream science - which is what I believe you mean when you use the term "libs" - do NOT rely on any false link between pollution and climate. The primary cause of the warming observed since the Industrial Revolution and particularly in the last 50 years is human GHG emissions. Do you or do you not have a problem with that statement.

That anyone should make more comments about the decisions and choices of their own nation, particularly in democracies where they have some input on who is in charge and what priorities they set, is completely normal and acceptable. People like me have no problem making comments about the actions of China and India and Russia and the EU and all the rest of the world as neither greenhouse gases nor any other form of pollution recognize borders. What I find far more concerning is the viewpoint, fairly common among deniers such as you, that the US doesn't need to do anything because they are not doing as much as the could or that they ought. You use your antipathy towards 'others' as an excuse to avoid your OWN repsonsibilities. This is the strategy of a spoiled child.

There has been no significant warming of earth in the last 500 years. small cycles that have nothing to do with human activity, caused by sun spot activity, wobbles of earth on its axis by a degree or two and changes in ocean currents.

My god are you stupid.

Global Temperature Report for 2018 - Berkeley Earth

Berkeley Earth, a California-based non-profit research organization, has been preparing independent analyses of global mean temperature changes since 2013. The following is our report on global mean temperature during 2018. We conclude that 2018 was likely the fourth warmest year on Earth since...

berkeleyearth.org

Al Gore said that Florida would be under water by now----------------is it? I rest my case.

You rest your case? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAHAAAHAAAAA ha ha haaaa...

 

[Redfish]

Those of us who follow and accept mainstream science - which is what I believe you mean when you use the term "libs" - do NOT rely on any false link between pollution and climate. The primary cause of the warming observed since the Industrial Revolution and particularly in the last 50 years is human GHG emissions. Do you or do you not have a problem with that statement.

That anyone should make more comments about the decisions and choices of their own nation, particularly in democracies where they have some input on who is in charge and what priorities they set, is completely normal and acceptable. People like me have no problem making comments about the actions of China and India and Russia and the EU and all the rest of the world as neither greenhouse gases nor any other form of pollution recognize borders. What I find far more concerning is the viewpoint, fairly common among deniers such as you, that the US doesn't need to do anything because they are not doing as much as the could or that they ought. You use your antipathy towards 'others' as an excuse to avoid your OWN repsonsibilities. This is the strategy of a spoiled child.

My god are you stupid.

Global Temperature Report for 2018 - Berkeley Earth

Berkeley Earth, a California-based non-profit research organization, has been preparing independent analyses of global mean temperature changes since 2013. The following is our report on global mean temperature during 2018. We conclude that 2018 was likely the fourth warmest year on Earth since...

berkeleyearth.org

You rest your case? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAHAAAHAAAAA ha ha haaaa...

4 tenths of a degree in 60 years????????????????? can you plot the temp variations on earth for the last 500,000 years? WE are not causing this, we cannot slow or stop or reverse it. Its a naturally occurring cycle. you have been lied to by the so-called "scientists". There is no link between climate and the actions of humans on earth.

 

[Crick]

4 tenths of a degree in 60 years????????????????? can you plot the temp variations on earth for the last 500,000 years? WE are not causing this, we cannot slow or stop or reverse it. Its a naturally occurring cycle. you have been lied to by the so-called "scientists". There is no link between climate and the actions of humans on earth.

I will take it then that you reject my statement ("The primary cause of the warming observed since the Industrial Revolution and particularly in the last 50 years is human GHG emissions"). You say it is a naturally occurring cycle and that scientists are lying to us. Can you show us the cycle and what its drivers might be? Do you have any published studies that identify and explain this cycle? I know you will say that people telling the truth will not be allowed to publish in peer reviewed journals, so I ask for studies published anywhere. I just want to see what YOUR sources might be; what evidence has convinced YOU that this is the case.

And then could you explain how ALL the world's scientists were pulled into a conspiracy to create this false global warming hoax and how they have arranged to ALL produce verifiable studies that ALL arrive at the same conclusions and that not a single one of them has ever confessed to this conspiracy that by this point is quite a few decades old? Can you point us to any other instance when all the world's scientists universally conspired to foist off a lie on the public? Can you show us the enormous weatlth that these scientists must have acquired to justify their actions? Can you tell us how they communicate? CAN YOU TELL US WHO IS IN CHARGE?

 

[Blaster]

Aside from the albedo effects in summer, the loss of sea ice over winter leads to atmospheric heating from the warmer sea water.

December serving up baked Alaska and warming most of Arctic

Much of the Arctic is in a burst of freak December warming. Temperatures in Alaska’s northernmost community hit 40 degrees Monday morning.

apnews.com

Haha

 

[Redfish]

I will take it then that you reject my statement ("The primary cause of the warming observed since the Industrial Revolution and particularly in the last 50 years is human GHG emissions"). You say it is a naturally occurring cycle and that scientists are lying to us. Can you show us the cycle and what its drivers might be? Do you have any published studies that identify and explain this cycle? I know you will say that people telling the truth will not be allowed to publish in peer reviewed journals, so I ask for studies published anywhere. I just want to see what YOUR sources might be; what evidence has convinced YOU that this is the case.

And then could you explain how ALL the world's scientists were pulled into a conspiracy to create this false global warming hoax and how they have arranged to ALL produce verifiable studies that ALL arrive at the same conclusions and that not a single one of them has ever confessed to this conspiracy that by this point is quite a few decades old? Can you point us to any other instance when all the world's scientists universally conspired to foist off a lie on the public? Can you show us the enormous weatlth that these scientists must have acquired to justify their actions? Can you tell us how they communicate? CAN YOU TELL US WHO IS IN CHARGE?

your position is supported by roughly half of climate experts, most of those are also on some kind of government payroll or grant. The other half are independent experts who reject the AGW claims because they cannot be supported by actual chemical evidence and contradict the climate history of planet earth. So pay me to do a study and I will give you the answer you pay for. its really quite simple.

 

[Crick]

your position is supported by roughly half of climate experts, most of those are also on some kind of government payroll or grant. The other half are independent experts who reject the AGW claims because they cannot be supported by actual chemical evidence and contradict the climate history of planet earth. So pay me to do a study and I will give you the answer you pay for. its really quite simple.

What is your source for that claim?

 

[jc456]

Aside from the albedo effects in summer, the loss of sea ice over winter leads to atmospheric heating from the warmer sea water.

December serving up baked Alaska and warming most of Arctic

Much of the Arctic is in a burst of freak December warming. Temperatures in Alaska’s northernmost community hit 40 degrees Monday morning.

apnews.com