Climate change

[Mugwump]

^ Skids, Kukla might be right .... but he might be wrong, because we cannot disprove his theory. We know that CO2 and CH4 trap heat in a thermal system, and we know that the ppm of these gases is rising fast.

I don't think we have to decide what is right and wrong here - but we should acknowledge that we are taking an unacceptable risk with our children's future by continuing to throw CO2 into the atmosphere, when there is a good probability that the mainstream hypothesis is correct, and we can see a path to a different energy mix.

[Skids]

^

You haven't lived in Aus for how long?

Left in 1998, so 18 years. Visit regularly, usually for several weeks in August, where it seems to me that the nights below zero are noticeably fewer than they were in 1996-98. In any event, the Australian BOM record data is clear, as is the effect on coral in the Barrier Reef.

It is certainly clearly observable in Northern Europe. I've lived in the Uk, NL or Germany from 1991-94, then 1998-2017 (Australia in the 1994-1998 period). The change in the severity of winters here in that time is striking, visible in the timing of daffodil and crocus, the days of snow cover, and the average winter day temperature.

So.... the planet is how many billion... yes, billion years old?

And you take a few decades to analyze the changing climate?

FMD the lunatics have taken over the asylum!

That's like taking a nano second from a year as your control piece.

[Skids]

^ Skids, Kukla might be right .... but he might be wrong, because we cannot disprove his theory. We know that CO2 and CH4 trap heat in a thermal system, and we know that the ppm of these gases is rising fast.

I don't think we have to decide what is right and wrong here - but we should acknowledge that we are taking an unacceptable risk with our children's future by continuing to throw CO2 into the atmosphere, when there is a good probability that the mainstream hypothesis is correct, and we can see a path to a different energy mix.

Ok, let's accept that theory.... can mankind, control and alter the path with; emmision taxes and control of our future fossil fuel burning demands? Really? Please, to think we can manipulate the scores of variables is farcical.

[Mugwump]

^ Skids, Kukla might be right .... but he might be wrong, because we cannot disprove his theory. We know that CO2 and CH4 trap heat in a thermal system, and we know that the ppm of these gases is rising fast.

I don't think we have to decide what is right and wrong here - but we should acknowledge that we are taking an unacceptable risk with our children's future by continuing to throw CO2 into the atmosphere, when there is a good probability that the mainstream hypothesis is correct, and we can see a path to a different energy mix.

Ok, let's accept that theory.... can mankind, control and alter the path with; emmision taxes and control of our future fossil fuel burning demands? Really? Please, to think we can manipulate the scores of variables is farcical.

^ There is only one major variable that we need to manipulate - CO2. The other variables are problems for the certainty we can attach to predictive models. But they are not the point. To address this risk, we need to control CO2 emissions. Emissions taxes seem a good place to start, especially as economic agents, such as businesses, respond strongly to economic incentives. The bigger issue, however, is China - though even they are beginning to get the point. I have more sympathy with the argument that small economies with a low CO2 count are pissing into the wind unless the USA and China and India take action.

[watt price tully]

[Skids]

[Skids]

The effects of long term oxygen deprivation on the brain, called cerebral hypoxia, are known and some sound reminiscent of the general rise of stupidity in the industrialized world.

And the belief that man can 'control' the climate is clear evidence of that!

Look, I'm all for renewable energy; recycling & all the other clean solutions. Fossil fuels will run out and we need an alternative.

We have as much ability to control the climate as we do to stop the next super volcanoe erupting or meteor hitting the planet... none!

The climate change furfy is a waste of trillions of dollars.... hey, they could use that money to feed and house as many refugees as you like..... but then, how many more people can this rock sustain?

[David]

I think this chart posted by Tannin a while back is a good representation of how humans can and have altered the climate:

http://magpies.net/nick/bb/viewtopic.php?t=80918

[Skids]

I think this chart posted by Tannin a while back is a good representation of how humans can and have altered the climate:

http://magpies.net/nick/bb/viewtopic.php?t=80918

Maybe humans have altered it.... but control it?

And that is only 22,000 years, the planet is 4.5 billion years old.

Representing 0.000004% of the planets timeline, hardly conclusive.

[David]

[Skids]

[Skids]

Rise in CO2 has 'greened Planet Earth'

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-36130346

Nic Lewis, an independent scientist often critical of the IPCC, told BBC News: "The magnitude of the increase in vegetation appears to be considerably larger than suggested by previous studies.

"This suggests that projected atmospheric CO2 levels in IPCC scenarios are significantly too high, which implies that global temperature rises projected by IPCC models are also too high, even if the climate is as sensitive to CO2 increases as the models imply."
And Prof Judith Curry, the former chair of Earth and atmospheric sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology, added: "It is inappropriate to dismiss the arguments of the so-called contrarians, since their disagreement with the consensus reflects conflicts of values and a preference for the empirical (i.e. what has been observed) versus the hypothetical (i.e. what is projected from climate models).

"These disagreements are at the heart of the public debate on climate change, and these issues should be debated, not dismissed."





Judith A. Curry

Nationality American
Education B.S. (1974) in geography, Ph.D. in geophysical sciences (1982)
Alma mater Northern Illinois University, University of Chicago
Thesis The formation of continental polar air (1982)

Judith A. Curry is an American climatologist and former chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology. Her research interests include hurricanes, remote sensing, atmospheric modeling, polar climates, air-sea interactions, and the use of unmanned aerial vehicles for atmospheric research. She is a member of the National Research Council's Climate Research Committee

[Pies4shaw]

^^^^ This is what we call an "externality effect". It might be useful, though, to have some more shade as the effects of climate change take hold.

[stui magpie]

http://blog.dilbert.com/post/1551429284 ... mate-model

http://blog.dilbert.com/post/1553040949 ... s-more-co2

Climate Change is yet another topic where there can be no rational debate, as to question it is to be labelled a denier and abused and insulted.

It's really hard to get a handle on it's impact in Australia because we have the prevailing competing El Nino and La Nina weather patterns.

Is it getting hotter in Melbourne? In the 80's we had a grandfinal played in 30+ degrees and a Melbourne Cup run in 40+.

I tend on the side that using more renewable energy rather than burning fossil fuel can only be a good thing, but the big picture needs to be looked at here, not just the rhetoric.

[Pies4shaw]

No, there can be no rational debate because it is not capable of rational dispute by people who aren't climate-scientists. They can debate it amongst themselves. Charles Darwin, eg, wasn't a professional journalist peddling an angle out of self-interest.