Climate Change - The Scientific Debate (Vol. II)
Discussion
kerplunk][adopts patronising nasal tone said:
The simple maxim that the climate science thread is for climate science discussion, not power generation policy, gets lost on AGW denial zealots.
Well have a word with Gadgetmac, his last post was from a advocacy site containing scientists and journalists, an eclectic mix you will agree . QuantumTokoloshi said:
Gadgetmac said:
QuantumTokoloshi said:
A question which made no sense. Not surprising I did not respond.
Much like your point here, the irrational focus on carbon neutral renewables due to AGW has consequences when weather and climate do not follow the script.
The simple maxim of No wind, no sun, no renewable power gets lost amongst all the CO2 zealotry. I like living in the 21 st century, and when the adherence to AGW religion, starts causing an energy generation shortfall, it becomes everyone's issue, including the scientific basis for the decisions taken.
There's a thread specifically for you conspiracy theorists. You bring nothing to this one.Much like your point here, the irrational focus on carbon neutral renewables due to AGW has consequences when weather and climate do not follow the script.
The simple maxim of No wind, no sun, no renewable power gets lost amongst all the CO2 zealotry. I like living in the 21 st century, and when the adherence to AGW religion, starts causing an energy generation shortfall, it becomes everyone's issue, including the scientific basis for the decisions taken.
There is a thread for your conspiracy theories, It is called, what Sci-fi have you read today. You bring comedy to this thread.
PRTVR said:
kerplunk][adopts patronising nasal tone said:
The simple maxim that the climate science thread is for climate science discussion, not power generation policy, gets lost on AGW denial zealots.
Well have a word with Gadgetmac, his last post was from a advocacy site containing scientists and journalists, an eclectic mix you will agree . 
It must really rankle that I can post new science papers on a daily basis on here whilst you’re busy quoting anything but that.
Love it
Yeah, sorry for quoting “scientists”.Gadgetmac said:
jshell said:
Gadgetmac said:
You bring nothing to this one.
f
k. Me. The irony! Glad I dipped in to see this one. I'll be off again now. 
Every time you’re asked to post some science you quickly scuttle off to other threads...
jshell said:
No, you're incorrect. You deluged this thread with endless fluff and some of us just left. Carry on though.
Again, no science, just the calling of scientific studies “fluff”.You left because you realised you had no answer to the sheer volume of published science saying that you don’t know what you’re talking about.
jshell said:
Gadgetmac said:
jshell said:
Gadgetmac said:
You bring nothing to this one.
fk. Me. The irony! Glad I dipped in to see this one. I'll be off again now. Every time you’re asked to post some science you quickly scuttle off to other threads...
kerplunk said:
You've never discussed science on this thread in your life
You know, it's funny but you're correct. I always stuck to the politics thread as I found the spin-off effects of the subject much more interesting than people repeating the battles being fought on a thousand other websites over 'my science says this' v's 'my science says that'.jshell said:
kerplunk said:
You've never discussed science on this thread in your life
You know, it's funny but you're correct. I always stuck to the politics thread as I found the spin-off effects of the subject much more interesting than people repeating the battles being fought on a thousand other websites over 'my science says this' v's 'my science says that'.jshell said:
kerplunk said:
yeah a real no-mark who just turns up here now and again to wave your ass around.
That's beneath you. I was being fairly contrite after you pointed something out. I always thought you were better than that, but obviously not.2020 one of three hottest years ever recorded: UN
https://phys.org/news/2020-12-hottest-years.html
This year is on course to be one of the three warmest ever recorded and could even top the record set in 2016, the United Nations said Wednesday.
The past six years, 2015 to 2020, are therefore set to make up all six of the hottest years since modern records began in 1850, the UN's World Meteorological Organization said in its provisional 2020 State of the Global Climate report.
https://phys.org/news/2020-12-hottest-years.html
This year is on course to be one of the three warmest ever recorded and could even top the record set in 2016, the United Nations said Wednesday.
The past six years, 2015 to 2020, are therefore set to make up all six of the hottest years since modern records began in 1850, the UN's World Meteorological Organization said in its provisional 2020 State of the Global Climate report.
Chester35 said:
Why is this thread so long?
Compared to the rest.
You don't get the same for the Ozone hole or pollutants.
Are people wearing science hats or political hats?
Some are wearing science hats and some are wearing conspiracy/political hats. A quick skim through the thread will let you know who's wearing what headgear.Compared to the rest.
You don't get the same for the Ozone hole or pollutants.
Are people wearing science hats or political hats?
Chester35 said:
Why is this thread so long?
Compared to the rest.
You don't get the same for the Ozone hole or pollutants.
Are people wearing science hats or political hats?
Some are wearing “science” hats and some are wearing “I’ll believe what I’m told by people who are ideologically/emotionally/financially/etc. involved in the topic” hats.Compared to the rest.
You don't get the same for the Ozone hole or pollutants.
Are people wearing science hats or political hats?
Have a look at glyphosate pesticides and cancer risk for a similar story.
More “fluff” or as others might see it peer reviewed science in the journal The Cryosphere 
Greenland ice sheet faces irreversible melting
Most detailed ever study of Greenland ice sheet warns of irreversible ice loss
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/12/2012...
https://tc.copernicus.org/articles/14/4299/2020/
Extract:
Scientists predict Greenland ice sheet will pass a threshold beyond which it will never fully regrow and sea levels will be permanently higher in as little as 600 years under current climate change projections, as Greenland's climate would be permanently altered as the ice sheet shrinks.
In a study published this week in The Cryosphere, researchers from the National Centre for Atmospheric Science and University of Reading demonstrate how climate change could lead to irreversible sea level rise as temperatures continue to rise and the Greenland ice sheet continues to decline.
The massive ice sheet faces a point of no return, beyond which it will no longer fully regrow, permanently changing sea levels around the world.
Greenland ice sheet faces irreversible melting
Most detailed ever study of Greenland ice sheet warns of irreversible ice loss
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/12/2012...
https://tc.copernicus.org/articles/14/4299/2020/
Extract:
Scientists predict Greenland ice sheet will pass a threshold beyond which it will never fully regrow and sea levels will be permanently higher in as little as 600 years under current climate change projections, as Greenland's climate would be permanently altered as the ice sheet shrinks.
In a study published this week in The Cryosphere, researchers from the National Centre for Atmospheric Science and University of Reading demonstrate how climate change could lead to irreversible sea level rise as temperatures continue to rise and the Greenland ice sheet continues to decline.
The massive ice sheet faces a point of no return, beyond which it will no longer fully regrow, permanently changing sea levels around the world.
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff