Climate Change may not be a bad our best brains feared.
Discussion
Disco Infiltrator said:
jet_noise said:
Much of your post, WoD, is reasoned. This however is tin-foil-conspiracy cobblers.
What you need to be asking is who is funding all the alarmist papers?
And why is there so much money available for them?
Well, the world's richest country is also our largest battery manufacturer.What you need to be asking is who is funding all the alarmist papers?
And why is there so much money available for them?
China.
Elon Musk.
Vested interest much?
grumbledoak said:
Quite.
And, rising sea level - be afraid! - in perspective:
Don't rising sea levels have more to do with what's on it (an ever increasing number of boats and ships etc, as the worlds's population grows and grows) and in it (dumping ground, ditto the ever growing population).And, rising sea level - be afraid! - in perspective:
Disco Infiltrator said:
Don't rising sea levels have more to do with what's on it (an ever increasing number of boats and ships etc, as the worlds's population grows and grows) and in it (dumping ground, ditto the ever growing population).
I doubt those are measurable. Glaciers on land would be my guess.But that's no use, see. Because it's not our fault! No leverage.
Jinx said:
durbster said:
The data is all out there, in the public domain.
And when you show people the data and it upsets them, they claim the data is corrupt, and instead choose to believe the version that makes them feel more comfortable.
The unmodified data is not in the public domain Durbs - this has been pointed out to you many times. Some of the raw data has even been lost by those charged with it's upkeep (step forward Prof. Phil Jones). You can get hold of some of the underlying data used to plot the various global temperatures but do not confuse these values with raw data. And when you show people the data and it upsets them, they claim the data is corrupt, and instead choose to believe the version that makes them feel more comfortable.
Considering the temperature record is supported by every single known method of measuring temperature, I doubt it but thanks for proving my second point.
Thankfully, all the Anti-Climate Change Conspiracy Theorists, those who were useless at school but now think they have miraculously gained IQ due to the 'University of Life, innit Guv' and anyone who simply just does not understand accelerated Climate Change beyond the Natural Order of things simply do not have a voice large enough to make a blind bit of difference
The consensus Globally is that we have been seeing an accelerated change to our Climate conditions owing to human intervention and there is a collective Will to combat it. Sure, it is complex, sure we will see anomalies and sure, we may see small changes on our part make larger than expected gains in improving the situation. Nothing discounts the absolute fact that without human technology impacted upon the environment, the Earth's natural progress would be a tad slower. Minutely so. But we are affected by relatively minute adjustments. As such, the effects of Climate Change have to be measured over a human-scale timeframe.
With the 'Flat-Earthers' and Moon-landing Conspiracy Theorists at least they caused no harm, the opposite could be true in the case of Climate Change but happily they aren't powerful enough, even the 'Dotard' is being curtailed.
Coolbanana said:
Thankfully, all the Anti-Climate Change Conspiracy Theorists, those who were useless at school but now think they have miraculously gained IQ due to the 'University of Life, innit Guv' and anyone who simply just does not understand accelerated Climate Change beyond the Natural Order of things simply do not have a voice large enough to make a blind bit of difference
The consensus Globally is that we have been seeing an accelerated change to our Climate conditions owing to human intervention and there is a collective Will to combat it. Sure, it is complex, sure we will see anomalies and sure, we may see small changes on our part make larger than expected gains in improving the situation. Nothing discounts the absolute fact that without human technology impacted upon the environment, the Earth's natural progress would be a tad slower. Minutely so. But we are affected by relatively minute adjustments. As such, the effects of Climate Change have to be measured over a human-scale timeframe.
With the 'Flat-Earthers' and Moon-landing Conspiracy Theorists at least they caused no harm, the opposite could be true in the case of Climate Change but happily they aren't powerful enough, even the 'Dotard' is being curtailed.
Jinx said:
durbster said:
Oh yes, I'm sure all the raw data shows something completely different and would change everything.
QED
Who knows what it is since you neglected to provide its origin (looks like it's from the Jo Nova blog from the URL).
Jinx said:
hairykrishna said:
Look at all the surface data; land and ocean. Take out all the adjustments. Warming trend increases.
Only because of the "adjustment" for the UHI effect. Leave that one in but take out the rest and what is the trend HK?hairykrishna said:
Jinx said:
hairykrishna said:
Look at all the surface data; land and ocean. Take out all the adjustments. Warming trend increases.
Only because of the "adjustment" for the UHI effect. Leave that one in but take out the rest and what is the trend HK?The effect of UHI would be dependant upon the placement of measuring devices whether inside or outside of UHI environments.
However, we are in danger of breaking the PH CC thread proliferation treaty here!
hairykrishna said:
The same? UHI have next to no effect on the trend.
No but the UHI adjustments do (the adjustments have a net negative affect on the trend as expected though probably not as much as the actual UHI effect - hence the if you remove all adjustments the trend increases) .How to lie with graphs 101.
Jinx said:
No but the UHI adjustments do (the adjustments have a net negative affect on the trend as expected though probably not as much as the actual UHI effect - hence the if you remove all adjustments the trend increases) .
How to lie with graphs 101.
No, the reason that the trend increases if you remove all adjustments is that the net adjustment to ocean temperatures is 'cooling' and there's more ocean area than land. The idea that adjustments made to the raw data are somehow exaggerating or creating the warming trend is nonsense.How to lie with graphs 101.
hairykrishna said:
No, the reason that the trend increases if you remove all adjustments is that the net adjustment to ocean temperatures is 'cooling' and there's more ocean area than land. The idea that adjustments made to the raw data are somehow exaggerating or creating the warming trend is nonsense.
To be fair the presumption that there is any actual long term record of oceanic temperatures is nonsense.hairykrishna said:
No, the reason that the trend increases if you remove all adjustments is that the net adjustment to ocean temperatures is 'cooling' and there's more ocean area than land. The idea that adjustments made to the raw data are somehow exaggerating or creating the warming trend is nonsense.
Not on the Argo it isn't. Are you talking about the Karlized temperature series?Kawasicki said:
Coolbanana said:
we are affected by relatively minute adjustments
Is that why we didn't make it through the truly gigantic temperature swings in the past? Or why today humans can only live in certain climates?Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff