Climate Change - The Scientific Debate (Vol. II)
Discussion
Further interesting info regarding the odd choice of a temperature baseline for global warming.
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feart...
and my favourite quote....
"The choice of a baseline near the lower extreme of a variable parameter is uncommon in science."
..but mainstream climate science isn't really science anyway....is it?
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feart...
and my favourite quote....
"The choice of a baseline near the lower extreme of a variable parameter is uncommon in science."
..but mainstream climate science isn't really science anyway....is it?
What could possibly go wrong?
Could thinning clouds combat climate change? Scientists propose radical plan.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-63...
There's a link to something of relevance at New Scientist and the paper has apparently been published in the Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres.
So before people go off on a "Daily Wail" rant, no matter how justified it might be from a reporting perspective since this particular re-writer has previous form, it might be worth considering that this is just one of many modelling based concepts that academia is being encouraged to consider for some reason. Presumably they all relate to obtaining research money to give academics something to do.
I have no problem with pure "research". I just hope that care is taken with considering the potential effect of any recommendations that are made when it is completed.
Could thinning clouds combat climate change? Scientists propose radical plan.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-63...
There's a link to something of relevance at New Scientist and the paper has apparently been published in the Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres.
So before people go off on a "Daily Wail" rant, no matter how justified it might be from a reporting perspective since this particular re-writer has previous form, it might be worth considering that this is just one of many modelling based concepts that academia is being encouraged to consider for some reason. Presumably they all relate to obtaining research money to give academics something to do.
I have no problem with pure "research". I just hope that care is taken with considering the potential effect of any recommendations that are made when it is completed.
Edited by LongQ on Thursday 8th November 10:58
kerplunk said:
What, like compared to the billions of tons of greenhouse gases and wide variety of other chemicals, gases and particles we're pumping into the atmosphere you mean?
In the name of modern 1st world living of course. Prevent those emissions and you're stating that we should all be cave men.
kerplunk said:
What, like compared to the billions of tons of greenhouse gases and wide variety of other chemicals, gases and particles we're pumping into the atmosphere you mean?
Remind me again how much CO2 and particles and chemicals are pumped into the atmosphere by plants and volcanoes and the oceans and all other life on this planet KP? FFS it is a chaotic system which we haven't even measured properly and don't understand - all we actually know is that cold kills more than hot and anything we do to delay an ice age is an advantage to all life on this planet.
Atomic12C said:
kerplunk said:
What, like compared to the billions of tons of greenhouse gases and wide variety of other chemicals, gases and particles we're pumping into the atmosphere you mean?
In the name of modern 1st world living of course. Prevent those emissions and you're stating that we should all be cave men.
Jinx said:
kerplunk said:
What, like compared to the billions of tons of greenhouse gases and wide variety of other chemicals, gases and particles we're pumping into the atmosphere you mean?
Remind me again how much CO2 and particles and chemicals are pumped into the atmosphere by plants and volcanoes and the oceans and all other life on this planet KP? FFS it is a chaotic system which we haven't even measured properly and don't understand - all we actually know is that cold kills more than hot and anything we do to delay an ice age is an advantage to all life on this planet.
kerplunk said:
Jinx said:
kerplunk said:
What, like compared to the billions of tons of greenhouse gases and wide variety of other chemicals, gases and particles we're pumping into the atmosphere you mean?
Remind me again how much CO2 and particles and chemicals are pumped into the atmosphere by plants and volcanoes and the oceans and all other life on this planet KP? FFS it is a chaotic system which we haven't even measured properly and don't understand - all we actually know is that cold kills more than hot and anything we do to delay an ice age is an advantage to all life on this planet.
LongQ said:
kerplunk said:
Jinx said:
kerplunk said:
What, like compared to the billions of tons of greenhouse gases and wide variety of other chemicals, gases and particles we're pumping into the atmosphere you mean?
Remind me again how much CO2 and particles and chemicals are pumped into the atmosphere by plants and volcanoes and the oceans and all other life on this planet KP? FFS it is a chaotic system which we haven't even measured properly and don't understand - all we actually know is that cold kills more than hot and anything we do to delay an ice age is an advantage to all life on this planet.
What was your point then?
kerplunk said:
LongQ said:
kerplunk said:
Jinx said:
kerplunk said:
What, like compared to the billions of tons of greenhouse gases and wide variety of other chemicals, gases and particles we're pumping into the atmosphere you mean?
Remind me again how much CO2 and particles and chemicals are pumped into the atmosphere by plants and volcanoes and the oceans and all other life on this planet KP? FFS it is a chaotic system which we haven't even measured properly and don't understand - all we actually know is that cold kills more than hot and anything we do to delay an ice age is an advantage to all life on this planet.
Then you have entirely missed the point.
What was your point then?
I listened to a radio broadcast a few weeks ago talking about some plant that had spores on its leaves that directly correlated to the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere. They also had fossil records of the same plants which indicated that in the distant past (they may have mentioned dinosaurs) that the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere was up to four times the current levels.
This got me thinking about one of the claims made in support of taking action on man-made carbon emissions that we are approaching a point of no return where the greenhouse effect will run out of control and turn the climate into something similar to Venus.
IF the CO2 concentration in the past has been much, much higher, and the earth didn't suffer runaway warming, why would it now, with man-made CO2?
This got me thinking about one of the claims made in support of taking action on man-made carbon emissions that we are approaching a point of no return where the greenhouse effect will run out of control and turn the climate into something similar to Venus.
IF the CO2 concentration in the past has been much, much higher, and the earth didn't suffer runaway warming, why would it now, with man-made CO2?
Edited by Professor Barney on Thursday 13th December 12:20
Professor Barney said:
I listened to a radio broadcast a few weeks ago talking about some plant that had spores on their leaves that directly correlated to the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere. They also had fossil records of the same plants which indicated that in the distant past (they may have mentioned dinosaurs) that the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere was up to four times the current levels.
This got me thinking about one of the claims made in support of taking action on man-made carbon emissions that we are approaching a point of no return where the greenhouse effect will run out of control and turn the climate into something similar to Venus.
IF the CO2 concentration in the past has been much, much higher, and the earth didn't suffer runaway warming, why would it now, with man-made CO2?
Simple, else you cannot tax it or redistribute it.This got me thinking about one of the claims made in support of taking action on man-made carbon emissions that we are approaching a point of no return where the greenhouse effect will run out of control and turn the climate into something similar to Venus.
IF the CO2 concentration in the past has been much, much higher, and the earth didn't suffer runaway warming, why would it now, with man-made CO2?
Professor Barney said:
I listened to a radio broadcast a few weeks ago talking about some plant that had spores on its leaves that directly correlated to the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere. They also had fossil records of the same plants which indicated that in the distant past (they may have mentioned dinosaurs) that the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere was up to four times the current levels.
This got me thinking about one of the claims made in support of taking action on man-made carbon emissions that we are approaching a point of no return where the greenhouse effect will run out of control and turn the climate into something similar to Venus.
IF the CO2 concentration in the past has been much, much higher, and the earth didn't suffer runaway warming, why would it now, with man-made CO2?
It almost certainly won't. The IPCC has said that Venus levels of greenhouse effect are not plausible.This got me thinking about one of the claims made in support of taking action on man-made carbon emissions that we are approaching a point of no return where the greenhouse effect will run out of control and turn the climate into something similar to Venus.
IF the CO2 concentration in the past has been much, much higher, and the earth didn't suffer runaway warming, why would it now, with man-made CO2?
One thing that might occur though is a massive extinction event. The P-T extinction even may have been associated with a high level of CO2, something of the magnitude occurring again would probably kill all mammals (including Humans).
Flibble said:
Professor Barney said:
I listened to a radio broadcast a few weeks ago talking about some plant that had spores on its leaves that directly correlated to the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere. They also had fossil records of the same plants which indicated that in the distant past (they may have mentioned dinosaurs) that the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere was up to four times the current levels.
This got me thinking about one of the claims made in support of taking action on man-made carbon emissions that we are approaching a point of no return where the greenhouse effect will run out of control and turn the climate into something similar to Venus.
IF the CO2 concentration in the past has been much, much higher, and the earth didn't suffer runaway warming, why would it now, with man-made CO2?
It almost certainly won't. The IPCC has said that Venus levels of greenhouse effect are not plausible.This got me thinking about one of the claims made in support of taking action on man-made carbon emissions that we are approaching a point of no return where the greenhouse effect will run out of control and turn the climate into something similar to Venus.
IF the CO2 concentration in the past has been much, much higher, and the earth didn't suffer runaway warming, why would it now, with man-made CO2?
One thing that might occur though is a massive extinction event. The P-T extinction even may have been associated with a high level of CO2, something of the magnitude occurring again would probably kill all mammals (including Humans).
LoonyTunes said:
Flibble said:
Professor Barney said:
I listened to a radio broadcast a few weeks ago talking about some plant that had spores on its leaves that directly correlated to the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere. They also had fossil records of the same plants which indicated that in the distant past (they may have mentioned dinosaurs) that the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere was up to four times the current levels.
This got me thinking about one of the claims made in support of taking action on man-made carbon emissions that we are approaching a point of no return where the greenhouse effect will run out of control and turn the climate into something similar to Venus.
IF the CO2 concentration in the past has been much, much higher, and the earth didn't suffer runaway warming, why would it now, with man-made CO2?
It almost certainly won't. The IPCC has said that Venus levels of greenhouse effect are not plausible.This got me thinking about one of the claims made in support of taking action on man-made carbon emissions that we are approaching a point of no return where the greenhouse effect will run out of control and turn the climate into something similar to Venus.
IF the CO2 concentration in the past has been much, much higher, and the earth didn't suffer runaway warming, why would it now, with man-made CO2?
One thing that might occur though is a massive extinction event. The P-T extinction even may have been associated with a high level of CO2, something of the magnitude occurring again would probably kill all mammals (including Humans).
TX.
Terminator X said:
LoonyTunes said:
Flibble said:
Professor Barney said:
I listened to a radio broadcast a few weeks ago talking about some plant that had spores on its leaves that directly correlated to the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere. They also had fossil records of the same plants which indicated that in the distant past (they may have mentioned dinosaurs) that the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere was up to four times the current levels.
This got me thinking about one of the claims made in support of taking action on man-made carbon emissions that we are approaching a point of no return where the greenhouse effect will run out of control and turn the climate into something similar to Venus.
IF the CO2 concentration in the past has been much, much higher, and the earth didn't suffer runaway warming, why would it now, with man-made CO2?
It almost certainly won't. The IPCC has said that Venus levels of greenhouse effect are not plausible.This got me thinking about one of the claims made in support of taking action on man-made carbon emissions that we are approaching a point of no return where the greenhouse effect will run out of control and turn the climate into something similar to Venus.
IF the CO2 concentration in the past has been much, much higher, and the earth didn't suffer runaway warming, why would it now, with man-made CO2?
One thing that might occur though is a massive extinction event. The P-T extinction even may have been associated with a high level of CO2, something of the magnitude occurring again would probably kill all mammals (including Humans).
TX.
TX - You're querying something called equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS). This is one of the many, er, discussion points on climate. 1.5-4.5°C per doubling of CO2 concentration acc. to the IPCC. Lower limit revised down from 2° at the last issue. Even this "official" figure has, as you can see, a huge range. Sceptics observe that the actual figure is at least at the low end if not even lower. The more shrill alarmists consider scenarios with even higher values than the official range. You makes your choice etc
jet_noise said:
Terminator X said:
LoonyTunes said:
Flibble said:
Professor Barney said:
I listened to a radio broadcast a few weeks ago talking about some plant that had spores on its leaves that directly correlated to the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere. They also had fossil records of the same plants which indicated that in the distant past (they may have mentioned dinosaurs) that the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere was up to four times the current levels.
This got me thinking about one of the claims made in support of taking action on man-made carbon emissions that we are approaching a point of no return where the greenhouse effect will run out of control and turn the climate into something similar to Venus.
IF the CO2 concentration in the past has been much, much higher, and the earth didn't suffer runaway warming, why would it now, with man-made CO2?
It almost certainly won't. The IPCC has said that Venus levels of greenhouse effect are not plausible.This got me thinking about one of the claims made in support of taking action on man-made carbon emissions that we are approaching a point of no return where the greenhouse effect will run out of control and turn the climate into something similar to Venus.
IF the CO2 concentration in the past has been much, much higher, and the earth didn't suffer runaway warming, why would it now, with man-made CO2?
One thing that might occur though is a massive extinction event. The P-T extinction even may have been associated with a high level of CO2, something of the magnitude occurring again would probably kill all mammals (including Humans).
TX.
TX - You're querying something called equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS). This is one of the many, er, discussion points on climate. 1.5-4.5°C per doubling of CO2 concentration acc. to the IPCC. Lower limit revised down from 2° at the last issue. Even this "official" figure has, as you can see, a huge range. Sceptics observe that the actual figure is at least at the low end if not even lower. The more shrill alarmists consider scenarios with even higher values than the official range. You makes your choice etc
It seems to me most sceptics think climate sensitivity is low based on a disbelief in climate model projections but that's just argument from incredulity isn't it.
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff