Su Moo Nein The Belgium Comeex Foliatet Hist Wat Is Leepking Ingin Thes Tifler
-
@cartman82, @cartman82, @cartman82!
Did it work?
He's probably having a late lunch or something. Check back later.
-
What?
Anita Sarkeesian sucks. Yay rape threats. Ride a bike once in a while, lazy Americans, your gas guzzlers will send us all under the sea.
There, happy?
-
-
How about "no net increase in average temperature"?
Wrong.And in spite of the Greenland Ice Sheet--you do recall that local effects aren't climate, right?
The global climate is the sum of local effects, and a drastic shift in local effects should be something to take notice of.
last year or the year before, the Arctic ice pack had record growth.
And yet that still wasn't enough to prevent the last two years from being amidst the 10 smallest minimums in recorded history. Also, all ten of those top 10 are the last ten years. (see Table 2)
-
You can't argue faith with statistics.
-
True, but I still feel obliged to warn my arctic cousins of the slow disaster that's striking their habitat.
-
Snow-bras?
-
And suddenly you just made half this forum pro-global-warming.
-
-
-
No sane people outside US question global warming is human caused. Its a very american thing, like teaching criationism in schools.
-
No sane people outside US question global warming is human caused.
You are crazy and wrong. But I can live with that.
-
It shouldn't surprise me that you flat out ignore the vast majority of the scientific community in regards to climate change, considering you flat out ignore the medical community in regards to a wide variety of other things, but still, somehow, it does. Perhaps because this particular set of facts is based on hard data, whereas the others are based on aggregate personal accounts, so it's even more impressive that you ignore this.
-
No sane people outside US question global warming
I'm outside US and I recently had to get a medical exam to renew my driver's license, so I'm officially legally sane (not that they checked for insanity specifically).
I doubt global warming is human caused to the extent where it would matter. We probably are affecting it a bit, but so what.
More importantly, say we assume global warming is happening and is caused by humans.
Should we abandon all progress now because it might happen to have some consequences in the distant future?
-
I doubt global warming is human caused to the extent where it would matter. We probably are affecting it a bit, but so what.
There's a lot of existing global warming from things like water vapour, but we have the climate that is (pretty much) the equilibrium point of all that. Adding in extra CO2 and CH4 — and we've been doing rather a lot of both, though not always intentionally — shifts the equilibrium point.
How much it does it and what that all means… is rather up in the air. We've got simulations about it, of course, but that doesn't mean that they're true. The sort of thing that scientists are really worried about though are stuff that might impact on the global ability to produce food, such as the US Midwest becoming significantly drier. That would be a major OhShit, and the amount of inertia in the system is such that once it starts happening, we've no other choice than to be screwed…
Current state: we can detect that the global CO2 levels are higher than they used to be, that global average temperature is going up, and that we might be staring at big problems. What the problems are… well, if we knew that for sure then they wouldn't be nearly so big a set of problems. Climate and weather forecasting are difficult.
-
When Freeman Dyson, a brilliant scientist who has been researching climate change since before most of us were even born, says, "You know, most people are being fuckwits about it," perhaps people should listen up.
-
There's a lot of existing global warming from things like water vapour, but we have the climate that is (pretty much) the equilibrium point of all that. Adding in extra CO2 and CH4 — and we've been doing rather a lot of both, though not always intentionally — shifts the equilibrium point.
There used to be next to no oxygen in Earth atmosphere at one point in time. Is the couple thousand times more oxygen that much of a problem for Earth's life in general? Do you think it will matter in couple million years that the temperature is several kelvins higher?The equilibrium point is always shifting, and the Earth's biosphere accomodates. It's only natural for changes to happen.
-
The equilibrium point is always shifting, and the Earth's biosphere accomodates. It's only natural for changes to happen.
The Earth will be fine! Humanity might not, and civilization might be screwed.
-
Freeman Dyson
who in his spare time invented a vacuum cleaner you operate with a crowbar
-
It shouldn't surprise me that you flat out ignore the vast majority of the scientific community in regards to climate change, considering you flat out ignore the medical community in regards to a wide variety of other things, but still, somehow, it does.
I have ignored neither.
Perhaps because this particular set of facts is based on hard data, whereas the others are based on aggregate personal accounts, so it's even more impressive that you ignore this.
You are awesome at being wrong.
-
The Earth will be fine! Humanity might not, and civilization might be screwed.
Who cares about civilization? Certainly not those who want to shut down factories or who trade emission limits.
-
protect teachers at all costsProtect the union dues at all costs
They want actual problems to go away as stupidly and quietly as possibleIt's right there in the chart
You always refer to this "Chart! From NASA!", so I decided to go look for it instead of asking, assuming that would annoy you. Low and behold the first chart I find is this
Global Surface Temperature | NASA Global Climate Change
Vital Signs of the Planet: Global Climate Change and Global Warming. Current news and data streams about global warming and climate change from NASA.
So, I kind of want to see your chart now please. I would like to compare
-
The problem, PER USUAL, is that morons see the issue as black and white.
I'm one of the greys, so I can't participate on either side of the "global warming debate" because the people who believe will bucket me as a "denier" and the people who don't will bucket me as a "supporter".
I believe global warming is real, human-caused, but:
-
not that big a deal (we've survived as a race vastly more devastating events in the past and that was before we had air conditioners and microwave burritos and all kinds of wondrous modern technologies)
-
probably not worth reversing, even were it possible, which is probably is not
So I believe in global warming, but oppose any government legislation based on it.
WHICH BUCKET AM I IN BLACK AND WHITE BINARY PEOPLE!
-
-
The Earth will be fine! Humanity might not, and civilization might be screwed.
See, this is the shit that gets me.
What about the Earth's average temperature rising gradually a few degrees every century leads to "civilization might be screwed?" I mean the temperature has been rising the last 20-30 years, right? And those years have been (on average) the most peaceful and prosperous in human history. So... what's the disconnect?
I just don't have the imagination to come up with these "screwed civilization" scenarios. Like... is the slightly warmer temperature going to wake up Godzilla from his million-year slumber, or...?
-
You always refer to this "Chart! From NASA!", so I decided to go look for it instead of asking, assuming that would annoy you. Low and behold the first chart I find is this
What that page doesn't say is that NASA "adjusted" the data before drawing it. Oddly enough, they raised the temperatures in recent decades and lowered them farther out in the past, without any explanation that makes sense.
-
-
1) not that big a deal (we've survived as a race vastly more devastating events in the past and that was before we had air conditioners and microwave burritos and all kinds of wondrous modern technologies)
- probably not worth reversing, even were it possible, which is probably is not
The planet may, in fact, be warming. However, if so, it's looking to be around 1C or less per decade (or even century? I can't keep track any longer.)
The planet's been warmer in the past than it is now, even in recorded history, and what historical records there are seem to show most places being a bit more hospitable now than they were then.
To people who think WE MUST DO SOMETHING NOW, consider this: 40 years ago, when there was a spell where everyone was worrying about a new ice age coming, the solutions all seemed to involved wrecking the economy of the first world to give tons of money to the UN. Somehow, when the consensus is the place is getting hotter, the exact same solution applies. Doesn't that seem just a little weird?
-
Oh God. Don't agree with me, you idiot.
I do not believe that global warming (or global cooling) is a conspiracy from the UN to redistribute wealth. I do believe FrostCat has an IQ of roughly 7.
-
Oh God. Don't agree with me, you idiot.
Why? Does that make you rethink your life choices?
Hey, here's another crazy idea: the West has been reducing pollution for decades, while the Russians and Chinese (and probably Indians) are dumping huge amounts of it into the air, land, and water. How is it that the West crippling its economy going to reverse global warming if the East keeps polluting?
I do not believe that global warming (or global cooling) is a conspiracy from the UN to redistribute wealth.
I don't think it's necessarily a conspiracy as such, either, and not necessarily by the UN per se even if it were. But the UN certainly has its hand out. It's an excellent graft machine, the UN.
I do believe FrostCat has an IQ of roughly 7.
Man, it must really hurt your worldview when I don't disagree with you, then.
-
-
WHICH BUCKET AM I IN BLACK AND WHITE BINARY PEOPLE!
The "crazy, rabid, zombie rats who apparently don't know that questions are supposed to end with question marks" bucket. It's a small bucket.
-
I'm serious. Show me your chart/data/source/whatever. I've been very curious and held out from asking but I want to see it.
I guess I screwed something up?
FWIW, I had to build that quote by hand. Yay Discourse
-
-
Of all the possible explanations for global warming drama, the two that make most sense are:
- The crazy ecologists are right and that we indeed messed up the ecosystem so much we're all going to die;
- Some entity bigger than any nation wants to take over the world by mass psychological terror.
Everything else is easily provable to be wrong.
-
Should we abandon all progress now because it might happen to have some consequences in the distant future?
Not to mention that abandoning all progress will prevent future technology advances that may fix the problem.
-
I'm serious. Show me your chart/data/source/whatever. I've been very curious and held out from asking but I want to see it.
Q. Why can't we use just raw data? A. Just averaging the raw data would give results that are highly dependent on the particular locations (latitude and elevation) and reporting periods of the actual weather stations; such results would mostly reflect those accidental circumstances rather than yield meaningful information about our climate.
Q. Can you illustrate the above with a simple example?
A. Assume, e.g., that a station at the bottom of a mountain sent in reports continuously starting in 1880 and assume that a station was built near the top of that mountain and started reporting in 1900. Since those new temperatures are much lower than the temperatures from the station in the valley, averaging the two temperature series would create a substantial temperature drop starting in 1900.Q. How can we combine the data of the two stations above in a meaningful way?
A. What may be done before combining those data is to increase the new data or lower the old ones until the two series seem consistent. How much we have to adjust these data may be estimated by comparing the time period with reports from both stations: After the offset, the averages over the common period should be equal. (This is the basis for the GISS method). As new data become available, the offset determined using that method may change. This explains why additional recent data can impact also much earlier data in any regional or global time series.Then you see shit like this http://borepatch.blogspot.com/2009/10/ripogenus-dam.html where it turns out that they decommissioned a data gathering station and essentially made up data for it for another 11 years.
-
Then you see shit like this http://borepatch.blogspot.com/2009/10/ripogenus-dam.html where it turns out that they decommissioned a data gathering station and essentially made up data for it for another 11 years.
Which should raise the question of what else they're lying about.
-
How is it that the West crippling its economy going to reverse global warming if the East keeps polluting?
Why are you fucking asking me? I don't agree that that's true, as I JUST FUCKING POSTED YOU FUCKING MORON!
I don't think it's necessarily a conspiracy as such, either, and not necessarily by the UN per se even if it were. But the UN certainly has its hand out. It's an excellent graft machine, the UN.
Right, that darned One World Government and it's secret tunnels under every capital on Earth the reptilians use to contact the queen of England who is one of them so they can declare war against the thetans and put gold fringe on courtroom flags everywhere. BUT IT'S NOT A CONSPIRACY THEORY!
Man, it must really hurt your worldview when I don't disagree with you, then.
It hurts a position when the Dumbest Person On Earth starts agreeing with it, yes. Especially if the reason why they're agreeing with it is because they're paranoid lunatics and have nothing to do with, say, logic or reason.
-
The crazy ecologists are right and that we indeed messed up the ecosystem so much we're all going to die;
Ok; but what exactly is going to kill us? People don't just suddenly drop dead for no reason.
Some entity bigger than any nation wants to take over the world by mass psychological terror.
I'm hoping you put this option here as a way of making fun of FrostCat and you don't seriously believe this is true.
-
Why are you fucking asking me?
You've got a big ego, friend.
Right, that darned One World Government and it's secret tunnels under every capital on Earth the reptilians use to contact the queen of England who is one of them so they can declare war against the thetans and put gold fringe on courtroom flags everywhere. BUT IT'S NOT A CONSPIRACY THEORY!
Slow news day or something? "A bunch of people trying to cash in on a scam" doesn't need a conspiracy with a guy in a white suit and a longhaired cat.
It hurts a position when the Dumbest Person On Earth starts agreeing with it, yes
It would suck to be you if that person did, though, I guess.
-
Slow news day or something? "A bunch of people trying to cash in on a scam" doesn't need a conspiracy with a guy in a white suit and a longhaired cat.
Until you have a smidgen of evidence to back this assertion up, it's a conspiracy theory.
-
doesn't need a conspiracy with a guy in a white suit and a longhaired cat.
No, but conspiracy theories are definitely better with them.
-
@FrostCat said:
doesn't need a conspiracy with a guy in a white suit and a longhaired cat.
No, but conspiracy theories are definitely better with them.
True, and Blakey's even got a cat.
-
Until you have a smidgen of evidence to back this assertion up, it's a conspiracy theory.
You are a conspiracy theory.
-
Then you see shit like this http://borepatch.blogspot.com/2009/10/ripogenus-dam.html
I don't get why he has a problem with the data coming from millinocket. It should have been marked as such of course, but there would be no actual difference. Millinocket maine is no less random wilderness than anywhere else out there, meaning it is a valid source for a temperature from rural locations.
Looks like a fun dataset to take a look at!
I don't get why you think NASA would purposely make it look like global warming was more of a thing than it is. If the government is concerned with global warming, they will probably divert funds that would go to NASA away from them to "eco" projects.
-
If the government is concerned with global warming, they will probably divert funds that would go to NASA away from them to "eco" projects.
Who do you think get paid to build the rockets to put the satellites in orbit? Well, actually, I guess it's LockMart or Boeing, but NASA needs lots of bodies in seats to monitor them or something.
-
Who do you think get paid to build the rockets to put the satellites in orbit?
Mostly the russians right now. And SpaceX, and in fact, pretty much everyone but NASA, and since I know you have to be at least a little intelligent to work at NASA, they would have changed tactics by now if that was there actual goal
I don't understand why people are always so convinced that there is a rediculous conspiracy behind everything. Are they just projecting? Do you conspire to fuck over everyone you know for your own benefit? I just want to live my damn life and eat food sometimes. I am much more likely to believe a mistake or fuckup was because of ineptitude, not malice
-
-
-
Ok; but what exactly is going to kill us?
Floods, mostly. And then eternal winter.People don't just suddenly drop dead for no reason.
I'm hoping you put this option here as a way of making fun of FrostCat and you don't seriously believe this is true.
I'm just saying it's more consistent theory than that governments spending trillions of bucks really has any significant effect on global warming.
:car:
Climate change - Wikipedia
lo and behold - Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Data.GISS: GISTEMP -- Frequently Asked Questions
