Slashdot Mirror
We're Creating a Perfect Storm of Unprecedented Global Warming (popsci.com)
An anonymous reader shares a report: If we do nothing to reduce our carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, by the end of this century the Earth will be as hot as it was 50 million years ago in the early Eocene, according to a new study out today in the journal Nature Communications. This period -- roughly 15 million years after dinosaurs went extinct and 49.8 million years before modern humans appeared on the scene -- was 16F to 25F warmer than the modern norm. [...] During the Eocene, it took more atmospheric CO2 to influence temperatures than it does today. In fact, if we don't change our behavior, 2100 will be as hot as the Eocene with much less atmospheric CO2 than was present at the time. A hotter sun means we get more bang for our CO2 buck. "Climate change denialists often mention that CO2 was high in the past, that it was warm in the past, so this means there's nothing to worry about," said lead study author Gavin Foster, a researcher in isotope geochemistry and paleoceanography at the United Kingdom's University of Southampton. "It's certainly true, that the CO2 was high in the past and that it was warm in the past. But because the sun was dimmer, the climate wasn't being forced as much [as it will be] in the future if we carry on as we are."
Agreed, you being pissed off is retarded and irrelevant.
Wait! What the fuck did he just say? Rewind that.
fzfzfzfbllyrpffffeeep...
PAUSE.
You mean to say the sun is hotter and, as a result, is having an effect? You know, contrary to the bullshit all the AGW evangelistas have been spewing these many years? Ok, gotcha.
sig: sauer
They're both absurd anti-science denier groups. Both absurd, both unwilling or emotionally incapable of looking at the evidence, and both fundamentally pathetic.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
YOLO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
But 9-14C is way outside of the consensus view. They need to have strong evidence of this fantastic claim.
They would need strong evidence of such a fantastic claim regardless of whether it was inside the "consensus view".
Science doesn't happen by consensus. It happens by rigorous proof and verifiable, repeatable testing of a (hopefully null) hypothesis.
Climate "science" is a joke, and it has been for decades. Not a single accurate model. Not a single null hypothesis actually tested. No rigor in measurement or data collection. Instead we're looking at a short time period with inconsistent measurements (and still throwing out or "adjusting" data to fit the predetermined conclusions) and engaging in statistical wankery to predict doom and gloom. Unless, of course, we spend lots of money to support the policies and programs of the people funding the research.
Go ahead and mod me troll/flamebait and call me a "denier". The Earth's climate is changing, and the greenhouse gas effect is real. However, it's been hotter before, and hotter eras supported more biomass and biodiversity. The planet isn't going to die from a few extra Kelvin or from a bit more CO2, and none of the proposed policies of filching tax dollars will secure your standard of living or save some species that can't adapt. I'm also against polluting in general, as I live here and enjoy clean air and water. But it doesn't take a genius (or maybe it does, in today's society) to realize that all the climate change doom and gloom is political bullshit and not science.