"It's this kind of bullshit that prevents people from believing the global warming hype."
If its all hype and bullshit and the Earth isn't warming, how do you explain why nearly every glacier, ice field, and ice sheet on the planet is melting faster than it has in even just 50 years ago?
The solar output can not explain the current temperature shifts because the total variation in solar output has been far too small to account for the observed temperature differences.
We know that orbital cycles, such as the Milkanovitch cycle can not explain the present global warming since currently it predicts that the Earth should be cooling rather than warming.
If as the AWG deniers claim all the physics surrounding the greenhouse effect is wrong, then we are left with a more profound question that the AWG deniers have created for themselves, but which they can provide NO CREDIBLE EXPLANATION whatsoever, namely why, if its not getting warmer, are all the world's glaciers, ice fields, and ice sheets melting at rates higher than ever previously recorded in Earth history?
"if a point data is wrong, you don't adjust it, you discard it."
No, it a data point is wrong you need to be able to explain why and how it is that it is wrong and also be able to explain what the effect would be without the presence of a particular data point.
All measures have the potential for error, so simply claiming that error is present is insufficient since that is taken as a given. One must be able to "correct" or "explain" anomalous data points.
Not a fact. The total ice volume in Antarctica is diminishing, even though the amount of sea ice around Antarctica is increasing. Not too surprising since with all the melting at the tongues of Antarctic glaciers virtually all the continent's glaciers are accelerating and dumping more ice into adjoining seas. As the glaciers melt more and more sea ice can be expected.
Forget authority and just ask yourself a simple question. If its not getting warmer then why are all the world's glaciers, ice fields, and ice sheets melting a rates that far exceed those reported for any previous geological period?
Exactly. Those who attempt to equate AWG based warming with post-glaciation forcing ALWAYS fail to recognize the rate difference between the two processes. AWG based warming is now between 100 and 1000 times faster than natural warming cycles at nearly any time in Earth history. Presently, Earth is heating at about 36 times the rate it did during the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum, the largest single temperature spike in the past 45 million years.
"We should be expending our efforts in trying to convince the opposition rather than shutting them down."
False, since shutting them down by replacing them with wind, solar, and tidal power will actually stop global warming regardless of whether some ever become educated or not. If humanity has to wait until the last wrong-headed fool to come to his or her senses, we won't make it as a species.
Better yet, lets figure out how to get the anti-AWG crowd to explain, why if its not getting any hotter, all the world's glaicer, ice fields, and ice sheets are melting at rates faster than ever previously reported?
Why is it those who are skeptical about AWG can NEVER answer this question?
" I’m skeptical because I have doubts about the data."
Forget "the [temperature] data" and just ask yourself, if its not getting any warmer, perhaps because the all climatologists are just pathological liars and simply incapable of reporting their data accurately, why are all the world's glaciers, ice fields, and ice sheets melting faster than at any previous time in Earth history?
The plutocratic republican's dream: If only only we can destroy government, then all societal problems will just take care of themselves, particularly if one lets former government functions get privatized so that the average citizen can have no say in addressing any problems that might arise.
"The claim that ANY weather measurement is the "hottest on record" or the "coldest on record" is only useful as an act of deception aimed at the uninformed"
Exactly. The last thing we should do is to use "hottest on record" to inform our behavior so as to avoid making it seem that standing anywhere on the planet is do different than standing in Death Valley without a water bottle in July and August.
Perhaps its precisely because AGW is actually a fact? Perhaps this possibility hasn't entered into your thinking. Remember "corrections" wouldn't be necessary at all, if there wasn't something that need correcting.
Since you are a self-admitted AWG-denier perhaps you can answer a question I have never been able to get a AWG-denier to answer.
If its not getting warmer, why is all the ice melting? Why is so much ice at both poles and in every glacier in between melting at rates higher than they every have been recorded to do so in the past?
We know it can't be the sun, since solar output has remained in a very narrow range ever since it has been measured.
We know it can't be Milankovitch or other orbital cycles since these predict the Earth should be cooling.
Simply not true. Vegetation makes a tremendous difference in the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, so much so that the records at Mauna Kea show distinct seasonal variation associated with it. Keep in mind that carbon dioxide is locked in wood for very long periods of time unless it is burned, just as carbon dioxide sequestered by algae can settle to the floor of the ocean where it is buried for long periods of time. The problem is that humans are both burning and removing forests at an increasing rate so all that previously sequestered carbon is going directly into the atmosphere and oceans increasing the concentration of this greenhouse gas thus global heating, not to mention the more serious problem of lower the pH of the oceans.
"The satellite temp record (also with no hokey adjustments to create warming like GISS) also shows NO warming for the past 15-20 years."
This is a false statement, except for one satellite, whose data was reported without correcting for the descent of its orbit.
Even if it were true, it leads to a bigger problem for the deniers of AWG. If its not getting warmer, why is all the ice in glaciers, ice fields, and ice sheets melting at at rates higher than ever previously observed?
Why is it that not a single AWG global warming denier is able to answer this question? We know its not the sun, as the variation in insolation is too small in magnitude to account for all the melting. We know its not Milankovitch cycles and other orbital cycles since the present position of the Earth, Sun and planets all predict that the Earth should be cooling now rather than warming.
Why are AWG global warming deniers unable to answer why it is that all the ice is melting if its not getting warmer?
"The pro-AGW stuff has ALL been tainted by special interest cash, massaged data, and manipulated peer review and publishing."
So it is your claim that the pro-AGW crowd is spending big money on melting all that ice and thats why its disappearing?
If that were true, why would the price of oil be falling? Have the pro-AGW crowd been secretly using all those new solar panels, windmills, and secretly built reactors to melt all the ice?
If its not getting hotter, why is all that ice melting?
"Now AGW on the other hand still depends mostly on flawed/incomplete computer models,"
That being so, will you kindly explain why virtually all the world's glaciers, ice fields, and ice sheets are melting at rates that are dramatically higher than have ever previously been measured?
We know it can't be the sun, since solar output changes far too little to account for the magnitude of the energy required to melt all that ice.
We know it isn't related to Milankovitch or other orbital cycles, since these hypotheses predict the Earth should be presently cooling.
Even if you could in somewhat show that that climate models are flawed and incomplete, which would make you a superstar in the world of climate science, if you could prove it, you would still need to explain why all that ice is melting so quickly. Keep in mind that the current rate of global mean temperature increase is about 36 times the rate observed during the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum, when the redwood forests in Wyoming became predominantly palm forests over the course of about 10,000 to 30,000 years and the entire North American mammal fauna changed abruptly.
"Inaccurate" and "flawed" climate models are the least of the AWG deniers problem as they have NO EXPLANATION why all the ice is melting so quickly.
"potentially moving fertile crop zones hundreds of miles"
It is always bemusing to see people think that because global warming will create higher temperatures in previously colder places that food crops can simply be grown in these newly warmed environments. The fact is that much of the reason food crops grow where they do in addition to evolutionary adaptation to specific habitats, is the fact that sufficient moisture and adequate quality soils are also available. Good quality soils can take hundreds or even thousands of years to develop. Many high latitude environments have very poor soils, often having been scoured by glaciers for thousands of years. Likewise, flowering and consequently pollination is affected by day/night length as well as by temperature, so simply because high latitude environments may become warm enough for crops to grow doesn't mean that flowering or pollination will be possible in these newly warmed environments.
The threat from human induced global warming is not simply that humans are warming the planet by burning fossil fuels, but rather very much about how fast we are warming the planet. We are currently warming the planet between 100 and 1000 times faster than would occur naturally and as a consequence we are disrupting the very ecological relationships upon which humans depend for their survival. Although its probably true that a few humans will survive and linger in the kind of Mad Max world we are creating for current and subsequent generations, but the vast majority of humanity is already on the road to extinction within a few hundred years at the current rate of change.
"Nobody has any evidence that we're close to where this is a significant problem"
Except perhaps for those few thousand souls who last week died of heat exhaustion as temperatures climbed well above 112 degrees Fahrenheit in India. A few years before 80,000 Russians died from a similar heat wave. Such heat waves are becoming far more common now and death from heat strokes will continue to rise. This is a problem as even in places like Kansas City, as in less than 100 years at the current rate of increased carbon dioxide induced heating, will have more than 100 days out of the year with temperatures in excess of 100 degrees Fahrenheit.
One major problem of "getting there" involves going to places that are about as inhospitable to human life as one can possibly imagine and doing much to destroy the one livable planet we have. The other is that most of the "there" is so far away, that even if we develop rockets that are 1,000's of times faster than those currently available, what we already know about human biology clearly indicates without any doubt whatsoever that no one would survive the trip, which should we leave the solar system would require tens of thousands of years. Even a few weeks in space leads to irreversible eye problems, ignoring other issues surrounding alteration of bone deposition, etc.
Now would be a good time to instead leave space travel to the robots and focus on figuring out a way to keep the planet from overheating and humans from destroying the last vestiges of biodiversity that we all rely upon for our survival.
Slashdot Mirror
If there has been a "pause" why is it the all the world's glaciers, ice fields, and ice sheets keep melting at faster and faster rates?
"It's this kind of bullshit that prevents people from believing the global warming hype."
If its all hype and bullshit and the Earth isn't warming, how do you explain why nearly every glacier, ice field, and ice sheet on the planet is melting faster than it has in even just 50 years ago?
The solar output can not explain the current temperature shifts because the total variation in solar output has been far too small to account for the observed temperature differences.
We know that orbital cycles, such as the Milkanovitch cycle can not explain the present global warming since currently it predicts that the Earth should be cooling rather than warming.
If as the AWG deniers claim all the physics surrounding the greenhouse effect is wrong, then we are left with a more profound question that the AWG deniers have created for themselves, but which they can provide NO CREDIBLE EXPLANATION whatsoever, namely why, if its not getting warmer, are all the world's glaciers, ice fields, and ice sheets melting at rates higher than ever previously recorded in Earth history?
"if a point data is wrong, you don't adjust it, you discard it."
No, it a data point is wrong you need to be able to explain why and how it is that it is wrong and also be able to explain what the effect would be without the presence of a particular data point.
All measures have the potential for error, so simply claiming that error is present is insufficient since that is taken as a given. One must be able to "correct" or "explain" anomalous data points.
Not a fact. The total ice volume in Antarctica is diminishing, even though the amount of sea ice around Antarctica is increasing. Not too surprising since with all the melting at the tongues of Antarctic glaciers virtually all the continent's glaciers are accelerating and dumping more ice into adjoining seas. As the glaciers melt more and more sea ice can be expected.
Forget authority and just ask yourself a simple question. If its not getting warmer then why are all the world's glaciers, ice fields, and ice sheets melting a rates that far exceed those reported for any previous geological period?
Exactly. Those who attempt to equate AWG based warming with post-glaciation forcing ALWAYS fail to recognize the rate difference between the two processes. AWG based warming is now between 100 and 1000 times faster than natural warming cycles at nearly any time in Earth history. Presently, Earth is heating at about 36 times the rate it did during the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum, the largest single temperature spike in the past 45 million years.
"We should be expending our efforts in trying to convince the opposition rather than shutting them down."
False, since shutting them down by replacing them with wind, solar, and tidal power will actually stop global warming regardless of whether some ever become educated or not. If humanity has to wait until the last wrong-headed fool to come to his or her senses, we won't make it as a species.
Better yet, lets figure out how to get the anti-AWG crowd to explain, why if its not getting any hotter, all the world's glaicer, ice fields, and ice sheets are melting at rates faster than ever previously reported?
Why is it those who are skeptical about AWG can NEVER answer this question?
" I’m skeptical because I have doubts about the data."
Forget "the [temperature] data" and just ask yourself, if its not getting any warmer, perhaps because the all climatologists are just pathological liars and simply incapable of reporting their data accurately, why are all the world's glaciers, ice fields, and ice sheets melting faster than at any previous time in Earth history?
The plutocratic republican's dream: If only only we can destroy government, then all societal problems will just take care of themselves, particularly if one lets former government functions get privatized so that the average citizen can have no say in addressing any problems that might arise.
Forget the climate models, just explain why if its not getting any hotter all the world's glaciers, ice fields, as ice caps are melting.
"The claim that ANY weather measurement is the "hottest on record" or the "coldest on record" is only useful as an act of deception aimed at the uninformed"
Exactly. The last thing we should do is to use "hottest on record" to inform our behavior so as to avoid making it seem that standing anywhere on the planet is do different than standing in Death Valley without a water bottle in July and August.
Forget the scientists. Just ask yourself, how can all that ice be melting if its not getting warmer?
Perhaps its precisely because AGW is actually a fact? Perhaps this possibility hasn't entered into your thinking. Remember "corrections" wouldn't be necessary at all, if there wasn't something that need correcting.
Since you are a self-admitted AWG-denier perhaps you can answer a question I have never been able to get a AWG-denier to answer.
If its not getting warmer, why is all the ice melting? Why is so much ice at both poles and in every glacier in between melting at rates higher than they every have been recorded to do so in the past?
We know it can't be the sun, since solar output has remained in a very narrow range ever since it has been measured.
We know it can't be Milankovitch or other orbital cycles since these predict the Earth should be cooling.
Actually, the ozone hole is still there and relatively large. It will be many years before it "closes".
Simply not true. Vegetation makes a tremendous difference in the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, so much so that the records at Mauna Kea show distinct seasonal variation associated with it. Keep in mind that carbon dioxide is locked in wood for very long periods of time unless it is burned, just as carbon dioxide sequestered by algae can settle to the floor of the ocean where it is buried for long periods of time. The problem is that humans are both burning and removing forests at an increasing rate so all that previously sequestered carbon is going directly into the atmosphere and oceans increasing the concentration of this greenhouse gas thus global heating, not to mention the more serious problem of lower the pH of the oceans.
Except for the Palisades, there will be little of New York or any other coast city left in a few hundred years.
"The satellite temp record (also with no hokey adjustments to create warming like GISS) also shows NO warming for the past 15-20 years."
This is a false statement, except for one satellite, whose data was reported without correcting for the descent of its orbit.
Even if it were true, it leads to a bigger problem for the deniers of AWG. If its not getting warmer, why is all the ice in glaciers, ice fields, and ice sheets melting at at rates higher than ever previously observed?
Why is it that not a single AWG global warming denier is able to answer this question? We know its not the sun, as the variation in insolation is too small in magnitude to account for all the melting. We know its not Milankovitch cycles and other orbital cycles since the present position of the Earth, Sun and planets all predict that the Earth should be cooling now rather than warming.
Why are AWG global warming deniers unable to answer why it is that all the ice is melting if its not getting warmer?
"The pro-AGW stuff has ALL been tainted by special interest cash, massaged data, and manipulated peer review and publishing."
So it is your claim that the pro-AGW crowd is spending big money on melting all that ice and thats why its disappearing?
If that were true, why would the price of oil be falling? Have the pro-AGW crowd been secretly using all those new solar panels, windmills, and secretly built reactors to melt all the ice?
If its not getting hotter, why is all that ice melting?
"Now AGW on the other hand still depends mostly on flawed/incomplete computer models,"
That being so, will you kindly explain why virtually all the world's glaciers, ice fields, and ice sheets are melting at rates that are dramatically higher than have ever previously been measured?
We know it can't be the sun, since solar output changes far too little to account for the magnitude of the energy required to melt all that ice.
We know it isn't related to Milankovitch or other orbital cycles, since these hypotheses predict the Earth should be presently cooling.
Even if you could in somewhat show that that climate models are flawed and incomplete, which would make you a superstar in the world of climate science, if you could prove it, you would still need to explain why all that ice is melting so quickly. Keep in mind that the current rate of global mean temperature increase is about 36 times the rate observed during the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum, when the redwood forests in Wyoming became predominantly palm forests over the course of about 10,000 to 30,000 years and the entire North American mammal fauna changed abruptly.
"Inaccurate" and "flawed" climate models are the least of the AWG deniers problem as they have NO EXPLANATION why all the ice is melting so quickly.
"potentially moving fertile crop zones hundreds of miles"
It is always bemusing to see people think that because global warming will create higher temperatures in previously colder places that food crops can simply be grown in these newly warmed environments. The fact is that much of the reason food crops grow where they do in addition to evolutionary adaptation to specific habitats, is the fact that sufficient moisture and adequate quality soils are also available. Good quality soils can take hundreds or even thousands of years to develop. Many high latitude environments have very poor soils, often having been scoured by glaciers for thousands of years. Likewise, flowering and consequently pollination is affected by day/night length as well as by temperature, so simply because high latitude environments may become warm enough for crops to grow doesn't mean that flowering or pollination will be possible in these newly warmed environments.
The threat from human induced global warming is not simply that humans are warming the planet by burning fossil fuels, but rather very much about how fast we are warming the planet. We are currently warming the planet between 100 and 1000 times faster than would occur naturally and as a consequence we are disrupting the very ecological relationships upon which humans depend for their survival. Although its probably true that a few humans will survive and linger in the kind of Mad Max world we are creating for current and subsequent generations, but the vast majority of humanity is already on the road to extinction within a few hundred years at the current rate of change.
"Nobody has any evidence that we're close to where this is a significant problem"
Except perhaps for those few thousand souls who last week died of heat exhaustion as temperatures climbed well above 112 degrees Fahrenheit in India. A few years before 80,000 Russians died from a similar heat wave. Such heat waves are becoming far more common now and death from heat strokes will continue to rise. This is a problem as even in places like Kansas City, as in less than 100 years at the current rate of increased carbon dioxide induced heating, will have more than 100 days out of the year with temperatures in excess of 100 degrees Fahrenheit.
One major problem of "getting there" involves going to places that are about as inhospitable to human life as one can possibly imagine and doing much to destroy the one livable planet we have. The other is that most of the "there" is so far away, that even if we develop rockets that are 1,000's of times faster than those currently available, what we already know about human biology clearly indicates without any doubt whatsoever that no one would survive the trip, which should we leave the solar system would require tens of thousands of years. Even a few weeks in space leads to irreversible eye problems, ignoring other issues surrounding alteration of bone deposition, etc.
Now would be a good time to instead leave space travel to the robots and focus on figuring out a way to keep the planet from overheating and humans from destroying the last vestiges of biodiversity that we all rely upon for our survival.