Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Hawkmoon on November 15, 2018, 10:31:33 PM
-
Or "climate change," or whatever.
It appears that the climate IS changing -- but not in the direction the doomsayer acolytes are claiming.
https://boston.cbslocal.com/2018/11/15/boston-weather-snow-snowiest-decade-northeast-storms-weatherbell-trends-beyond-the-forecast/
TL;DR summary: The northeast is getting colder, and seeing a LOT more snow than in several previous decades.
-
Wasn't it only 3 or 4 decades ago that the climatologists were proclaiming that we were heading into a new Ice Age?
And looking at the very noisy long term (400,000 years) records, I think they were right. Despite the noise, major and minor climate cycles are apparent even to the mere unsophisticated nekkid eyeball.
Terry, 230RN
Edited to change "400,00" to "400,000." But what's a mere order of magnitude between friends, eh?
-
Wasn't it only 3 or 4 decades ago that the climatologists were proclaiming that we were heading into a new Ice Age?
And looking at the very noisy long term (400,000 years) records, I think they were right. Despite the noise, major and minor climate cycles are apparent even to the mere unsophisticated nekkid eyeball.
Yes, there was even a movie. I didn't see it and I don't remember the title, but I distinctly remember having seen the trailer.
https://longreads.com/2017/04/13/in-1975-newsweek-predicted-a-new-ice-age-were-still-living-with-the-consequences/
It might have been this movie, but 2004 seems too recent. My dinosaur brain thinks it was at least 10 years earlier, but I can't find it.
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0319262/
-
I was thinking 3 or 4 decades. It was in a lot of the TechMech journals and if I'm not mistaken, even in Scientific American.
-
I think it's time to revive the discussion. I've got about five inches of white global warming on the ground right now, and that's unprecedented. Even when I was a kid in the 1950s (when we had "real" winters around here), the question was always whether or not we would have a white Christmas. I can't remember ever having a white Thanksgiving.
-
During the '70s the mantra was about the impending new ice age brought on by pollution.
I don't really remember the start of the "anthropogenic globular warmulating" thing. I think I was too busy working and destroying the environment in those days.
-
Late 60's early 70's the panic was a new ice age. Then came the ozone hole & banning Freon's, replacing the F12 in hairspray cans w/ propane. Blind frogs then AGW. BTW. I don't think the Freon thing was ever proven.
-
^ "BTW. I don't think the Freon thing was ever proven."
Believe the woman environmentalists.
Because.
-
I’m shocked, who would have thought the sun could have so much influence on our climate?
-
Late 60's early 70's the panic was a new ice age. Then came the ozone hole & banning Freon's, replacing the F12 in hairspray cans w/ propane. Blind frogs then AGW. BTW. I don't think the Freon thing was ever proven.
That's actually a success story. The ozone damage is much improved since then, and is continuing to improve since banning some of these chemicals.
-
That's actually a success story. The ozone damage is much improved since then, and is continuing to improve since banning some of these chemicals.
That's what they want you to believe. Have you ever seen an ozone hole? How do you know there was one? How do you know it's smaller now? And how do you know that smaller is better?
-
Late 60's early 70's the panic was a new ice age. Then came the ozone hole & banning Freon's, replacing the F12 in hairspray cans w/ propane. Blind frogs then AGW. BTW. I don't think the Freon thing was ever proven.
That '60s to '70s sounds more right to my ferrite core memory. :old:
Terry, 230RN
-
Say the climate went extreme one way or the other.
What type of planet would you find most interesting?
An iceball or a dunescape?
And which would likely be more conducive to the survival of the species?
-
^^^Dune. The Spice must flow.
-
https://www.iceagenow.info/
-
TL;DR summary: The northeast is getting colder, and seeing a LOT more snow than in several previous decades.
Nothing about summer temps in that article. Need to take the annual average temp over time to see if there is warming or cooling.
-
^^^Dune. The Spice must flow.
My name is a killing word.
-
That's actually a success story. The ozone damage is much improved since then, and is continuing to improve since banning some of these chemicals.
The "hole" has been found to be rather perennial. Sometimes smaller, sometimes bigger. All in all, no affect from costing consumers millions.
-
The "hole" has been found to be rather perennial. Sometimes smaller, sometimes bigger. All in all, no affect from costing consumers millions.
And, we actually have absolutely no idea how long it has been there.
Hell, for all we know it might have been 10X bigger 100 years ago.
-
True. From what I remember, most of those chemicals do react with and remove ozone from the atmosphere. But ozone is constantly being created as well so trying to figure out if those chemicals are removing it faster than it is replaced is a guessing game. Banning those chemicals was probably the right thing to do. I am sure the execution/law could have been better. Almost all of the Hollywood doomsday stuff about it was just silly.
-
They COULD react to separate the second O from ozone, provided you have free water, a chlorine compound stable enough to reach the ionosphere & UV light. And it only happened at the South Pole & only in spring when there were clouds.
-
Well a lot of folks are using ozone generators as air purifiers, but iirc ozone is pretty unstable and the odds are really low on actually making it from the earth's surface to the ozone layer. Plus this is like spitting in the ocean to raise the sea level.
-
Can't find it, but I remember seeing a study done in the late 40's about the ozone "hole", and that was before any of the cfc's were in common use.
-
Update: https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/climate-change-global-warming-earth-cooling-media-bias/
The northeastern United States has just gone though the coldest Thanksgiving since (I believe) 1871. Tell me again why I should be concerned about global warming.
More: https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/the-stunning-statistical-fraud-behind-the-global-warming-scare/
-
There's a really fantastic Youtube based weekly show I watch, called TMRO. Mostly space news, launches, new satellites, technology advances, stuff like that. Every now and then they drift into lefty globularwarmism and they did it this week, talking about the Atacama desert as an analog for some elements of the Martian surface. Talking about the only life present there, being about 18 varieties of microbes that are such extremophiles that they can only exist in Atacama under its current static conditions (i.e. no precipitation, ever). They went on to say that due to globularwarmism, it rained in the desert and that a dozen of these microbes went extinct because they are so specially evolved to absorb moisture from any available source, they ruptured their cell membranes due to the excessive water from the rain.
...Except they also said it hadn't rained in Atacama for 500 years.
So did globularwarmism cause it to rain 500 years ago? No explanation of the source of rain in that area 500 years past. Or if the asserted man-originated globularwarmism is responsible for an increase in precipitation there consistently.
If a freak storm can happen 500 years ago, it can happen today too.
-
I've been to the Atacama Desert. Yes, it is arid, but it does see precipitation. The salt lakes ("salares" in Spanish) didn't create themselves.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atacama_Desert
Although the almost total lack of precipitation is the most prominent characteristic of the Atacama Desert, exceptions may occur. In July 2011, an extreme Antarctic cold front broke through the rain shadow, bringing 80 cm (31 in) of snow to the plateau, stranding residents across the region, particularly in Bolivia, where many drivers became stuck in snow drifts and emergency crews became overtaxed with a large number of rescue calls.[16]
In 2012, the altiplano winter brought floods to San Pedro de Atacama.[17][18]
On 25 March 2015, heavy rainfall affected the southern part of the Atacama Desert.[19][20] Resulting floods triggered mudflows that affected the cities of Copiapo, Tierra Amarilla, Chanaral, and Diego de Almagro, causing the deaths of more than 100 people.
We spent three nights in San Pedro de Atacama. My step-daughter currently works there. Don't believe everything the global warming climate change acolytes tell you.
-
My grandparents lived in Tucson, AZ. They said floods were not uncommon.
-
Let's not commit the same error that the global warming acolytes make: Confusing short term variations with long term trends.
And even worse: Making predictions from short term variations.
And believing the underlying assumption that a warming of the planet is necessarily bad. Oh, there's that. Almost forgot.
Terry
-
Let's not commit the same error that the global warming acolytes make: Confusing short term variations with long term trends.
According to the experts we’re in an interglacial period.
So warming is normal, until cooling starts up again.
They’ve got all their bases all covered.
-
I heard something interesting today on NPR.
When looking at climate and weather, think of climate as your personality and weather as your mood for the day.
A season or two of cold winter in one region (they mentioned NE) doesn't the rest of the world is cooling, or a couple hot summers in another region doesn't mean the world is warming.
-
I heard something interesting today on NPR.
When looking at climate and weather, think of climate as your personality and weather as your mood for the day.
A season or two of cold winter in one region (they mentioned NE) doesn't the rest of the world is cooling, or a couple hot summers in another region doesn't mean the world is warming.
It means that if you are picking what data sites to feed to your computer model or have some time to fill on the evening news.
I am open to the idea of warming or AGW. Hard to imagine seven billion people have zero effect. I am also open to the idea that science by definition isn't ever settled, car on dioxide self regulates, and that the scare is just a power grab. Further, I think that our exit from the little ice age coincided with moves away from the particulate heavy fuels of the industrial revolution. So right about the time we kept good temp records we also had made an industrial winter of sorts.
And anyway, I am way more concerned with global cooling. The stresses that the maunder minimum put on European society drove a lot of the wars, emigration to here, and the potato famine.
-
If I was climate and weather I'd be one consistent ahole of a season.
-
One of the things about being 75 years old at this time in history, is that I have been an interested observer for a lot of stuff that has occurred over my life time. I understand my lifetime is nothing but less than an instant in the grand scope of the history of the universe and the Erf. But still, I can offer at least 65 or so years of observations.
When I was a kid, most people heated with coal and fuel oil. We lived in a lot of smoke in the winter time. We had a lot of snow in the winter and it was really cold most of the time. In the summer it was warm to hot and muggy. It rained periodically. But having said that, over the years we had winters that were not so cold and snowy (Even when it was smoky from coal and fuel oil) and summers that were not so hot and warm and muggy. Sometimes it didn't rain all that often and sometimes it rained frequently. If I could make one unscientific observation for my neighborhood: with all the smoke gone because of natural gas heat, it's easier to breath and it's not so stinky, except for the luddites who heat their homes with wood when natural gas is so cheap and efficient. My conclusion is that weather today is sometimes the same as it was when I was a kid, and also variable as I observed over the years.
I've done a bit of reading about the climate and the over riding jist of what I read seems to indicate that weather is arbitrary at best. At worst there have been cycles of really cold times and really hot times over long periods of time. I wonder if a good deal of guess work is involved there. In other words it's pretty hard even with the evidence that is available to trust what I hear about "climate change" and "global warming". What I do seem to detect is a good bit of evidence that there are motives behind what is broadcast and one can be very suspicious of those motives when one looks into where the conclusions and reports are coming from.
I one doesn't believe that most every thing has been politicized for one reason or another, one, in my view, is a fool.
-
As a non scientist and non statistician this is the way I see it:
Computer models aren’t reality.
Computer models continue to do a terrible job of predicting future climate conditions.
Computer models do a reasonably good job on local weather out to a week or so.
Probabilities aren’t reality.
When “scientists” use the term “high confidence” they are generally referring to probabilities, probably.
Models and probabilities aren’t reality, they are guesses, educated guesses based on not just what is known but what the scientists or statistician thinks about various unknowns.
Models aren’t reality.
The certainty of man made catastrophic climate change that the .gov/ed/entertainment propaganda complex has instilled in people is frustrating. It’s the default presupposition and getting folks to examine let alone change a presupposition is near impossible.
I’m happy to stipulate that changing the chemical composition of our atmosphere is probably a bad idea.
I’m happy to stipulate that pumping billions of tons of particulate matter into our atmosphere probably has unintended bad consequences.
Somehow, if you are skeptical of the catastrophic climate change fear mongers you are branded as hating the planet and environment. You know people have been brainwashed when they can only boil the issue down into a simple binary choice.
-
I think a lot of things boil down to binary choices, just not always one choice or one question.
I agree with the last two posts though. Regarding the former, my grandfather said he thought the weather moved in long cycles. Occasionally I see things that point to him being right about that.
-
I’m happy to stipulate that pumping billions of tons of particulate matter into our atmosphere probably has unintended bad consequences.
But didn't some pro-climate change group or agency just propose doing exactly that, within the past week or ten days, as a way of combatting man-caused climate change?
The irony is inescapable. When industry allows particulates to escape into the atmosphere as a byproduct of manufacturing or generation, it's bad. When "science" causes particulates to escape into the atmosphere as a product of some laboratory, it's good.
The science is settled. Yeah, right.
-
I don't quite know what to make of this, but I'll post the link so I can't be accused of hiding something.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-6430691/Ocean-circulation-North-Atlantic-weakest-1-500-years-trigger-Ice-Age.html
The gist of this seems to be that changes in North Atlantic currents may herald another mini-ice age. Naturally, if we see a new ice age, it will be the result of global warming. (Honest -- I couldn't make this up.)
The research, co-led by Drs. Christelle Not and Benoit Thibodeau from the Department of Earth Sciences and the Swire Institute of Marine Science, The University of Hong Kong, is interpreted to be a direct consequence of global warming and associated melt of the Greenland Ice-Sheet.
230RN please take note: I am aware of the grammatical failing in the above, which actually says (but I don't think it means to say) that "The research ... is interpreted to be a direct consequence of global warming and associated melt of the Greenland Ice-Sheet."
-
I don't quite know what to make of this, but I'll post the link so I can't be accused of hiding something.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-6430691/Ocean-circulation-North-Atlantic-weakest-1-500-years-trigger-Ice-Age.html
The article is describing changes in climate and literally states "climate change is to blame." Hmm, a changing climate is caused by a changing climate. No! Really?!?!?!?
-
As a non scientist and non statistician this is the way I see it:
Computer models aren’t reality.
Computer models continue to do a terrible job of predicting future climate conditions.
Computer models do a reasonably good job on local weather out to a week or so.
Probabilities aren’t reality.
When “scientists” use the term “high confidence” they are generally referring to probabilities, probably.
Models and probabilities aren’t reality, they are guesses, educated guesses based on not just what is known but what the scientists or statistician thinks about various unknowns.
Models aren’t reality.
The certainty of man made catastrophic climate change that the .gov/ed/entertainment propaganda complex has instilled in people is frustrating. It’s the default presupposition and getting folks to examine let alone change a presupposition is near impossible.
I’m happy to stipulate that changing the chemical composition of our atmosphere is probably a bad idea.
I’m happy to stipulate that pumping billions of tons of particulate matter into our atmosphere probably has unintended bad consequences.
Somehow, if you are skeptical of the catastrophic climate change fear mongers you are branded as hating the planet and environment. You know people have been brainwashed when they can only boil the issue down into a simple binary choice.
I wish I took more Stat classes instead of the just enough to graduate, but modeling is very good at predicting trends if you can use unbiased data. As AJ stated, you don't cherry pick the data you want.
Where modeling can fail is folks take the results and other trend results forget about correlation does not mean causation.
-
Hawkmoon: OK, thanks.
.....
Time for this again. Not ten years. Not 100 years, not a thousand years....
Four hundred thousand years:
-
Man, I remember when Wired still wrote stories about computers and stuff. "No more ice". I'd like to see the 100 year climate event that will expose lakes that have been buried two miles deep in ice in the Antarctic for 15 million years. Idiots.
https://twitchy.com/dougp-3137/2018/11/30/on-fire-wired-science-has-the-hottest-of-global-warming-doomsday-predictions-for-todays-babies/
-
Alaska just had a major (7.2) earthquake. Start the countdown for how long it will take for some genius to blame in on man-made climate change.
-
Alaska just had a major (7.2) earthquake. Start the countdown for how long it will take for some genius to blame in on man-made climate change.
That already showed up on Twitchy. People were doing a combined Sarah Palin / global warming diss.
-
That already showed up on Twitchy. People were doing a combined Sarah Palin / global warming diss.
https://twitchy.com/sarahd-313035/2018/11/30/proof-that-there-is-a-god-sarah-palins-post-earthquake-tweet-sends-haters-over-the-edge/
I like the one that mocked her by asking if it was "BIBLICAL RETRUBUTION" [sic].
-
More comedy from the party of science.
https://twitchy.com/gregp-3534/2018/11/30/journalist-thinks-tsunami-warning-triggered-by-the-alaska-earthquake-is-proof-climate-change-is-real/