Thread: Any doubts about Climate Change?

Could be related to warming seas, who knows. The bugs of the south seem to be moving north by air and land so why not the sea.

Lobster shell disease moves northward to Maine | The Portland Press Herald / Maine Sunday Telegram

Oh my God! We're gonna die from rising CO2. Oh wait, you mean it was far higher in previous time periods?

^ I just don't understand this article at all. What does it mean, BM?

Originally Posted by misskit

^ I just don't understand this article at all. What does it mean, BM?

Well, it's just a refutation of the Pogo's who cry: "The Sky Is Falling" w/regard to increased CO2 levels.

The data is ok, but there were no 7 billion and soon far more people in the Cambrian. Half of them live along the costs, and can't afford a sea level rise of as little as 2 metres. We use already 30% of all the land, and that will rise to close to 100% with a growing population, and rising seas. We drive all other life to extinction. The Cambrian's trilobites had no such concerns.

well quite, pluse the enviroment would not have been very healthy either and i am also willing to bet that boonmee's expert gains his confidence from complete ignorence... and is blistfully unware the the suns energy output has significantly increased over that time.

Cooling Looms As Earth

Man made global warming is IMHO a tax scam, climate change has and will always happen. For ecological reasons we should all be greener and there should be a lot less of us.

Peer-Reviewed Study Finds CO2 Not Responsible for Recent Global Warming

Peer-Reviewed Study Finds CO2 Not Responsible for Recent Global Warming | Heartlander Magazine

CO2 Is Rising but Temperatures Not Following Suit. Global warming activists are having a difficult time explaining the ongoing disconnect between atmospheric carbon dioxide levels and global temperatures.

CO2 Is Rising but Temperatures Not Following Suit | Heartlander Magazine

"The Heartland Institute is an American conservative and libertarian[2] public policy think tank based in Chicago, which states that it advocates free market policies...In the 1990s, the group worked with the tobacco company Philip Morris to question serious cancer risks to secondhand smoke, and to lobby against government public-health reforms... More recently, the Institute has focused on questioning the science of human-caused climate change, and was described by the New York Times as "the primary American organization pushing climate change skepticism.....The documents disclosed the names of a number of donors to the institute – including the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation, tobacco companies Altria and Reynolds American, drug firms GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer and Eli Lilly, Microsoft, liquor companies, and an anonymous donor who had given $13 million over the past five years. Some of the documents also contained details of payments to climate skeptics and financial support to skeptics' research programs, namely the founder of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change Craig Idso ($11,600 per month), physicist Fred Singer ($5,000 plus expenses per month), geologist Robert M. Carter ($1,667 per month) and a pledge of $90,000 to meteorologist Anthony Watts. Carter and Watts confirmed receiving payments."
...

The Heartland Institute - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Originally Posted by GR3

Cooling Looms As Earth

Man made global warming is IMHO a tax scam, climate change has and will always happen. For ecological reasons we should all be greener and there should be a lot less of us.

Tax scam or convenient way for governments to escape blame for the lower standard of living Globalization is causing in most Western Countries.

globalisation my arse. you chaps are poorer because you have systematicaaly been transering income to the richest 1% of your country. in the 1980 the richest 1% got 10% of the national income now they get over 40% and they use some of that money to distract you from the real issues, like global warming, so that they can continue to enrich themselves.

Climate Changing Apple Taste And Texture - Business Insider


Climate change is screwing up the apples, according to a new study. Temperatures in Japan's two biggest apple-growing regions have been steadily rising by about 1/3 of a degree every decade, and the subtle change correlates with changes to the taste and texture of the apples grown there.


Apples are the third most popular fruit worldwide, according to the researchers. They are also often eaten raw and whole, making texture and taste more important than with other fruits that are processed before eating.


Japanese scientists have been studying apples since 1970 in the two largest apple-growing regions in Japan, and think that rising temperatures over the last 40 years have led to earlier blooming periods and higher temperatures during maturation and ripening periods.
These changes have changed the taste and texture of the crops: The sweet, crisp Fuji apple — the most popular apple in the world — and the Tsugara, an also sweet apple highly popular in Japan, are becoming sweeter, but softer, every year.
The results were published in the journal Scientific Reports on August 15.



The researchers collected data from orchards following governmental recommended farming and soil-management techniques and restricted their data to apples collected from older, more stable trees to reduce variability.

They then measured the concentration of acids in the apples (both Fuji and Tsugaru apples are already among the sweeter varieties of apple).


Over time, the apples were losing acids — making them sweeter — but also growing softer and less crisp. This could be bad for farmers, since, as the researchers noted, firmer fruits tend to last longer on the shelf.


Of course, these changes are so subtle they are most likely missed by most consumers, and besides, who really remembers exactly how a Fuji apple tasted in 1970?


But, nonetheless, changes in climate are changing our food. How do you like them apples?





-

Originally Posted by GR3

Cooling Looms As Earth

Man made global warming is IMHO a tax scam, climate change has and will always happen. For ecological reasons we should all be greener and there should be a lot less of us.

Originally Posted by GR3

Peer-Reviewed Study Finds CO2 Not Responsible for Recent Global Warming

Peer-Reviewed Study Finds CO2 Not Responsible for Recent Global Warming | Heartlander Magazine

Originally Posted by Rainfall

"The Heartland Institute is an American conservative and libertarian[2] public policy think tank based in Chicago, which states that it advocates free market policies...In the 1990s, the group worked with the tobacco company Philip Morris to question serious cancer risks to secondhand smoke, and to lobby against government public-health reforms... More recently, the Institute has focused on questioning the science of human-caused climate change, and was described by the New York Times as "the primary American organization pushing climate change skepticism.....The documents disclosed the names of a number of donors to the institute – including the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation, tobacco companies Altria and Reynolds American, drug firms GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer and Eli Lilly, Microsoft, liquor companies, and an anonymous donor who had given $13 million over the past five years. Some of the documents also contained details of payments to climate skeptics and financial support to skeptics' research programs, namely the founder of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change Craig Idso ($11,600 per month), physicist Fred Singer ($5,000 plus expenses per month), geologist Robert M. Carter ($1,667 per month) and a pledge of $90,000 to meteorologist Anthony Watts. Carter and Watts confirmed receiving payments."
...

The Heartland Institute - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GR3 definitly linked to some major climate change deniers. The authors of those articles are paid stooges and frauds.

Who is Jay Lehr? - Greedy Lying Bastards

James Taylor | DeSmogBlog

Originally Posted by hazz

globalisation my arse. you chaps are poorer because you have systematicaaly been transering income to the richest 1% of your country. in the 1980 the richest 1% got 10% of the national income now they get over 40% and they use some of that money to distract you from the real issues, like global warming, so that they can continue to enrich themselves.

The two are interconnected. Globalisation is what makes those big Multinationals uncontrollable and facilitates the income transfer.

New IPCC Report: Climatologists More Certain Global Warming Is Caused By Humans, Impacts Are Speeding Up

The Fifth — and hopefully final — Assessment Report (AR5) from the UN Intergovernmental Panel On Climate Change (IPCC) is due next month. The leaks are already here:

Drafts seen by Reuters of the study by the UN panel of experts, due to be published next month, say it is at least 95 percent likely that human activities – chiefly the burning of fossil fuels – are the main cause of warming since the 1950s.

That is up from at least 90 percent in the last report in 2007, 66 percent in 2001, and just over 50 in 1995, steadily squeezing out the arguments by a small minority of scientists that natural variations in the climate might be to blame.

This is a doubly impressive story since, as we’ve reported, Reuters has slashed climate coverage and pressured reporters to include false balance. Leading climatologists who have seen drafts of the report confirm this story’s accuracy.

Of course, nothing in the report should be a surprise to readers of Climate Progress, since the AR5 is just a (partial) review of the scientific literature (see my 12/11 post, It’s “Extremely Likely That at Least 74% of Observed Warming Since 1950″ Was Manmade; It’s Highly Likely All of It Was). The draft AR5 confirms that natural forces played a very small role in warming since 1950, which again means that human activity is highly likely be a source of virtually all of the recent warming.

I say the AR5 is a “partial” review that is “hopefully” the last because, like every IPCC report, it is an instantly out-of-date snapshot that lowballs future warming because it continues to ignore large parts of the recent literature and omit what it can’t model. For instance, we have known for years that perhaps the single most important carbon-cycle feedback is the thawing of the northern permafrost. The IPCC’s Fifth Assessment climate models completely ignore it, thereby lowballing likely warming this century.

No doubt some in the media will continue to focus on the largely irrelevant finding that the equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) may be a tad lower than expected.

In terms of real world warming and its impact on humans, the ECS is a mostly theoretical and oversimplified construct — like the so-called spherical cow. The ECS tells you how much warming you would get IF we started slashing emissions asap and stabilized carbon dioxide concentrations in the air around 550 parts per million (they are currently at 400 ppm, rising over 2 ppm a year, and accelerating) — AND IF there were no slow feedbacks like the defrosting permafrost.

The climate however is not a spherical cow. Every climate scientist I’ve spoken to has said we will blow past 550 ppm if we continue to put off action. Indeed, we’re on track for well past 800 ppm. And a 2012 study found that the carbon feedback from the thawing permafrost alone will likely add 0.4°F – 1.5°F to total global warming by 2100.

So the alarming disruption in our previously stable, civilization-supporting climate depicted in the top figure is our future. On our current emissions path, the main question the ECS answers is whether 9°F warming happens closer to 2080, 2100, or 2120 — hardly a cause for any celebration. Quite the reverse. Warming beyond 7F is “incompatible with organized global community, is likely to be beyond ‘adaptation’, is devastating to the majority of ecosystems & has a high probability of not being stable (i.e. 4°C [7F] would be an interim temperature on the way to a much higher equilibrium level,” as climate expert Kevin Anderson explains here.
Dr. Michael Mann emailed me:

The report is simply an exclamation mark on what we already knew: Climate change is real and it continues unabated, the primary cause is fossil fuel burning, and if we don’t do something to reduce carbon emissions we can expect far more dangerous and potentially irreversible impacts on us and our environment in the decades to come.

As for the seeming slowdown in global warming, that turns out to be only true if one looks narrowly at surface air temperatures, where only a small fraction of warming ends up. Arctic sea ice melt has accelerated. Disintegration of the great ice sheets of Greenland and Antarctica has sped up. The rate of sea level rise has doubled from last century.

Finally, very recent studies of the ocean, which has absorbed the vast majority of the heat, also showglobal warming has accelerated in the past 15 years. Sadly, the AR5 appears to have stopped considering new scientific findings before the publication of this research.

Originally Posted by hazz

so gr3 you have not discovered the smoking gun that proves that climate change is not real, only the smoking gun proving you lack the skills to differentiate between the truth and even the lie's of crude propaganda.

You do not have the skills to read and understand what I have said. I have stated many times on here that there is climate change, I have not denied it. I have denied man made climate change and I hope you have the skills to see the difference?
I am also an advocate of stoping the burning of fosil fuels but for different reasons than you.

Originally Posted by bsnub

Originally Posted by GR3

Cooling Looms As Earth

Man made global warming is IMHO a tax scam, climate change has and will always happen. For ecological reasons we should all be greener and there should be a lot less of us.

Originally Posted by GR3

Peer-Reviewed Study Finds CO2 Not Responsible for Recent Global Warming

Peer-Reviewed Study Finds CO2 Not Responsible for Recent Global Warming | Heartlander Magazine

Originally Posted by Rainfall

"The Heartland Institute is an American conservative and libertarian[2] public policy think tank based in Chicago, which states that it advocates free market policies...In the 1990s, the group worked with the tobacco company Philip Morris to question serious cancer risks to secondhand smoke, and to lobby against government public-health reforms... More recently, the Institute has focused on questioning the science of human-caused climate change, and was described by the New York Times as "the primary American organization pushing climate change skepticism.....The documents disclosed the names of a number of donors to the institute – including the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation, tobacco companies Altria and Reynolds American, drug firms GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer and Eli Lilly, Microsoft, liquor companies, and an anonymous donor who had given $13 million over the past five years. Some of the documents also contained details of payments to climate skeptics and financial support to skeptics' research programs, namely the founder of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change Craig Idso ($11,600 per month), physicist Fred Singer ($5,000 plus expenses per month), geologist Robert M. Carter ($1,667 per month) and a pledge of $90,000 to meteorologist Anthony Watts. Carter and Watts confirmed receiving payments."
...

The Heartland Institute - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GR3 definitly linked to some major climate change deniers. The authors of those articles are paid stooges and frauds.

Who is Jay Lehr? - Greedy Lying Bastards

James Taylor | DeSmogBlog

They are not climate change deniers, they are man made climate change deniers and your delibirate missrepresentation is the main keystone that prevents people from believing you.

Originally Posted by S Landreth

New IPCC Report: Climatologists More Certain Global Warming Is Caused By Humans, Impacts Are Speeding Up

The Fifth — and hopefully final — Assessment Report (AR5) from blah blah blah...

Do you have to cut and paste nearly the whole article from 'thinkprogress.org?'

You could just post the link and give your views on it.

All this cutting and pasting of someone else's work just clutters up this web site.

Some people may even think that you wrote it.

Yeah, that's right SL.
How dare you clutter up the web site with actual information, instead of, say...nothing really important.

Originally Posted by GR3

Originally Posted by hazz

so gr3 you have not discovered the smoking gun that proves that climate change is not real, only the smoking gun proving you lack the skills to differentiate between the truth and even the lie's of crude propaganda.

You do not have the skills to read and understand what I have said. I have stated many times on here that there is climate change, I have not denied it. I have denied man made climate change and I hope you have the skills to see the difference?
I am also an advocate of stoping the burning of fosil fuels but for different reasons than you.

All you have done is used that well known move the goalpost technique of denialism. In the same way that the creationists retreated to intelligent design when it was no longer possible deny genetics. Now that those behind climent denial can no longer deny that the climate is changing, they have now retreated to promoting the idea that its natural change unaffected by human activity. This is still climate denial in the same way that ID is denial of evolution.

What you have done is posted links to very old theories which were seen to have major flaws at the time and have since proven to be wrong. the author of your link has published a number of papers on the subject and like the other proponents of these alternative theories he has refused to acknowledge and answer critics in subsequent papers. Answering your critics is, in science, how you convince people you are right.... its the corner stone that allows you to differentiate between the genius and the denialist crank, the truth speaker and the spive on the payroll.

And yes you are right, I lack the ability to kill off my commons sense to allow me to believe the debunked tosh you think is truth. But don't think the lack o this skill prevents me from understating what you are saying, it simply stopping me believing the lies and misrepresentations you mistake for evidence.

Now before you starting with posting more of your rinsed and repeated bollocks. when you post some amazing revelation that the consensus on climate change is wrong. research what you post and explain why the critics of the theory are wrong in your post. And saying "because they don't agree with me" does not count and is not going to get you any respect; because at this moment you look someone who's made a fool of themselves multi nicing to rinse and repeat.