Climate Change / Global Warming Discussion

[ZsoZso]

Nice try but you have not offered any proof that the current warming trend since the end of the Little Ice Age is in any way due to anthropogenic CO2 production. We have had similar or even greater periods of warming in the distant past which obviously were not due to AGW.

Let me try to phrase it very simply for you as a 3 step logic / proof:

1. It is a well established and undisputed fact, that the human activity of burning fossil fuels deposits huge amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere, which has caused the concentration to increase from ~280ppm (before industrial revolution) to over 405 ppm by 2017.

2. As @nwdiver (here)and @ggies07 (here) has stated up-thread, Swedish chemist Svante Arrhenius demonstrated the effect of carbon dioxide on the temperature of the atmosphere back in 1896, and his observation has been confirmed by many scientists over the following 120+ years.

3. The straight logical conclusion from steps 1 and 2 together, i.e. since humans are dumping copious amount of CO2 into the atmosphere and CO2 in the atmosphere causes warming, is that human activity causes the warming.

Q.E.D.

 

[mspohr]

I have been following this thread and even if you are a denier why would you not want to do your part to keep the environment healthy and clean. I was doing this long before there was talk about Climate Change it just seems the right thing to do, as they say a no brainer. So even if you have no brain you could do it.

Reminds me of the cartoon, "What if we made air cleaner, energy cheaper, environment healthier and climate change was just a hoax?"

 

[SR22pilot]

Reminds me of the cartoon, "What if we made air cleaner, energy cheaper, environment healthier and climate change was just a hoax?"

One of my favorite cartoons.

 

[jrad6515]

So I asked for proof of a human fingerprint in the temperature record and all I hear are ad hominem attacks but zero actual proof. Not that I am surprised of course.

I will just leave you with this quote from one of your AGW cult heroes, weatherman Kevin Trenberth:

"The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t."

Pretty much says it all to me. Poor alarmists. Must be frustrating that most thinking people don't buy your scam despite all of your attempts to fudge the record. You are getting so desperate that now you are sending schoolchildren out there to fight your losing battles for you. What a cowardly act that is. Just pathetic.

 

[jrad6515]

Yeah, I engaged early assuming he was here in good faith and didn't understand science, but he has proven to any reasonable reader of this thread that he's just a dogmatic denier. I'm done with him as well.

...says the name-calling alarmist who himself has no clue about what constitutes scientific proof and immediately tucked tail and ran when I challenged him to show actual proof of a human fingerprint in the temperature record. And you guys wonder why the public doesn't buy your AGW scam/religion. Go figure.

 

[ZsoZso]

Let me try to phrase it very simply for you as a 3 step logic / proof:

1. It is a well established and undisputed fact, that the human activity of burning fossil fuels deposits huge amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere, which has caused the concentration to increase from ~280ppm (before industrial revolution) to over 405 ppm by 2017.

2. As @nwdiver (here)and @ggies07 (here) has stated up-thread, Swedish chemist Svante Arrhenius demonstrated the effect of carbon dioxide on the temperature of the atmosphere back in 1896, and his observation has been confirmed by many scientists over the following 120+ years.

3. The straight logical conclusion from steps 1 and 2 together, i.e. since humans are dumping copious amount of CO2 into the atmosphere and CO2 in the atmosphere causes warming, is that human activity causes the warming.

Q.E.D.

So I asked for proof of a human fingerprint in the temperature record and all I hear are ad hominem attacks but zero actual proof. Not that I am surprised of course.

EXCUSE ME !?

WHAT !?

 

[JRP3]

So I asked for proof of a human fingerprint in the temperature record and all I hear are ad hominem attacks but zero actual proof.

What's your counter argument for the physics of the CO2 molecule? And CH4?

 

[JRP3]

Pretty much says it all to me. Poor alarmists. Must be frustrating that most thinking people don't buy your scam despite all of your attempts to fudge the record. You are getting so desperate that now you are sending schoolchildren out there to fight your losing battles for you. What a cowardly act that is. Just pathetic.

Not nearly as pathetic as your post. Most thinking people are in fact concerned about climate change. You deniers are in the minority.

 

[Merrill]

I’m wondering why we are arguing about this subject, should we not put all our efforts into making this planet a place where future generations can survive. As I said above what does it hurt to live a green life even if you are a sceptic, do what you can do and put all the efforts that you spend arguing into making a difference.

 

[mspohr]

The New York Times: Your Questions About Food and Climate Change, Answered.
Your Questions About Food and Climate Change, Answered

The climate impact of your diet, in detail.

 

[ohmman]

NASA study: Human influence on global droughts goes back 100 years

https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2019-05/nsfc-nsh050119.php

 

[SageBrush]

Let me try to phrase it very simply for you as a 3 step logic / proof:

1. It is a well established and undisputed fact, that the human activity of burning fossil fuels deposits huge amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere, which has caused the concentration to increase from ~280ppm (before industrial revolution) to over 405 ppm by 2017.

2. As @nwdiver (here)and @ggies07 (here) has stated up-thread, Swedish chemist Svante Arrhenius demonstrated the effect of carbon dioxide on the temperature of the atmosphere back in 1896, and his observation has been confirmed by many scientists over the following 120+ years.

3. The straight logical conclusion from steps 1 and 2 together, i.e. since humans are dumping copious amount of CO2 into the atmosphere and CO2 in the atmosphere causes warming, is that human activity causes the warming.

Q.E.D.

This argument is incomplete.

Question #1 is whether the Earth is accumulating heat. While certainly true that humans are adding to the Earth's greenhouse effect by adding methane and CO2 (amongst other chemicals) to the atmosphere, we still need to convince ourselves that changes to the atmosphere do not either block more incoming radiation or allow heat to escape at a faster rate by another mechanism.

For the longest time the skeptics held out hope that water vapor would be a negative forcing since it is expected to increase as the globe warms. And indeed it is, but it also has positive forcing characteristics. In total water vapor adds to the heat accumulation. Strike 2.

The last frontier of the skeptic scientist was led by the MIT meteorologist (and brilliant scientist to boot) Lindzen. He anticipated a rise in heat loss as the globe warmed, leading to an equilibrium temperature way below the IPCC models. He is still waiting, and last I read he has given up on the notion. Strike 3.

Lindzen is my favorite. He was asked if he disputes the greenhouse effect of CO2. In reply he said (I'm paraphrasing) "Of course not. Only an idiot would make that argument."

 

[nwdiver]

He anticipated a rise in heat loss as the globe warmed, leading to an equilibrium temperature way below the IPCC models. He is still waiting, and last I read he has given up on the notion. Strike 3.

If only Earth had a sister planet that despite the surface receiving less energy due to 100% cloud cover the immense greenhouse effect allowed the heat to continue to accumulate until the surface was hot enough to melt lead..... Then we would know beyond ANY doubt that accumulating CO2 levels don't have a thermal equilibrium anywhere near what life as we know it is capable of enduring.

 

[S'toon]

If only Earth had a sister planet that despite the surface receiving less energy due to 100% cloud cover the immense greenhouse effect allowed the heat to continue to accumulate until the surface was hot enough to melt lead..... Then we would know beyond ANY doubt that accumulating CO2 levels don't have a thermal equilibrium anywhere near what life as we know it is capable of enduring.

I'm amused by really old science fiction that had life on a certain planet in our solar system that's about the size of our planet.

 

[ZsoZso]

So I asked for proof that humans are not responsible for the temperature rise and all I hear are ad hominem attacks but zero actual proof. Not that I am surprised of course.

I will just leave you with this quote from one of your AGW heroes, weatherman Kevin Trenberth:

"The fact is that we can account for all the warming at the moment and it is all due to human activity."

Pretty much says it all to me. Poor environment. Must be frustrating that most thinking people don't buy the fossil burners scam despite all of their attempts to fudge the record. They are getting so desperate that now they are sending pathetic trolls to forums to fight their losing battles of FUD. What a cowardly act that is. Just pathetic.

You are absolutely right. No thinking intelligent human would ever fall for the dumb FUD campaign of the fossil fuel propaganda machine. I am glad we all agree here and nobody even questions the well established science.

 

[ohmman]

You are absolutely right. No thinking intelligent human would ever fall for the dumb FUD campaign of the fossil fuel propaganda machine. I am glad we all agree here and nobody even questions the well established science.

I like the following as a guideline: As of the most recent surveys, 27% of Americans still do not believe in AGM. That minority should have no voting power against the significant majority, so we need to be out voting and putting climate change at the top of our list of issues for the candidates. And before you get too upset about the 27%, it’s worth noting that 26% of Americans believe aliens live among us.

I’m guessing the Venn diagram of these two groups looks like concentric circles.

 

[SageBrush]

I like the following as a guideline: As of the most recent surveys, 27% of Americans still do not believe in AGM.

Reference ?

The polls I see (for the US) suggest that most people have realized that climate change is occurring but the larger majority of Republicans are not sure or disagree that it is anthropogenic.

My interp: most (but by all means not all) people can read a thermometer.

 

[ohmman]

Reference ?

The polls I see (for the US) suggest that most people have realized that climate change is occurring but the larger majority of Republicans are not sure or disagree that it is anthropogenic.

Climate Change in the American Mind: December 2018

You are correct; I stated the amount who accept global warming as real and is "important" to them. The amount who properly attribute it to human activity is at 62%, per that recent poll.

 

[mspohr]

Amsterdam to ban petrol and diesel cars and motorbikes by 2030

Cars and motorbikes running on petrol or diesel will be banned from driving in Amsterdam from 2030.

 

[ohmman]

CO2-sniffing plane finds oilsands emissions higher than industry reported