Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 123 (8733 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 02-22-2017 4:58 PM
446 online now:
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: timtak
Upcoming Birthdays: CosmicChimp
Post Volume:
Total: 799,182 Year: 3,788/21,208 Month: 2,183/1,605 Week: 383/376 Day: 72/101 Hour: 4/5


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
2021
22
2324
...
27Next
Author Topic:   Climate Change Denier comes in from the cold: SCIENCE!!!
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18138
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.1


(2)
Message 316 of 396 (795871)
12-18-2016 2:45 PM
Reply to: Message 315 by Tanypteryx
12-17-2016 6:52 PM


Re: Simple Proof of Man-Made Global Warming
Nice

quote:
When a forest fire burns, the CO2 in the smoke came from living or recently dead fuel, so the smoke contains the same proportions of carbon-12 and carbon-14 as the atmosphere. This is the case with nearly all natural sources of CO2. We can carbon date the CO2 in the atmosphere, and tell exactly how much of it comes from humans burning fossil fuels. It's a hard measurement. It leaves no room for interpretation.

There is one natural source of CO2 that contains only carbon-12, and which is often pointed out by climate deniers as the real source of all of this new carbon-12: volcanoes. Volcanoes worldwide constantly erupt, both on land and under the sea. They do so at a fairly constant rate. We measure their output, and we know that annually, worldwide volcanic activity averages about 200 million tons of CO2 added to the atmosphere, all with carbon-12, which is indistinguishable from the carbon-12 produced by burning fossil fuels. However, each year, we measure a total of about 29 billion tons of CO2 added to the atmosphere. That's more than 100 times the amount volcanoes can account for. The only possible source of all the rest of that new CO2 is fossil fuel burned by humans.

This, in short, is the "smoking gun" that proves the increase in CO2 in the atmosphere is caused by humans burning fossil fuel. It's not a conjecture or a model or a prediction, it's a measurement that anyone can reproduce, and isotopes are isotopes, and don't have alternate explanations.


Pretty hard to argue with eh?

Enjoy


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 315 by Tanypteryx, posted 12-17-2016 6:52 PM Tanypteryx has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 6014
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.9


(2)
Message 317 of 396 (795997)
12-20-2016 4:51 PM
Reply to: Message 315 by Tanypteryx
12-17-2016 6:52 PM


Re: Simple Proof of Man-Made Global Warming
Tanypteryx writes:

I couldn't see any obvious flaws in this article and it has a short list of references at the end.

I have found that type of argument to be the most compelling when trying to discuss the topic. The basic science is pretty straightforward and accessible to most scientific laypeople. It really comes down to the simple fact of temperatures increasing as you put more greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere. It is an inescapable physical fact.

In addition to the material in that article, we could also point to changes in the 13C/12C ratio. Most fossil fuel comes from photosynthesizers, and the process of photosynthesis favors the lighter isotope 12C. Plants are rich in 12C compared to the atmosphere around them. Over the last 150 years the amount of 12C has increased, indicating that the cause of the CO2 increase is fossil fuel use (in combination with the 14C data).

Another simple fact is historic CO2 values. Ice records from Greenland and Antarctica cover several glacial and interglacial cycles, and they show CO2 bouncing between 175 and 300 ppm. Prior to the industrial revolution we were at about 280 ppm, the normal for the peak of an interglacial period. We are now at 400 ppm. That is 30% higher than at any time in the ice core record for the last million years.

Is it just a coincidence that we see the biggest spike of CO2 in the last 1 million years from a natural process at the same time we are burning gigatons of fossil fuels? It takes more denial than most people have to ignore the rather obvious connection between fossil fuels and record CO2 levels.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 315 by Tanypteryx, posted 12-17-2016 6:52 PM Tanypteryx has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 318 by jar, posted 12-20-2016 4:59 PM Taq has responded
 Message 325 by RAZD, posted 12-21-2016 2:32 PM Taq has not yet responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 28156
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 318 of 396 (795998)
12-20-2016 4:59 PM
Reply to: Message 317 by Taq
12-20-2016 4:51 PM


Re: Simple Proof of Man-Made Global Warming
There is only a problem because you and others look for a problem. If you would only stop searching for things to worry about you could stop worrying.

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 317 by Taq, posted 12-20-2016 4:51 PM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 319 by Taq, posted 12-20-2016 5:05 PM jar has acknowledged this reply

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 6014
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.9


(2)
Message 319 of 396 (796000)
12-20-2016 5:05 PM
Reply to: Message 318 by jar
12-20-2016 4:59 PM


Re: Simple Proof of Man-Made Global Warming
jar writes:

There is only a problem because you and others look for a problem. If you would only stop searching for things to worry about you could stop worrying.

Similar to the (mythical) ostrich adaptation that allows them to escape detection by predators:


This message is a reply to:
 Message 318 by jar, posted 12-20-2016 4:59 PM jar has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 320 by Tanypteryx, posted 12-20-2016 7:41 PM Taq has not yet responded

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 1318
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 6.3


Message 320 of 396 (796010)
12-20-2016 7:41 PM
Reply to: Message 319 by Taq
12-20-2016 5:05 PM


Re: Simple Proof of Man-Made Global Warming
There is an uncanny resemblance to Trump in that image.

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 319 by Taq, posted 12-20-2016 5:05 PM Taq has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 321 by jar, posted 12-20-2016 7:54 PM Tanypteryx has responded
 Message 323 by RAZD, posted 12-20-2016 10:25 PM Tanypteryx has responded

    
jar
Member
Posts: 28156
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 321 of 396 (796011)
12-20-2016 7:54 PM
Reply to: Message 320 by Tanypteryx
12-20-2016 7:41 PM


Re: Simple Proof of Man-Made Global Warming
Alfred E. had the answer.

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 320 by Tanypteryx, posted 12-20-2016 7:41 PM Tanypteryx has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 322 by Tanypteryx, posted 12-20-2016 7:59 PM jar has acknowledged this reply

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 1318
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 6.3


Message 322 of 396 (796012)
12-20-2016 7:59 PM
Reply to: Message 321 by jar
12-20-2016 7:54 PM


Re: Simple Proof of Man-Made Global Warming
What, me worry?

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 321 by jar, posted 12-20-2016 7:54 PM jar has acknowledged this reply

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18138
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.1


Message 323 of 396 (796016)
12-20-2016 10:25 PM
Reply to: Message 320 by Tanypteryx
12-20-2016 7:41 PM


Re: Simple Proof of Man-Made Global Warming
There is an uncanny resemblance to Trump in that image.

You mean where the feathers swoop out over the cloaca?


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 320 by Tanypteryx, posted 12-20-2016 7:41 PM Tanypteryx has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 324 by Tanypteryx, posted 12-20-2016 10:39 PM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 1318
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 6.3


(1)
Message 324 of 396 (796017)
12-20-2016 10:39 PM
Reply to: Message 323 by RAZD
12-20-2016 10:25 PM


Re: Simple Proof of Man-Made Global Warming
And the color, and the head.

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 323 by RAZD, posted 12-20-2016 10:25 PM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18138
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.1


(3)
Message 325 of 396 (796050)
12-21-2016 2:32 PM
Reply to: Message 317 by Taq
12-20-2016 4:51 PM


Melting Arctic
quote:
Pre-Christmas melt? North Pole forecast to warm 50 degrees above normal Thursday

Its not normal, and its happening again.

For the second year in a row in late December and for the second time in as many months, temperatures in the high Arctic will be freakishly high compared to normal.

Computer models project that on Thursday, three days before Christmas, the temperature near the North Pole will be an astronomical 40-50 degrees warmer-than-normal and approaching 32 degrees, the melting point.

On some forecast maps simulating Arctic temperatures, the color bar does not even go as high as predicted levels.

The warmth will be drawn into the Arctic by a powerhouse storm east of Greenland. The European weather model estimates its lowest pressure will be around 945 millibars, which is comparable to many category 3 hurricanes.

Maue explained that depleted sea ice cover east of the Nordic Sea helps create a passageway for warm air to surge north uninhibited. You have more real estate available to advect the warm and moist air northward, he said.

Arctic sea ice levels are at a record lows. In November, the Arctic usually gains ice, but over a period of five days it saw 19,000 square miles of ice cover vanish, which NOAA called almost unprecedented.

When these excessive warm anomalies occur in the Arctic, the cold air which is usually present must go somewhere. In November, it piled up in Siberia and that is poised to happen again:


This is global climate change folks. It ain't pretty, and it ain't going away.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 317 by Taq, posted 12-20-2016 4:51 PM Taq has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 326 by xongsmith, posted 12-21-2016 6:43 PM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

  
xongsmith
Member
Posts: 1750
From: massachusetts US
Joined: 01-01-2009
Member Rating: 4.9


(1)
Message 326 of 396 (796073)
12-21-2016 6:43 PM
Reply to: Message 325 by RAZD
12-21-2016 2:32 PM


Re: Melting Arctic
RAZD excerpt:

...the temperature near the North Pole will be an astronomical 40-50 degrees warmer-than-normal...

Speaking as an old Astrophysics student, this is good, but never-the-less, major hyperbole!


- xongsmith, 5.7d

This message is a reply to:
 Message 325 by RAZD, posted 12-21-2016 2:32 PM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18138
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.1


(3)
Message 327 of 396 (796687)
01-03-2017 8:33 AM


Two items in my news feeds
First:

quote:

... A group of researchers just tried to replicate 38 peer-reviewed studies that support skeptic talking points, and surprise! They ran into some trouble.

In a paper published last week in the journal Theoretical and Applied Climatology, the researchers reported a number of problems with the 38 studies, including questionable physics and incomplete data sets. They also found that some of the studies were published in peer-reviewed journals that didnt specialize in climate science, and therefore probably didnt have the proper experts looking over the work.

One of the most common problems the researchers encountered was something called cherry-picking. Not to be confused with actual cherry-picking (which is now endangered thanks to climate change), data cherry-picking is a big science no-no in which researchers falsify results by including only the data that support those results and not the data that dont.

A group of researchers just tried to replicate 38 peer-reviewed studies that support skeptic talking points, and surprise! They ran into some trouble.

In a paper published last week in the journal Theoretical and Applied Climatology, the researchers reported a number of problems with the 38 studies, including questionable physics and incomplete data sets. They also found that some of the studies were published in peer-reviewed journals that didnt specialize in climate science, and therefore probably didnt have the proper experts looking over the work.

One of the most common problems the researchers encountered was something called cherry-picking. Not to be confused with actual cherry-picking (which is now endangered thanks to climate change), data cherry-picking is a big science no-no in which researchers falsify results by including only the data that support those results and not the data that dont.

https://www.theguardian.com/...ate-climate-contrarian-papers

If any of the contrarians were a modern-day Galileo, he would present a theory thats supported by the scientific evidence and thats not based on methodological errors. Such a sound theory would convince scientific experts, and a consensus would begin to form. Instead, as our paper shows, the contrarians have presented a variety of contradictory alternatives based on methodological flaws, which therefore have failed to convince scientific experts.

Human-caused global warming is the only exception. Its based on overwhelming, consistent scientific evidence and has therefore convinced over 97% of scientific experts that its correct.


And then:

quote:
With enough evidence, even skepticism will thaw

Half a decade before he took this trip to the farthest reaches of the north, Andreas Muenchow had his doubts about whether warming temperatures were causing one of the worlds great platforms of ice to melt and fall apart.

He even stood before Congress in 2010 and balked on whether climate change might have caused a mammoth chunk of ice, four times the size of Manhattan, to break off from this floating, 300-square-mile shelf. The University of Delaware oceanographer said he wasnt sure. He needed more evidence.

But then the Petermann Ice Shelf lost another two Manhattans of ice in 2012, and Muenchow decided to see for himself, launching a project to study the ice shelf intensively.

He was back again in late August, no longer a skeptic. It was hard not to be a believer here at 81 degrees north latitude, where Greenland and Canada very nearly touch. The surface of the bumpy and misshapen ice was covered with pools and puddles, in some cases frozen over but with piercing blue water beneath. Streams carved through the vast shelf, swelling into larger ponds or even small lakes.

The meltwater was a sign the ice shelf was growing more fragile, moving closer to the day when it might give up more city-size chunks of ice.

The Petermann Ice Shelf serves as a plug of sorts to one of Greenlands largest glaciers, lodged in a fjord that, from the height of its mountain walls down to the lowest point of the seafloor, is deeper than the Grand Canyon. Theres enough ice piled up behind Petermann to raise oceans globally by nearly a foot someday.

The question for Muenchow is no longer whether Petermann is changing its how fast it could give up still more ice to the seas. Thats why he and British Antarctic Survey colleague Keith Nicholls ventured here by helicopter to take the measure of the Petermann shelf, which had been shifting and surging in a way that damaged the scientific instruments they had left behind a year earlier behaving as though it didnt want to be known.


The evidence shows global climate change is occurring.

Enjoy


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

Replies to this message:
 Message 328 by Tangle, posted 01-03-2017 10:56 AM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 4305
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 328 of 396 (796698)
01-03-2017 10:56 AM
Reply to: Message 327 by RAZD
01-03-2017 8:33 AM


Re: Two items in my news feeds
RAZD writes:

with enough evidence even skepticism will thaw

Sadly, not necessarily.

"The backfire effect occurs when, in the face of contradictory evidence, established beliefs do not change but actually get stronger. The effect has been demonstrated experimentally in psychological tests, where subjects are given data that either reinforces or goes against their existing biases - and in most cases people can be shown to increase their confidence in their prior position regardless of the evidence they were faced with.

In a pessimistic sense, this makes most refutations useless."

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Backfire_effect


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 327 by RAZD, posted 01-03-2017 8:33 AM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 23397
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 329 of 396 (796701)
01-03-2017 11:28 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by RAZD
02-03-2015 4:51 PM


The problem with this topic as always is that the science just isn't clear enough to prove anything. The guy in the video is very convinced that he's arrived at a scientific conclusion from his studies that proves there is global warming (he's using that term instead of the more equivocal "climate change" which is interesting in itself), and that human activity is the cause of it, and he sketches out the theories his study eliminated which leaves this conclusion. But while I'm sure he's sincere it's basically all just his own assertion, his own conclusions, and there's just no way for a person to assess whether his study really did cover all the possibilities, really did include all the relevant information, really did prove what he says. There are others who sound just as sincere and just as aware of all the variables, who disagree with him about such scientific basics.

So there's global warming. Isn't Planet Earth subject to long-term cycles of warming and cooling according to current theory? Isn't there really just too much input of various kinds to come to any such clear conclusion? And given the horrific political consequences of forcing industrialized nations to toe some invented scientific line, how can anybody be eager to see such a solution to what could turn out to be an imaginary problem or at least a problem that has other causes and other possible soilutions if any? Not that there shouldn't be measures taken to cut down on all kinds of emissions and pollutions, I'm sure there should be, but most recommendations are culture-killers and there just isn't enough scientific evidence to warrant them.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by RAZD, posted 02-03-2015 4:51 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 330 by frako, posted 01-03-2017 11:53 AM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 331 by Dr Adequate, posted 01-03-2017 2:46 PM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 332 by Taq, posted 01-03-2017 2:46 PM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 333 by RAZD, posted 01-03-2017 2:57 PM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 334 by NoNukes, posted 01-03-2017 9:31 PM Faith has not yet responded

    
frako
Member
Posts: 2653
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 330 of 396 (796703)
01-03-2017 11:53 AM
Reply to: Message 329 by Faith
01-03-2017 11:28 AM


The problem with this topic as always is that the science just isn't clear enough to prove anything. The guy in the video is very convinced that he's arrived at a scientific conclusion from his studies that proves there is global warming (he's using that term instead of the more equivocal "climate change" which is interesting in itself), and that human activity is the cause of it, and he sketches out the theories his study eliminated which leaves this conclusion. But while I'm sure he's sincere it's basically all just his own assertion, his own conclusions, and there's just no way for a person to assess whether his study really did cover all the possibilities, really did include all the relevant information, really did prove what he says. There are others who sound just as sincere and just as aware of all the variables, who disagree with him about such scientific basics.

Yea you could have said that 40 years ago but now there is consnsus in the scietific community that there is climate change and mankind is responsible. Sure there are a few on the fence usually paid by the oil industry but the vast majority of scientists agree so your best bet if you dont know anything on the topic is to listen to them.

Isn't Planet Earth subject to long-term cycles of warming and cooling according to current theory?

Um yea linked to co2 increases decreases.

Isn't there really just too much input of various kinds to come to any such clear conclusion?

The only thing that fits perfectly is co2 increas increases the temperature of the earth. While other ideas like the sun being responcible do not show any correlation.

And given the horrific political consequences of forcing industrialized nations to toe some invented scientific line, how can anybody be eager to see such a solution to what could turn out to be an imaginary problem or at least a problem that has other causes and other possible soilutions if any?

At this point thats like saying why would you force me in to a bucket brigade when there is a chance that the fire 5 m from my house wont reach it.

Not that there shouldn't be measures taken to cut down on all kinds of emissions and pollutions, I'm sure there should be, but most recommendations are culture-killers and there just isn't enough scientific evidence to warrant them.

Im on the side that thinks its alredy to late the best we can hope for is a +3 degree rise. And that the following turmoil caused by famine, thirst mass migration .... does not push us in to nuclear war and thus nailing the last nail in humanitys coffin rendering ourselves extinct.

Simply because humanity is to greedy to stop pouring more and more co2 every year in to the atmosphere, well at least until the first grate catastrophe that will be linked to global warming. Im talking about something like a grate drought trough the center of america cutting the WORLDS grain supply by 30% but what will a hungry wolrd do will we finaly act or go to ware with people that have food.

Edited by frako, : No reason given.

Edited by frako, : No reason given.


Christianity, One woman's lie about an affair that got seriously out of hand

What are the Christians gonna do to me ..... Forgive me, good luck with that.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 329 by Faith, posted 01-03-2017 11:28 AM Faith has not yet responded

    
RewPrev1
...
2021
22
2324
...
27Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017