Climate and Weather

Daniel Miller said:
Let us assume that among qualified climate researchers there is a very small percentage that are politically or financially motivated to reach a certain conclusion. For the sake of argument, let's assume that it is 10% on each side of the man-made climate change argument. About 95% of all qualified researchers come down on the side that our current climate change is unprecedented in its rate, and that it is caused by human activity. About 5% disagrees. If we take away 10% from each side, we get 86 out of 100 believing that our current climate change is unprecedented in its rate, and that it is caused by human activity. We get only 4 or 5 out of 100 disagreeing.

The sound bet is with the 86, and against the 4 or 5 outlier researchers.
Click to expand...
Where did you find that "about 95% of all qualified researchers come down on the side that our current climate change is unprecedented in its rate"?
 
Ricky Fandango said:
I linked the wrong article from that web page, although that is an interesting read.
It lays out a pretty contentious history in the field.

Here's the one I meant to link regarding abrupt climate change.
Rapid Climate Change

This was a response to Danny's belief that climate was relatively stable before the internal combustion engine.
Click to expand...
You have misstated my belief. I never said climate was stable in the past, or relatively so. All historical climate studies show that it has changed over the last 4.5 billion years. My belief is that it is changing more rapidly now than it should, that the change is toward warming when it should be toward cooling, and that the change is caused by human activity.
 
Ricky Fandango said:
Where did you find that "about 95% of all qualified researchers come down on the side that our current climate change is unprecedented in its rate"?
Click to expand...
Well-known. But here is a NASA link which says:

"Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities. In addition, most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position. The following is a partial list of these organizations, along with links to their published statements and a selection of related resources."

https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/
 
Ricky Fandango said:
I linked the wrong article from that web page, although that is an interesting read.
It lays out a pretty contentious history in the field.

Here's the one I meant to link regarding abrupt climate change.
Rapid Climate Change

This was a response to Danny's belief that climate was relatively stable before the internal combustion engine.
Click to expand...

Did he say he believed that? I must have missed it.
 
Wez said:
Like what?
Click to expand...
Read the first article I posted mistakenly about the "discovery" of global warming.
Every ten years or so, there's a new theory, and a new battle over its validity.
The site and the article support the AGW theory.
Its interesting and informative.
 
Ricky Fandango said:
Read the first article I posted mistakenly about the "discovery" of global warming.
Every ten years or so, there's a new theory, and a new battle over its validity.
The site and the article support the AGW theory.
Its interesting and informative.
Click to expand...

Can you link it please?
 
Daniel Miller said:
You have misstated my belief. I never said climate was stable in the past, or relatively so. All historical climate studies show that it has changed over the last 4.5 billion years. My belief is that it is changing more rapidly now than it should, that the change is toward warming when it should be toward cooling, and that the change is caused by human activity.
Click to expand...
Change happens regardless of human activity...
The question is can humans do anything rational or meaningful to stop or control climate change?
What have you done on the rational and meaningful front?
 
Wez said:
I see you're having a conversation with yourself again. It's easy to spot, you start responding to things that have nothing to do with the actual conversation. It happens all the time.
Click to expand...

And it is apparently contagious. The plumber is showing symptoms like posting articles he doesn't understand.
 
Daniel Miller said:
Well-known. But here is a NASA link which says:

"Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities. In addition, most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position. The following is a partial list of these organizations, along with links to their published statements and a selection of related resources."

https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/
Click to expand...
Lets pretend that NASA is unbiased, and above reproach, and that there is no political element to what gets peer review, and what doesn't.
You stated that the current climate change is unprecedented, and that humans are the cause.
NASA says that the current climate change is likely to be a result of human activity.

Two completely different things.

I'll let you respond to this point before going further.
 
Wez said:
I see you're having a conversation with yourself again. It's easy to spot, you start responding to things that have nothing to do with the actual conversation. It happens all the time.
Click to expand...
You guys don't like that I cut to the chase by agreeing with you that AGW is real. The reality is that you guys pay lip service to your own argument while consuming vast amounts of fossil fuels everyday. Hypocrites, the lot of you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top