Climate and Weather

[dad4]

Well the catastrophic predictors get the biggest megaphone and drive policy. You're a trust the experts guy, and its your science experts that are predicting these catastrophes. So how do you decipher what science to believe? It is a huge credibility issue that is only getting worse. I'm glad you acknowledge that MSM is the least trustworthy source. Curious, where do I find Q reading material, other than reading Crush's posts?

Like I've mentioned before, if middle of road estimates are 900 inches of snow at Alta and Dorado in the kelp beds, I'm all for global warming.

The climate effects to worry about are all medium to long term. For example, over the next 80 years, sea levels rise by 1-3 meters. That’s middle of the road. It also means flooding almost all coastal flood plains in the world, such as Bangladesh. ( Rich places, like LA or SD, can decide to build sea walls once it starts. You’ll pay extra taxes and lose your beaches, but the people will be ok. Less true in poor countries. )

Go to NOAA if you want consensus estimates. MSM is better than fringe media, but it’s still media.

2022 Sea Level Rise Technical Report

This Sea Level Rise Technical Report provides the most up-to-date sea level rise projections available for all U.S. states and territories; decision makers will look to it for information. This multi-agency effort, representing the first update since 2017, offers projections out to the year 2150...

oceanservice.noaa.gov

.

I‘m sure you can find some fringe scientist who issued a fringe prediction ten years ago. Those guys exist, just like Lomberg exists.

But most of the science has always indicated a 50-100 year time scale for anything severe. The early effects were things like Greenland ice cap melting, loss of arctic ice, and coral bleaching. All of those are happening, and can be observed now.

 

[watfly]

This seems timely.

Climate scientist says media manipulates truth about global warming

A climate change scientist has claimed the world's leading academic journals reject papers which don't 'support certain narratives' about the issue and instead favor 'distorted' research.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[Grace T.]

Look it up. It’s surprisingly small. Around 200-300.

But they had LOTS if kids and grandkids.

DNA sequences suggest 250 people made up original Native American founding population

The latest news and information for the University of Kansas.

news.ku.edu

Within a few thousand years, there were enough people to kill off the dire wolves, wooly mammoths, giant sloths, and most of the other large land mammals. Just spears. No one had invented a bow yet.

Not definitive. Other researchers have said it was multiple waves of migration, which would imply larger numbers.

Dogs probably helped. Ironic now they are one of the biggest problems.

 

[Desert Hound]

I stand corrected. For MOST people, it gets rational once we agree on some basic facts. (It is happening, we are causing it, and it will cause significant problems over the long term.)

Here is a case in point where you focus only on one outcome. It is really all you do.

There is no nuance in your discussion.

You take it as a fact that the theory is true. There is a reason why it is called a theory. It has not been proven.

There are a number of prominent scientists who for instance disagree CO2 is a driver to any significant effect, point out that the modeling is still in its infancy and as such is still very unreliable, or think claims of catastrophic warming is overblown.

These same scientists also point out that if you want to get funding you have to toe the gov line. That distorts the research.

These scientists are also treated in the same way gov/media treated scientists who disagreed with Covid policies.

There is a lot of political capital and lots of money interests invested in promoting the idea that warming will be bad.

 

[Grace T.]

The climate effects to worry about are all medium to long term. For example, over the next 80 years, sea levels rise by 1-3 meters. That’s middle of the road. It also means flooding almost all coastal flood plains in the world, such as Bangladesh. ( Rich places, like LA or SD, can decide to build sea walls once it starts. You’ll pay extra taxes and lose your beaches, but the people will be ok. Less true in poor countries. )

Go to NOAA if you want consensus estimates. MSM is better than fringe media, but it’s still media.

2022 Sea Level Rise Technical Report

This Sea Level Rise Technical Report provides the most up-to-date sea level rise projections available for all U.S. states and territories; decision makers will look to it for information. This multi-agency effort, representing the first update since 2017, offers projections out to the year 2150...

oceanservice.noaa.gov

.

I‘m sure you can find some fringe scientist who issued a fringe prediction ten years ago. Those guys exist, just like Lomberg exists.

But most of the science has always indicated a 50-100 year time scale for anything severe. The early effects were things like Greenland ice cap melting, loss of arctic ice, and coral bleaching. All of those are happening, and can be observed now.

Part of the dilemma. Lots of cheap land in inhospitable Canada might become lovely. Russia is a cess pool of decline headed for the worst kind of oblivion even before they foolishly invaded Ukraine. Now they have all that lovely real estate. Bad for the Bangladeshi and Micronesians but doubt you’ll get Americans to stop flying and retract meat anymore than you can tell the Chinese this far on economic development no further

Don’t buy the overgrazing theory on the Sahara. That’s a natural mechanism that’s been developing for ever. We know from the Roman and Phoenician histories it was much more of a garden even as late as the Roman era. Things seem to turn around the Muslim conquest which might have also been an impetus for reworking of Arabian society.

 

[espola]

Here is a case in point where you focus only on one outcome. It is really all you do.

There is no nuance in your discussion.

You take it as a fact that the theory is true. There is a reason why it is called a theory. It has not been proven.

Did you know that Newton's Theory of Gravitation is still called a "theory" despite the fact that NASA and SpaceX use it every day??

Did you know that Einstein's Theories of Relativity (special and general) are still called "theories" despite the fact that GPS wouldn't work without taking them into the calculations?

 

[Desert Hound]

This one isn’t really a back and forth kind of issue.

The scientific back and forth is over questions like, “Will it take 50 or 100 years for sea levels to rise by 2 meters?”. Or, “what will happen to the average frequency of Category 5 hurricanes if global temperature rise by 3 Celcius?”. It isn’t over whether we are causing CO2 and temperatures to rise in a fundamentally different way than it has before.

This is absolutely a back and forth issue.

Global warming is a theory. We want a back and forth on the issue. Different viewpoints help science advance.

 

[Slobodan]

If you are looking only at the most catastrophic projections, you are deliberately listening to the least trustworthy sources.

That’s like trying to understand mainstream conservatism by reading nothing but Q. Yeah, there are loons out there. But there are also rational voices.

The middle of the road estimates are bad enough. You don’t need to seek out the “we’re all gonna die” crowd.

Least trustworthy... like Bill Nye the science guy? Resident expert for libtard networks like CNN and MSNBS?

Bill Nye on how to address climate change

Bill Nye invokes the film "Oppenheimer" when explaining how we should address climate change.» Subscribe to MSNBC: http://on.msnbc.com/SubscribeTomsnbcAbout:...

www.youtube.com

 

[espola]

Part of the dilemma. Lots of cheap land in inhospitable Canada might become lovely. Russia is a cess pool of decline headed for the worst kind of oblivion even before they foolishly invaded Ukraine. Now they have all that lovely real estate. Bad for the Bangladeshi and Micronesians but doubt you’ll get Americans to stop flying and retract meat anymore than you can tell the Chinese this far on economic development no further

Don’t buy the overgrazing theory on the Sahara. That’s a natural mechanism that’s been developing for ever. We know from the Roman and Phoenician histories it was much more of a garden even as late as the Roman era. Things seem to turn around the Muslim conquest which might have also been an impetus for reworking of Arabian society.

That's interesting since there is good geological evidence that the Sahara has been desert since about 2500 BCE or sooner.

More information on the Sahara green/brown cycles here --

Sahara - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Desert Hound]

This seems timely.

Climate scientist says media manipulates truth about global warming

A climate change scientist has claimed the world's leading academic journals reject papers which don't 'support certain narratives' about the issue and instead favor 'distorted' research.

www.dailymail.co.uk

It is very timely.

A number of scientists have expressed the exact same concern about not getting published.

It is worse than that. Funding is problematic if you don't toe the line. Scientists are incentivized to produce work regarding climate alarmism because their careers depend on it. That type of issue produces bad results.

You dont have to go far back to see how it works. Covid anyone? We saw how skewed everything was. Dissenting voices were treated as fringe. Those dissenting voices were correct however.

 

[espola]

This is absolutely a back and forth issue.

Global warming is a theory. We want a back and forth on the issue. Different viewpoints help science advance.

"Global warming" is currently measurable, providing good evidence even for your mistaken definition of "theory".

 

[espola]

It is very timely.

A number of scientists have expressed the exact same concern about not getting published.

It is worse than that. Funding is problematic if you don't toe the line. Scientists are incentivized to produce work regarding climate alarmism because their careers depend on it. That type of issue produces bad results.

You dont have to go far back to see how it works. Covid anyone? We saw how skewed everything was. Dissenting voices were treated as fringe. Those dissenting voices were correct however.

BS, The quickest way to a Nobel Prize is to make a discovery that contradicts current assumptions about things.

 

[Grace T.]

That's interesting since there is good geological evidence that the Sahara has been desert since about 2500 BCE or sooner.

More information on the Sahara green/brown cycles here --

Sahara - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Sheep domestication is estimated at 8000 BCE and began in the Fertile Crescent (I know that because I just read it in my kid's AP Ancient History text )

It points out we don't have a very good sense of the climate since the real recorded history doesn't really start until the Renaissance and before that we have chunks and huge periods which are unrecorded. We know in the Roman cycle that areas which are now desert were green and that Africa was considered a lush agricultural province along the coast (though the desert did exist south)....similar a bit to what California is today....northern morocco tunisia and libya did not look then what it looked like now, unless you believe the theory the Romans just talked up Carthage to further their glory and Carthage wasn't really the mecca that history claims it to be. We also know that between 150 CE- 600 CE there was a very large climate shift going on, which historians suspect may have been responsible for the Steppe tribes moving into the eras occupied by Roman and Chinese civilizations. Even more interesting is the bronze age collapse...not enough evidence to sustain it but historians think widespread climate change might have contributed to the migrations that caused the collapse. We are trying to decipher all this by looking through a key hole at a much wider picture, admittedly while also smoking while trying to do it.

 

[Slobodan]

LOVE IT! Nevada Rangers! This is how you deal with unemployed, deodorant avoiders at Burning Man. Personally, I would have let all that rain wash their bodies off my tires. Yeah, you had your chances to get out of the way and you chose poorly.

 

[espola]

Sheep domestication is estimated at 8000 BCE and began in the Fertile Crescent (I know that because I just read it in my kid's AP Ancient History text )

It points out we don't have a very good sense of the climate since the real recorded history doesn't really start until the Renaissance and before that we have chunks and huge periods which are unrecorded. We know in the Roman cycle that areas which are now desert were green and that Africa was considered a lush agricultural province along the coast (though the desert did exist south)....similar a bit to what California is today....northern morocco tunisia and libya did not look then what it looked like now, unless you believe the theory the Romans just talked up Carthage to further their glory and Carthage wasn't really the mecca that history claims it to be. We also know that between 150 CE- 600 CE there was a very large climate shift going on, which historians suspect may have been responsible for the Steppe tribes moving into the eras occupied by Roman and Chinese civilizations. Even more interesting is the bronze age collapse...not enough evidence to sustain it but historians think widespread climate change might have contributed to the migrations that caused the collapse. We are trying to decipher all this by looking through a key hole at a much wider picture, admittedly while also smoking while trying to do it.

The Carthaginian settlements in Africa were between the Atlas Mountains and the Mediterranean coast. They never settled in the Sahara.

 

[Desert Hound]

That's interesting since there is good geological evidence that the Sahara has been desert since about 2500 BCE or sooner.

Per usual you miss the point.

The Sahara went from being grasslands to a desert. The climate always changes. And when it does we adapt.

 

[Desert Hound]

"Global warming" is currently measurable, providing good evidence even for your mistaken definition of "theory".

A changing climate...something that is natural is not a theory.

The theory is that the current cycle is man made. That theory has yet to be proven.

You cant be that dumb can you thinking you just scored a point?

 

[Slobodan]

That's interesting since there is good geological evidence that the Sahara has been desert since about 2500 BCE or sooner.

More information on the Sahara green/brown cycles here --

Sahara - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Did you just use Wikipedia for a source again?

 

[dad4]

Least trustworthy... like Bill Nye the science guy? Resident expert for libtard networks like CNN and MSNBS?

Bill Nye on how to address climate change

Bill Nye invokes the film "Oppenheimer" when explaining how we should address climate change.» Subscribe to MSNBC: http://on.msnbc.com/SubscribeTomsnbcAbout:...

www.youtube.com

Bill Nye is an actor. Quoting him is like getting your medical advice from Doogie Howser.

How about you dredge up a 10-20 year old government report and see what it was predicting? You know, try to actually find out what mainstream scientific opinion on climate was saying in 2003.

I know it is easier to do a web search for hyperbole from some lightweight MSM type with an am-stud degree. But those aren’t the ones I’m defending.

 

[espola]

A changing climate...something that is natural is not a theory.

The theory is that the current cycle is man made. That theory has yet to be proven.

You cant be that dumb can you thinking you just scored a point?

You're babbling.