Why Climate Change Won't Matter in 20 Years

[adoxograph]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

NEWSFLASH!
World found to extend beyond US border.


Sent from my SGP521 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

Really? What? Are you sure? Wait a minute - you are joking, right?

[Delfin]

Originally Posted by mr_f

Ignoring the odd insults, I am still curious about your claim. Do you really believe the Paris agreement will lead to a reduction in global temperatures? You are quite possibly the only person in existence that thinks the agreement will be that effective.


They were aiming to limit warming to 2ºC. There appears to be near universal agreement that the current commitments will not achieve that goal. (Perhaps limiting warming to 3ºC.)

Still ignoring the main point, I see. As I said, I don't blame you since it blows up your meme.

But to your torture of the English language, yes, the Paris Accords pretend to reduce the temperature of the planet compared to doing nothing. And the difference between doing nothing and spending trillions is a difference of of 1/5th of a degree C. Let me know if you need me to draw this out in picture form if you are still having trouble understanding.

Whether global temps will increase by 2 or 3 degrees C by 2100 remains to be seen. Since none of the models predicting this have had much going for them in terms of accuracy since they are based on an evidently faulty value for climate sensitivity as well as incorrect assumptions regarding negative feedbacks, I doubt we'll see that level of warming. But time will tell. The only thing that is quite clear is that whatever is actually going to happen is going to happen whether warmist loons continue to spend vast sums of money accomplishing nothing, and diverting needed resources from projects that would be of benefit to mankind.

[mr_f]

Originally Posted by Delfin

Still ignoring the main point, I see. As I said, I don't blame you since it blows up your meme.

But to your torture of the English language, yes, the Paris Accords pretend to reduce the temperature of the planet compared to doing nothing. And the difference between doing nothing and spending trillions is a difference of of 1/5th of a degree C. Let me know if you need me to draw this out in picture form if you are still having trouble understanding.

Whether global temps will increase by 2 or 3 degrees C by 2100 remains to be seen. Since none of the models predicting this have had much going for them in terms of accuracy since they are based on an evidently faulty value for climate sensitivity as well as incorrect assumptions regarding negative feedbacks, I doubt we'll see that level of warming. But time will tell. The only thing that is quite clear is that whatever is actually going to happen is going to happen whether warmist loons continue to spend vast sums of money accomplishing nothing, and diverting needed resources from projects that would be of benefit to mankind.

Since you are still having trouble understanding what portion of the increase in atmospheric CO2 is attributable to humans, I don't think you are in a good place to be making projections. But I do enjoy the continued childish insults. Keep 'em coming.

[Delfin]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

newhaul denies AGW, you apparently do too. No confusion.

Ah, but that is not what you initially wrote. Unless you are once again mashing together the concept of climate change with the cause of climate change. Since you have trouble with the honest use of words as does apparently Mr. F., let me clarify the terminology for you. Climate change happens. In the short term it is called weather. In the long term it is called climate change and no one doubts it has been happening for eons. You accused Newhaul of denying climate change, which if you believe is the case, then you a sick man.

Anthropogenic global warming is the concept that the 12 molecules out of every million molecules of atmospheric gas are magical and are responsible for climate change. That is a highly suspicious pseudo scientific concept that is currently under serious attack by gathering mountains of contrary data. You apparently believe in that scam, and just as I deny that I am Napoleon, I deny the similar delusion of AGW.

Clear now?

[mr_f]

Originally Posted by Delfin

Ah, but that is not what you initially wrote. Unless you are once again mashing together the concept of climate change with the cause of climate change. Since you have trouble with the honest use of words as does apparently Mr. F., let me clarify the terminology for you. Climate change happens. In the short term it is called weather. In the long term it is called climate change and no one doubts it has been happening for eons. You accused Newhaul of denying climate change, which if you believe is the case, then you a sick man.

Anthropogenic global warming is the concept that the 12 molecules out of every million molecules of atmospheric gas are magical and are responsible for climate change. That is a highly suspicious pseudo scientific concept that is currently under serious attack by gathering mountains of contrary data. You apparently believe in that scam, and just as I deny that I am Napoleon, I deny the similar delusion of AGW.

Clear now?

Let me get this straight. You are simultaneously upset that I took your words literally (Paris agreement will reduce temperature) and upset that LE interpreted newhauls words (that he denies humans are causing climate change).

Must be hard to go through life this upset at everyone.

[Celestialsailor]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

Actually, less is more

Where exactly did I say Utopia? You warmist guys are big on ice melts and co2 molecules but fall well short on practical solutions.

...that must mean that you have a solution.

[SailOar]

Originally Posted by Delfin

Yes, SO, in the summertime Greenland ice melts.

Summertime? SUMMERTIME??? Do you know anything about the Arctic?

On March 22 a new record was set (since satellite coverage began ~1980) for the least maximum winter Arctic Sea Ice Extent. 20 DAYS LATER, on April 11, Greenland breaks a record BY A MONTH for the earliest time that at least 10% of the ice cap surface was melting!

But if you understood anything about the study published the water from the melted ice basically stays in place in most all locations which is why the researchers stated that there was little to no total ice lost except around the edges. I really wish you would try to pay attention. Correcting you is getting tedious.

Take a look at this video about what happens to meltwater on the Greenland ice cap and then try again to convince me that you're not totally clueless.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-EMCxE1v22I

.
.

[stevensuf]

Yet at the other side of the world

https://weather.com/news/climate/new...-breaks-streak

MY bet is on cooling, Maunder Minimum on its way!

Lots of underwater volcanoes going wild under the arctic!!

[stevensuf]

Oh And most plants will gobble up extra co2 up to around 1500ppm and with a few degrees extra temperature will enjoy it to around 2000ppm.

[stevensuf]

OHH and was greenland not green before? a few centruies back when the viking colonised it, before the world got a lot colder and they had to leave greenland because it became whiteland?

The planet has been steadily cooling for the past 10,000 years since the peak of the interglacial period, which by the way is due back any time soon, a return to full blown ice age conditions would cause far more havoc than the small rise in temperature we may have due to some extra co2.

[stevensuf]

yeah warmest year ever!!!!

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by Celestialsailor

...that must mean that you have a solution.

Yes. Accept and adapt.

Sent from my SM-G900I using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[adoxograph]

Originally Posted by stevensuf

... MY bet is on cooling, Maunder Minimum on its way!...

I am working on my PhD in astrophysics right now - and no I'm not an expert in AGW.

My thesis is "Analysing host stars in exoplanetary systems", which includes space weather. I consider myself very knowledgeable in regards to the activities of the only star in our system.

A group of my undergraduates is working on a project to determine the ellipticity of earth's orbit by taking pictures of the sun every day and measuring the diameter. As the sun appears bigger at perihelion than at aphelion they can define the shape of the orbit using the difference. Therefore I have pictures of the sun every day. Our star is rather quiet right now as was the complete cycle 24.

I can tell you one thing stevensuf: Don't bet on a coming Maunder Minimum, thinking that the sun all of a sudden will reduce energy output, as you will lose.

Here a picture from today. (No, that is not one of ours as I could not figure out how to upload pictures. This one is from spacweatherlive.com)

[TurninTurtle]

Originally Posted by Christian Ho

The answer is here and as easy as this......

The fuel for those electric cars = electricity... which is produced primarily by burning coal.

You just suggested moving to the fuel that puts the most MERCURY into the air.

thank you for playing.

[Celestialsailor]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

Yes. Accept and adapt.

Sent from my SM-G900I using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

In other words continue down the road we're on. Yup...guess that's a solution.