General / Off-Topic Recycle or Die! (the elite environmental thread)

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
And when the local weatherman (or any weather man for that matter) get's to the point where they can accurately predict the weather a week from today with anything even remotely resembling consistency I'll start taking the models more seriously. Until then, I'm keeping my mind open.
No, you're closing down your brain, probably because denial is more comfortable and less scary.
 
And when the local weatherman (or any weather man for that matter) get's to the point where they can accurately predict the weather a week from today with anything even remotely resembling consistency I'll start taking the models more seriously. Until then, I'm keeping my mind open.

You still don't know what climate is after WeComeInPeace's explanation and your own citation? There's no recovery for you then.
 
Says who (other than jasonbarron)? Never heard this nonsense before and I'm totally up to be redirected to one of your favorite conspiracy sides now. Bring it! :D
Check out post #3154, Frillop. The quote is directly from the article explaining it.

Edit: Nah Gregg, I totally get it. Totally. You want to lend the science more credence than it deserves. That's 100% completely gotten my friend, and has been so for a very long time.
 
Last edited:
Check out post #3154, Frillop. The quote is directly from the article explaining it.
That link of yours says exactly what we're trying to tell you.
Edit: Nah Gregg, I totally get it. Totally. You want to lend the science more credence than it deserves. That's 100% completely gotten my friend, and has been so for a very long time.
Without science, you would have no car, no GPS, not computer, no antibiotics, no electricity, no central heating, and no food for 7.8 billion humans. I think you get the picture. Science deserves a lot more credence than you are willing to give it ;)
 
Last edited:
The confusion might come from 2 different interpretations of the word 'climate'. The difference is quite well explained here:
We're talking about "EARTH CLIMATE" here, Jason!
Yep, that's exactly the same link I already supplied probably five times now, along with this quote taken directly from the paper, near the top:

"What is the difference between weather and climate?
Weather is the day-to-day state of the atmosphere, and its short-term variation in minutes to weeks. People generally think of weather as the combination of temperature, humidity, precipitation, cloudiness, visibility, and wind. We talk about changes in weather in terms of the near future: "How hot is it right now?" "What will it be like today?" and "Will we get a snowstorm this week?"

Climate is the weather of a place averaged over a period of time, often 30 years. Climate information includes the statistical weather information that tells us about the normal weather, as well as the range of weather extremes for a location."

I'll kindly direct your attention to the emboldened parts.

@WeComeInPeace, yes, I'm aware of the benefits of science to mankind. Ironically, probably more so than you.
 
I liked it better when it was called global warming.
When we add more CO2 to the atmosphere, less of the energy from the Sun gets reflected back into space.
That’s all. The rest are secondary effects.
 
Went to one of the big Christmas parties for the Doctors last night, in the hybrid car. Had to borrow clothes to go to the wedding before that, so was a bit overdressed. Most of my closet is empty nowadays.

A lot of the luxury vehicles parked outside were all hybrids too. The Christmas lights were all LEDs this year, and lots of the crowd were avoiding meat. There's a sense that things have changed.
Last time, it was when cigarettes disappeared. But that was due to legislation. This is more of a quiet growing realization, even among the oldest ones. The behaviour is being updated.
 
So you don't have any issues with all the CO2, yet bound in ice, would more and more start to melt and thus triggering an unstoppable catch-22?
I'm no scientist and unable to do the math. All I know is that many scientists fear exactly that will happen.
There are several tipping points. One is methane bound in ice (clathrate hydrates). That's a nasty one, because methane is a much more potent greenhouse gas than CO2, and there's a lot of it. Release of the methane would cause a huge jump in the global average temperature. Some say 10 deg C, but the timescale is uncertain. The data say that methane is being released at higher rates than predicted by the models.

Since this is a positive feedback loop, only small inaccuracies in the model could result in huge changes to the outcome. Not to the general understanding of the mechanism, it is melting, but to the timescale of the release and it's influence on the global average temperature on short timescales.

Another positive feedback loop is the Albedo effect. Ice looks white because it reflects more light sunlight. Oceans look dark because they absorb light (energy). The more ice that melts the larger the area absorbing energy. Quite beautiful that the ice melts at accelerating rates if you watch the planet from a spaceship, but pretty alarming at the surface.
 
Last edited:
Went to one of the big Christmas parties for the Doctors last night, in the hybrid car. Had to borrow clothes to go to the wedding before that, so was a bit overdressed. Most of my closet is empty nowadays.

A lot of the luxury vehicles parked outside were all hybrids too. The Christmas lights were all LEDs this year, and lots of the crowd were avoiding meat. There's a sense that things have changed.
Last time, it was when cigarettes disappeared. But that was due to legislation. This is more of a quiet growing realization, even among the oldest ones. The behaviour is being updated.
Wow, all the rich, overpaid doctors' luxury cars at the big Christmas party were all hybrids??? Holy smokes, those people sound like they're really doing their part to avert a climate crisis!
 
...
...and if you understand how something as 'stable' as our reality is build upon something as unpredictable and based on possibilities like quantum mechanics, you'd certainly get a glimpse why you can't take weather forecasting as a model for earth climate predictions.

This is a valid analogy. But your optimism is probably misplaced.

I tried something similar with sand grains and a sand dune analogy before, but theres a real problem for them to make the mental transition to large scale phase shifts.
The neural net is lacking a couple layers. Can't process big picture.

Edit:
Eg- Having a firearm is great! I can defend myself! Vs What happens when 300 million people get guns?
Eg- Vaccinate? Why when the personal risk is small? Vs What happens when no one is vaccinated?
Hence- Weather I understand, why isn't Climate exactly the same as lots of Weather? It should be even MORE unpredictable!

Maybe cow and stampede would work? Maybe car and traffic?
IDK.
 
Last edited:
I've never heard of that group. Who are they and why should we discount anything they say?
im curious did you watch that video from the church militant off youtube??
i encourage you to take the time to watch it. its worth watching purely for understanding the ever evolving methods of deception employed in the Climate change movement, and the very people who are behind it!!
 
im curious did you watch that video from the church militant off youtube??
i encourage you to take the time to watch it. its worth watching purely for understanding the ever evolving methods of deception employed in the Climate change movement, and the very people who are behind it!!

(Going to regret this.)
Ok, what are you referencing here?
And... "church militant"? What church is that? Why do they have "militants"? And are they after the X-Men?
 
So you don't have any issues with all the CO2, yet bound in ice, would more and more start to melt and thus triggering an unstoppable catch-22?
I'm no scientist and unable to do the math. All I know is that many scientists fear exactly that will happen.
It's organic carbon trapped in the ice. The CO2 comes when it starts to decompose. It's a potentially serious, but complex issue. It's not a balloon of CO2 or Methane trapped under some ice plug.
There is really no point for us to discuss it. The simple undeniable facts are more than enough to see that we should reduce global emissions of CO2.
 
Direct consequence of global warming related to the human activities.

the Victoria Falls on the border between the Zimbabwe and the Zambia.

January 2019 :

1.jpeg


Today :

2.jpeg
 
Looks like a good soul here deleted the original post 👍with the extremist right wing hate propagande,... militant church, ....yeah, of course, what else! Pfff,,,
 
For good measure, this for example are reliable and trustworthy sources to refer to instead.




Now I shall leave you at your continuous engagement with Mr. Barron who has given more than enough evidence to understand what purpose his postings serve.
 
Last edited:
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom