The Environment Thread

[JCon]

3 minutes ago, pigseye said:

I'm not the one posting models 80 years in the future showing temperatures on the prairies.

If it looks like a duck, it's probably a duck.

If CO2 is the control knob for temperature, then is Winnpeg immune to the affects? 

We're talking climate change in this thread. If you want to talk about the temperature, I would suggest starting a new thread or going to the Weather Network. 

[pigseye]

1 minute ago, JCon said:

We're talking climate change in this thread. If you want to talk about the temperature, I would suggest starting a new thread or going to the Weather Network. 

Thread title hasn't changed, has it?

[blue_gold_84]

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/01/180112091209.htm

Quote

Increased fluctuations in the path of the North Atlantic jet stream since the 1960s coincide with more extreme weather events in Europe such as heat waves, wildfires and flooding. The new research is the first reconstruction of historical changes in the North Atlantic jet stream prior to the 20th century. By using tree rings, the researchers developed a historical look at the position of the North Atlantic jet back to 1725.

When the North Atlantic Jet is in the extreme northern position, the British Isles and western Europe have a summer heat wave while southeastern Europe has heavy rains and flooding, she said.

When the jet is in the extreme southern position, the situation flips: Western Europe has heavy rains and flooding while southeastern Europe has extreme high temperatures, drought and wildfires.

This winter's extreme cold and snow in the North American Northeast and extreme warmth and dryness in California and the American Southwest are related to the winter position of the North Pacific Jet...

Climate change isn't just limited to increased temperatures. It also has to do with changes and fluctuations to weather patterns being more extreme throughout the year.

[pigseye]

9 minutes ago, JCon said:

I don't need to. That's done with peer review. That's how the experts distinguish between the crap and science. 

You are starting to see the light my friend,

In Chapter 9, the key science chapter, the IPCC concludes that "it is very highly likely that greenhouse gas forcing has been the dominant cause of the observed global warming over the last 50 years". The IPCC leads us to believe that this statement is very much supported by the majority of reviewers. The reality is that there is surprisingly little explicit support for this key notion. Among the 23 independent reviewers just 4 explicitly endorsed the chapter with its hypothesis, and one other endorsed only a specific section.

Question everything has always been my mantra. I won't believe something just because the consensus may, show me the actual evidence behind what you are saying and let me decide for myself.

[Wanna-B-Fanboy]

1 hour ago, pigseye said:

Thread title hasn't changed, has it?

Trust me, I've tried....

[Wanna-B-Fanboy]

3 hours ago, pigseye said:

Thread title hasn't changed, has it?

Just did- thanks for that.

[Rich]

Gentlemen, please leave the insults out of the discussion.   If you can’t debate this as mature adults, you will be treated like spoiled children.  

[Mark F]

4 hours ago, Rich said:

Gentlemen, please leave the insults out of the discussion.

 

I understand your concern, but

We have a person posting  who  who frequently will not directly answer a question, who ignores  (or doesn't understand) information posted about the issue, who frequently  attempts to change the subject, deflects, and obstructs a sensible  discussion.  when all else fails, he insults.

I responded at length to one of his posts, in response He said to me "what are you rambling on about now" 

hardly polite.

In a discussion about climate change, he brings up today's temperature.

This is absurd. 

 hopefully he doesn't confuse anybody that might be reading this,  with his nonsense.

That's the only reason anybody bothers to reply to him. 

Edited April 11, 2018 by Mark F

[Rich]

8 minutes ago, Mark F said:

 

I understand your concern, but

We have a person posting  who  who frequently will not directly answer a question, who ignores  (or doesn't understand) information posted about the issue, who frequently  attempts to change the subject, deflects, and obstructs a sensible  discussion.  when all else fails, he insults.

I responded at length to one of his posts, in response He said to me "what are you rambling on about now" 

hardly polite.

In a discussion about climate change, he brings up today's temperature.

This is absurd. 

 hopefully he doesn't confuse anybody that might be reading this,  with his nonsense.

That's the only reason anybody bothers to reply to him. 

If someone is insulting, people should report the post rather then insult back.  All people are doing is adding to the work a mod needs to do to put a discussion on track, and frankly that is not appreciated. 

If you don't like how someone debates, don't engage them.

If you don't think there are other people who share a certain point of view and you simply want to simply dismiss it and call it absurd and nonsense, then you aren't looking for a discussion, nor will you change anyones mind on what appears to be an important topic to you.    Silencing a point of view does not make it go away.

Bottom line, there really is no excuse to resort to name calling and insults.

 

[bigg jay]

There's also the ignore function which works wonderfully for this guy.

[Mark F]

9 minutes ago, Rich said:

If you don't like how someone debates, don't engage them.

 

I don't like it when people mislead people about something as important as this, intentionally or otherwise.

That's not debating.

I won't bother with this thread anymore. Which means of course, he wins.

your site, your rules.

Edited April 12, 2018 by Mark F

[Rich]

7 minutes ago, Mark F said:

I don't like it when people mislead people about something as important as this, intentionally or otherwise.

That's not debating.

I won't bother with this thread anymore. Which means of course, he wins.

your site, your rules.

Would you prefer a site where I am the final arbiter of what thoughts people can post and not post on all topics?  That is a line that I believe keeps moving once started, nor do I think I'm qualified for that responsibility.

[pigseye]

On 4/9/2018 at 8:25 AM, Mark F said:

Due to the decision to ignore this , these companies now have a massive financial problem similar to the tobacco industry.

article in "the Independent"

Next we might see shareholder actions against them.

The judge in California threw out the case Mark

https://www.heartland.org/news-opinion/news/hot-air-let-out-of-californias-climate-change-lawsuit

Quote

Apparently, California’s idea that the oil companies secreted away formulas for cooler, or maybe it was warmer, weather did not persuade Judge Alsup. A reporter who was in the judicial classroom tweeted “Judge slams California cities lawyers says they misled the court – says document they claim ‘shows conspiracy’ shows nothing of the sort #climatechange tutorial.” Other attendees agreed.

The judge also agreed with the following

Happer and the others provided a lovely summary.

1. The climate is always changing; changes like those of the past half-century are common in the geologic record, driven by powerful natural phenomena

2. Human influences on the climate are a small (1%) perturbation to natural energy flows

3. It is not possible to tell how much of the modest recent warming can be ascribed to human influences

4. There have been no detrimental changes observed in the most salient climate variables and today’s projections of future changes are highly uncertain

Monckton’s (my) group had two straightforward points.

First result: … there is no “consensus” among scientists that recent global warming was chiefly anthropogenic, still less that unmitigated anthropogenic warming has been or will be dangerous or catastrophic …

Second result: … even if it be assumed [for the sake of argument] that all of the 0.8 [degree Celsius] global warming since anthropogenic influence first became potentially significant in 1950 was attributable to us, in the present century little more than 1.2 [C] of global warming is to be expected, not the 3.3 [C] that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) had predicted.

Have the courts gone crazy now or is it the lunatics on the other side who try to bring these suites to begin with?

Edited April 12, 2018 by pigseye
P

[pigseye]

18 hours ago, Mark F said:

 

I understand your concern, but

We have a person posting  who  who frequently will not directly answer a question, who ignores  (or doesn't understand) information posted about the issue, who frequently  attempts to change the subject, deflects, and obstructs a sensible  discussion.  when all else fails, he insults.

I responded at length to one of his posts, in response He said to me "what are you rambling on about now" 

hardly polite.

In a discussion about climate change, he brings up today's temperature.

This is absurd. 

 hopefully he doesn't confuse anybody that might be reading this,  with his nonsense.

That's the only reason anybody bothers to reply to him. 

It's not my intention to insult anyone, if I did I apologize for that.

Like you, I won't back down from my beliefs if I think you are wrong about something I'm going to say so.

I am in a science field, have been for over 25 years and when I see people attacking other scientists just because their results don't fall in line with current thinking, I get annoyed.

I'm actually all for green energy, it's cleaner, provides new jobs and is good for the economy but please don't try to tell me that I'm a science denier, just because I'm not as passionate as you might be about something.

And don't try to tell me that I don't understand the science, you don't know anything about me or how much or how little I know of the subject. I have read every link that has been posted here and it is just more of the same mainstream information that has been out for years, much of it is actually out of date.

I admit, the temperature data was a bit over the top but it was meant to show you that it has gotten dam hot on the prairies in the past without any help from humans. 

[pigseye]

I don't want to make Mark F cry but, c'est la vie

A global-scale instrumental temperature record that has not been contaminated by (a) artificial urban heat (asphalt, machines, industrial waste heat, etc.), (b) ocean-air affected biases (detailed herein), or (c) artificial adjustments to past data that uniformly serve to cool the past and warm the present . . . is now available.

http://notrickszone.com/2018/05/03/its-here-a-1900-2010-instrumental-global-temperature-record-that-closely-aligns-with-paleo-proxy-data/#sthash.mLDyALlv.dpbs

most of the modern era warming occurred prior to the 1940s, and the there has effectively been no net warming since then.

[pigseye]

During 2017, there were 150 graphs from 122 scientific papers published in peer-reviewed journals indicating modern temperatures are not unprecedented, unusual, or hockey-stick-shaped — nor do they fall outside the range of natural variability.  We are a little over 4 months into the new publication year and already 81 graphs from 62 scientific papers undermine claims that modern era warming is climatically unusual.

http://notrickszone.com/2018/05/10/81-graphs-from-62-new-2018-papers-invalidate-claims-of-unprecedented-global-scale-modern-warming/#sthash.QgCk6M4S.dpbs

 

Who are the deniers again? 

[blue_gold_84]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/climate-change-heat-waves-1.4751633

[Mark F]

9 minutes ago, blue_gold_84 said:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/climate-change-heat-waves-1.4751633

Love the "we just have to get used to it" statements in that article.

we know what happens when you don't have air conditioning, when it gets hot, and your old, young, or have health problems. you die.

forget air conditioning,

 there are literally billions of people who on a good day, don't have enough to eat,     no clean water, no medicine, and no healthcare;

  there are going to be deaths in the millions caused by this. not to mention climate wars, ethnic conflict and collapse, as people figure out who to blame.

all of those things predicted by the Pentagon, years ago.

 

[blue_gold_84]

I think it's to the point we're collectively effed... The damage is done. You can't spew loads and loads of CO2 into the atmosphere for decades on end and not expect changes.

[FrostyWinnipeg]

Angus Reid’s polling this month suggests 13 per cent of Manitobans believe “global warming is a theory that has not yet been proven.” Meanwhile, 30 per cent of Manitobans say is climate change is “a fact, and is mostly caused by natural changes”; 43 per cent say it’s “mostly caused by (human-made) emissions.”

Saskatchewan residents are the most likely to believe global warming hasn’t been proven, with 29 per cent of respondents voicing that view, and just 38 per cent blaming human-made emissions.

[Mark F]

non stop massive fires around the world now.

redding california burning down.

 

[basslicker]

On ‎2018‎-‎04‎-‎11 at 5:33 PM, Mark F said:

 

I understand your concern, but

We have a person posting  who  who frequently will not directly answer a question, who ignores  (or doesn't understand) information posted about the issue, who frequently  attempts to change the subject, deflects, and obstructs a sensible  discussion.  when all else fails, he insults.

I responded at length to one of his posts, in response He said to me "what are you rambling on about now" 

hardly polite.

In a discussion about climate change, he brings up today's temperature.

This is absurd. 

 hopefully he doesn't confuse anybody that might be reading this,  with his nonsense.

That's the only reason anybody bothers to reply to him. 

The most insulting thing on this website, and this is even gong back to the old days at 'the other place', is that the majority on here attack the minority opinion and treat them like infidels.  If you're not with the ruling, often Liberal (in opinion not political affiliation), opinion then you're stupid and regarded as such.  It's why I haven't even bothered logging in for almost 6 months.  I'm not sure why I did today hahaha. 

That being said I try not to antagonize people nowadays, on purpose at least. 

 

Godspeed brothers

Edited July 27, 2018 by basslicker

[yogi]

Reality does have a liberal bias...

[Mark F]

I admire the courage and dedication of the firefighters, equipment operators, pilots, and police that fight these  massive wildfires.

The one in N California doubled in size overnight.

 sky in redding is orange. Looks like the vision of hell.

Edited July 28, 2018 by Mark F

[FrostyWinnipeg]

24 minutes ago, Mark F said:

I admire the courage and dedication of the firefighters, equipment operators, pilots, and police that fight these  massive wildfires.

The one in N California doubled in size overnight.

 sky in Reddit is orange. Looks like the vision of hell.

Orange indeed.