There IS a problem with global warming... it stopped in 1998

[brenthutch 444]

3 hours ago, DJL said:

You're again quoting one person as saying there's an imminent catastrophe looming......

UN IPCC scientist Joëlle Gergis declares climate ’emergency’: ‘My grief is rapidly being superseded by rage. Volcanically explosive rage’ – ‘The very foundation of human civilization is at stake’

And that is an IPCC scientist talking, hardly a political loon.

[DJL 235]

1 minute ago, brenthutch said:

UN IPCC scientist Joëlle Gergis declares climate ’emergency’: ‘My grief is rapidly being superseded by rage. Volcanically explosive rage’ – ‘The very foundation of human civilization is at stake’

And that is an IPCC scientist talking, hardly a political loon.

My text that you're replying to with the above:

"You're again quoting one person as saying there's an imminent catastrophe looming as if he means that next week a superflood is going to wipe out your Wilmington vacation house.  Does that get us up to speed?  Try putting that on the scale of human's time on Earth to make it something we can actually discuss."

Do you think that Joelle Gergis is claiming in that sentence that your vacation destination in Wilmington will be washed away within a few weeks or are they both referring to the scale of human existence?  

[brenthutch 444]

1 hour ago, DJL said:

Ok, cite your source please?

https://www.carbonbrief.org/explainer-how-do-scientists-measure-global-temperature

”work out what global temperatures are” = use models to fill in the blanks

[DJL 235]

8 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

https://www.carbonbrief.org/explainer-how-do-scientists-measure-global-temperature

”work out what global temperatures are” = use models to fill in the blanks

And how does that support your statement that the models exaggerate the role of CO2?

[brenthutch 444]

11 minutes ago, DJL said:

My text that you're replying to with the above:

"You're again quoting one person as saying there's an imminent catastrophe looming as if he means that next week a superflood ......

J Gergis is a she, and why does the “one person” I site spewing apocalyptic climate nonsense have dozens of names?

[DJL 235]

1 minute ago, brenthutch said:

J Gergis is a she, and why does the “one person” I site spewing apocalyptic climate nonsense have dozens of names?

You know what sure, call it many people, call them legion.  Do you take their words to mean you will have to cancel your vacation plans next week or are THEY referring to a longer scale on the human timeline when they say "imminent" and "catostrophic"?

[brenthutch 444]

3 minutes ago, DJL said:

You know what sure, call it many people, call them legion.  Do you take their words to mean you will have to cancel your vacation plans next week or are THEY referring to a longer scale on the human timeline when they say "imminent" and "catostrophic"?

Given that humans have been around for around 200,000 years “imminent” could be interpreted as the next thousands years.  And when they say “catastrophic” what they really mean is benign.

[billvon 2,990]

1 hour ago, brenthutch said:

It is not the lack more extensive coverage that leads to overstating temps it is the use of models to fill in the blanks.  Recently NOAA claimed an all time record high for an are in SE Africa (an area where no actual readings were taken) people on the ground did not witness anything close to what NOAA claimed  

In my example, you used your model (a simple assumption that the temperature was the same between stations) to fill in the blanks.

In a slightly more complicated example, let's say your house on the beach is 80F, your house inland is 85F, and a neigbor ten miles further inland is 90F.  A reasonable model is that the temperature is increasing from coast to inland.  Now let's say one day your home's thermometer goes out while you are at the beach.  It's 80F there, and it's 90F at that inland neighbor's house.  You could assume (with reasonable accuracy) that your house is 85F - because you have data to indicate that's true.  You might even assume that someplace midway between your house on the coast and your house inland is about 82.5F.

That would be you, just "making up data" - just like every climactic data set does.

[billvon 2,990]

3 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

Given that humans have been around for around 200,000 years “imminent” could be interpreted as the next thousands years.  And when they say “catastrophic” what they really mean is benign.

So she's right. 

What was your beef, again?

[DJL 235]

1 minute ago, brenthutch said:

Given that humans have been around for around 200,000 years “imminent” could be interpreted as the next thousands years.  And when they say “catastrophic” what they really mean is benign.

That's the opposite of what you've been saying for the last several pages.  We're good, I get it that you're just giving them shit about dramatic language and we all know they're making a warning of doom and gloom for things that might happen in the next 100 years.  Drop off some one that low country food in Richmond on your way back North.

[brenthutch 444]

I would but we are flying.  After being trapped in a car for 12 hours in DC and OBX traffic with a sciatic nerve acting up, I swore never again.  

[ScottishJohn 25]

15 hours ago, brenthutch said:

It is not the lack more extensive coverage that leads to overstating temps it is the use of models to fill in the blanks.  Recently NOAA claimed an all time record high for an are in SE Africa (an area where no actual readings were taken) people on the ground did not witness anything close to what NOAA claimed  

You really have no idea about this subject.

NOAA does not use use models to fill in "the blanks" 

NOAA and every other Met organisation around the world use observations from satellites in data sparce areas. These observations added to all the other methods of taking weather observations (Amdars, Aireps, dirfting bouys, AWS, Human observations, sondes, etc) are used as model input data.

Stating that there is no African human weather observations (with no evidence) is just plain lazy or lying. See the list below from a simple google search.

I don't know if you are just clutching at any straw to try and back up your claims or that you are just in this for the argument but some the stuff you are posting is just nonsense.

I haven't read through all your posts because I don't have the time or the will power but I can tell you that  the scientists who work in this field are doing it for the science and not for some political end game.

If there was overwhelming verifiable proof that pumping more CO2 / methane ,etc into the atmosphere was not causing the atmosphere to warm up and that warming the atmosphere did not have an impact on global weather then these scientists would be the first to shout about it (they do like the sound of their own voice)

 

For example WMO reporting station from Uganda with 6 digit WMO Identifier.

• Arua 636020_ARUA
• Bombo 63000_UG_BOMBO 
• Bukalasa 63000_UG_BUKALASA 
• Butiaba 63000_UG_BUTIABA 
• Dwoli 63000_UG_DWOLI 
• Entebbe 637050_ENTEBBE 
• Fort Portal 636760_FORT_PORTAL 
• Gondokoro 63000_UG_GONDOKORO 
• Gulu 636300_GULU  
• Hoima 63000_UG_HOIMA 
• Jinja 636820_JINJA  
• Kabale 637260_KABALE 
• Kamuli 63000_UG_KAMULI  
• Kampala 636800_KAMPALA
• Kasese 636740_KASESE 
• Kitgum 63000_UG_KITGUM  
• Kololo Hill 63000_UG_KOLOLO_HILL 
• Lira 636304_LIRA  
• Masaka 637051_MASAKA  
• Masindi 636540_MASINDI 
• Mbale 63000_UG_MBALE  
• Mbarara 637020_MBARARA 
• Moroto 63635_MOROTO 
• Moyo 63000_UG_MOYO 
• Mubende 63000_UG_MUBENDE 
• Nagichot 63000_UG_NAGICHOT 
• Nimule 63000_UG_NIMULE  
• Serere 63000_UG_SERERE
• Simsa 63000_UG_SIMSA
• Soroti 636580_SOROTI
• Tororo 636840_TORORO
• Wadelia 63000_UG_WADELIA

 

Edited August 9, 2019 by ScottishJohn
to complete sentence.

[DJL 235]

3 hours ago, ScottishJohn said:

18 hours ago, brenthutch said:

It is not the lack more extensive coverage that leads to overstating temps it is the use of models to fill in the blanks.  Recently NOAA claimed an all time record high for an are in SE Africa (an area where no actual readings were taken) people on the ground did not witness anything close to what NOAA claimed  

You really have no idea about this subject.

He's likely referring to a blog post on realclimatescience.com run by Tony Heller, pen name Stephen Goddard.  We've already shown that guy to be a fishnet wearing street corner hooker for whoever will pay him to write climate denial stuff so I think Mr. BrentHutch was hesitant to post it.  In the blog post he compared two NOAA data maps in a fairly misleading way (One from a land surface temp network, one from a land and sea surface temp network) and claimed the second must be faked because when compared to a third from a satellite network by a different group that measures Upper and Lower Trophospheric temperatures using microwave radiometers, which would inherently show different data from surface air readings, there was a tiny area in SE Africa that didn't match up.  (So therefore CO2 doesn't affect air temps....or something, I don't know.)

[kallend 2,026]

The author's thesis is that many in the GOP leadership are well aware of the need to do something about climate change, but are afraid of upsetting the ignorami in their base.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/12/opinion/republicans-environment.html?em_pos=small&ref=headline&nl_art=3&te=1&nl=opinion-today&emc=edit_ty_20190812?campaign_id=39&instance_id=11570&segment_id=16078&user_id=ca24d8cbef60603e22e6b56f4ff89857&regi_id=89442825emc=edit_ty_20190812

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

47 minutes ago, kallend said:

...but are afraid of upsetting the ignorami in their base.

You have to wonder how much that idea keeps them from criticizing the Mango Mussolini.

[kallend 2,026]

23 hours ago, wolfriverjoe said:

You have to wonder how much that idea keeps them from criticizing the Mango Mussolini.

Someone called them "Vichy Republicans" - with motives like the collaborators in France. 

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

10 hours ago, kallend said:

Someone called them "Vichy Republicans" - with motives like the collaborators in France. 

Well, given Trump's support of the Nazi types, it's amazingly apt.

[ryoder 1,590]

10 hours ago, kallend said:

Someone called them "Vichy Republicans" - with motives like the collaborators in France. 

I first heard the term from Bill Maher.

I don't know if he originated it.

 

Edited August 13, 2019 by ryoder

[DJL 235]

Previously it took an El Nino to hit these temps so the question is where this data point will end up in the trend. Is it a spike on the graph and we're going to see lower July temps in the next few years or is it the new normal?

Assessing the Global Climate in July 2019

July was the warmest month on record for the globe

https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/news/global-climate-201907

Edited August 19, 2019 by DJL

[kallend 2,026]

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-49520949

The Great Barrier Reef's outlook has been officially downgraded from poor to very poor due to climate change.

Rising sea temperatures thanks to human-driven global warming remain the biggest threat to the reef, a five-year Australian government report says.

Actions to save it "have never been more time critical", the report reads.

Stretching over 2,300km (1,400 miles), the reef was designated a World Heritage site in 1981 for its "enormous scientific and intrinsic importance".

But in recent years the reef has been increasingly damaged by warmer seas which have killed off coral and affected its long-term health.

[billvon 2,990]

1 hour ago, kallend said:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-49520949

The Great Barrier Reef's outlook has been officially downgraded from poor to very poor due to climate change.

I have noticed climate change deniers switching from a "The reef is just fine, stupid!" narrative to a "the reef is just going through one of its natural dieoffs, stupid!" narrative.   At least they are moving in a sort-of correct direction.

[brenthutch 444]

1 hour ago, kallend said:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-49520949

The Great Barrier Reef's outlook has been officially downgraded from poor to very poor due to climate change.

Rising sea temperatures thanks to human-driven global warming remain the biggest threat to the reef, a five-year Australian government report says.

Actions to save it "have never been more time critical", the report reads.

Stretching over 2,300km (1,400 miles), the reef was designated a World Heritage site in 1981 for its "enormous scientific and intrinsic importance".

But in recent years the reef has been increasingly damaged by warmer seas which have killed off coral and affected its long-term health.

Well I guess it will be gone in a year or two :-(

At 500,000 years old it had a pretty good run.

[normiss 798]

19 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

Well I guess it will be gone in a year or two :-(

At 500,000 years old it had a pretty good run.

Wonder what the reaction will be when all the food from the ocean is gone.

I guess humans had a "pretty good run" too.

[brenthutch 444]

3 hours ago, normiss said:

Wonder what the reaction will be when all the food from the ocean is gone.

I guess humans had a "pretty good run" too.

Yep and I guess we will go the way of the dodo bird in the next decade or so (if AOC, Al Gore, Prince Charles and Greta Thunburg are correct).  OTOH, if I’m right, my seventy five year old self will be rubbing your nose in it with more vigor than I am today.

Edited August 31, 2019 by brenthutch

[JoeWeber 2,720]

6 hours ago, brenthutch said:

Well I guess it will be gone in a year or two :-(

At 500,000 years old it had a pretty good run.

Do you mow your lawn, paint your house or even unplug the shitter, when the time comes? Why bother? Why not whack down your shade trees to save the expense of watering them? Why even get up each morning? It's pointless given that life is so short and the day's are even shorter, right. Would it be because your continued existence is pleasurable to you and also benefits your wife and kids?

Biodiversity isn't an easy come easy go proposition. Just as an old tree may have value that exceeds one trip through the mill so might an old ecosystem like the Great Barrier Reef have value worth preserving.

Have you ever been to the Great Barrier Reef? Have you ever explored it over hundreds of dives? Do you even have the slightest clue about what you would so glibly toss to the dogs because in your world view when it's time it's time? I'm guessing not.