Global Warming’s Kaput; 2008 Coolest in 5 Years

[TankBuster 0]

Quote

You're not suggesting that it's really the same amount but just getting all piled up at the North Pole like some gigantic mountain are you?

Sure, could be, couldn't it? Santa has a bunch of elves who could be doing that. Yeah.

No, I was just wondering why ice is reported in that scientific report as a two dimensional entity. Doesn't seem, well, scientific. I honestly don't read them, so I'm asking a serious question. Hard to believe, but I am.

The forecast is mostly sunny with occasional beer.

[quade 4]

Quote

Quote

You're not suggesting that it's really the same amount but just getting all piled up at the North Pole like some gigantic mountain are you?

Sure, could be, couldn't it? Santa has a bunch of elves who could be doing that. Yeah.

No, I was just wondering why ice is reported in that scientific report as a two dimensional entity. Doesn't seem, well, scientific. I honestly don't read them, so I'm asking a serious question. Hard to believe, but I am.

Ah, because, and I know this is going to sound weird, we're not talking about precipitation, we're talking about the surface of ocean water freezing. It's much easier to track via satellite because, well, it's visible as a surface condition.

My guess is that if you took volume into account, the numbers would look a a metric crap ton worse.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[lawrocket 3]

Do you see a difference between claiming to know "the truth" and asking questions?

I know not what the future will bring. I also happen to think that nobody else knows with certainty, either. I know that in 100,000 years, we will have gone through some warm periods and cool periods. How many fluctuations, the intensity, etc.

I am merely pointing out that we do not know. I am NOT claiming to have the answers. I am saying that I am skeptical of those who know the near future of climate change - especially when 30 years ago their knowledge was 180 degrees apart.

So perhaps I am being elitist and arrogant by be cynical. I can accept that. But what is elitist about asking questions?


P.s. I am adept at an asshole, too. I was wrong about Italy in the World Cup and I think I've demonstrated that when I'm wrong I'll wear it.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[tkhayes 348]

30,000 children die of starvation every day in the world.

If 25,000 die one day, that does not mean the problem is getting better.

The trend for global warming is in fact, warming. At least with the data we have for decades.

The end result may very well be an ice age of some sort, but that does even mean that the problem of 'carbonization' of the atmosphere is resolved. Carbon is causing far more problems than just warming.

The US is responsible for more carbon emissions than any other country, however that will not last long since India and China are industrializing at a pace we cannot even dream of.

I have no kids, I burn 100K gallons of Jet A every year, and I am still trying to do my part to help reduce my footprint at home, at work, wherever I can. But in the end, this will not affect me in the least. It will affect the generations after me.

Funny, somehow, I still actually care

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

says geologist Don J. Easterbrook, a professor emeritus at Western Washington University.

...
In March, Easterbrook said he was putting his “reputation on the line” by predicting global cooling.

I generally dislike being provincial, but what kind of reputation is he putting on the line as the professor from a directional university?

I really dont know, for the most part I thought the post was more for fun, with a "fact" thrown in here and there

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[masterblaster72 0]

Quote

But what is elitist about asking questions?

Absolutely nothing...there is nothing "messianic" about it...which is my point too.

Quote

P.s. I am adept at an asshole, too. I was wrong about Italy in the World Cup and I think I've demonstrated that when I'm wrong I'll wear it.

Well, from that exchange alone a while back, I don't think you're an asshole...but if you think you are, I guess I can't convince you otherwise. Since I remembered something you said a while back in another thread that I quoted I just thought I'd point out what seemed to me a contradiction in your ideas (of course this is an inherent risk when having high post numbers as you do).

Be humble, ask questions, listen, learn, follow the golden rule, talk when necessary, and know when to shut the fuck up.

[TankBuster 0]

Quote

My guess is that if you took volume into account, the numbers would look a a metric crap ton worse.

I disagree. The thin ice near the edge will recede a lot faster than the thick ice near the poles, won't it?

The forecast is mostly sunny with occasional beer.

[quade 4]

Quote

Quote

My guess is that if you took volume into account, the numbers would look a a metric crap ton worse.

I disagree. The thin ice near the edge will recede a lot faster than the thick ice near the poles, won't it?

Scale any item volumetrically and the numbers grow much faster compared to surface area. This is why, for instance, if you were to use the same ratio of surface area alone, flying squirrels can land without a parachute and wingsuit flyers can not.

For instance, take a cube 1 unit on a side. It has a surface area of 6 square units and an internal volume of 1 cubic unit. Now, scale that up 10 times and it has a surface area of 600 square units ((HxW)*6), but an internal volume of 1000 cubic units (HxWxD).

I'm not saying that ice sheets in perfectly square units, but you ought to get my drift. If we assume that at least "some" of the ice is thicker than say, an inch, then the thicker the ice, the larger the number would be exaggerated by comparing previous years based on volume rather than just the surface.

Make sense?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[jenfly00 0]

Quote

Oh, i dunno, when i have my AC set to 85 degrees and it still runs most of the day all summer...i'd say it's pretty fuckin' hot.

Honestly, i'm past the point of arguing about global warming and moving on to arguing about general responsibility and long-term thinking.

Do i want to leave the earth fucked up for my children but easy and cheaper for me, or leave it a better place?

The decision is easy for me (and i don't even have kids yet!). And I don't do it because of global warming or whatever. i do it because it's the right thing to do.

I tried this approach with him once. He believes we are treating the earth just fine and our environment is in great shape except for 'a few spots here and there'.

He doesn't get it because he doesn't want to.

-----------------------
"O brave new world that has such people in it".

[TankBuster 0]

Quote

Oh, i dunno, when i have my AC set to 85 degrees and it still runs most of the day all summer...i'd say it's pretty fuckin' hot.

Honestly, i'm past the point of arguing about global warming and moving on to arguing about general responsibility and long-term thinking.

Do i want to leave the earth fucked up for my children but easy and cheaper for me, or leave it a better place?

The decision is easy for me (and i don't even have kids yet!). And I don't do it because of global warming or whatever. i do it because it's the right thing to do.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I tried this approach with him once. He believes we are treating the earth just fine and our environment is in great shape except for 'a few spots here and there'.

He doesn't get it because he doesn't want to.

What are you guys doing to stop this? If you're still skydiving that's pumping out quite a bit of carbon. Driving? If you folks are really serious about this legacy you're leaving, wouldn't you stop all carbon output that your life didn't depend on? When Gore goes around preaching about it in his jet, its ok because he buys "offsets." So its ok to destroy the planet if you put money in someone's pocket?

The forecast is mostly sunny with occasional beer.

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

Quote

The average daily ice loss rate for August 2008 was 78,000 square kilometers per day (30,000 square miles per day). This is the fastest rate of daily ice loss that scientists have ever observed during a single August. Losses were 15,000 square kilometers per day (5,800 square miles per day) faster than in August 2007, and 27,000 square kilometers per day (10,000 square miles per day) faster than average. National Snow and Ice Data Center, Sept. 4, 2008

Ice, being a three dimensional animal, should be measured in cubic kilometers, shouldn't it? I ask that in all sincerety.

Those reports are partially an artifact of the instrumentation used to obtain data (2D visual satellite imagery) and the method for comparison (to older satellite images that are 2D too). It's also due to the fact that thickness of arctic sea ice varies.

Yes, folks talk about both volume and mass of ice lost. E.g., "The Thinning of Arctic Sea Ice, 1988–2003: Have We Passed a Tipping Point?" Journal of Climate, 2005; "Has Arctic Sea Ice Rapidly Thinned?" Journal of Climate, 2002; "Arctic Ocean sea ice volume: What explains its recent depletion?" JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH, 2005; "A younger, thinner Arctic ice cover: Increased potential for rapid, extensive sea-ice loss" Geophys. Res. Lett, 2007; and "Perspectives on the Arctic's Shrinking Sea-Ice CoverScience, 2007

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[airdvr 210]

Marg,

Is GW real or imagined? If there's anyone on this board whose opinion I trust it would be you. Except on politics of course

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Oh, i dunno, when i have my AC set to 85 degrees and it still runs most of the day all summer...i'd say it's pretty fuckin' hot.

Honestly, i'm past the point of arguing about global warming and moving on to arguing about general responsibility and long-term thinking.

Do i want to leave the earth fucked up for my children but easy and cheaper for me, or leave it a better place?

The decision is easy for me (and i don't even have kids yet!). And I don't do it because of global warming or whatever. i do it because it's the right thing to do.

What you insinuate here is pure crap

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

Quote

30,000 children die of starvation every day in the world.

If 25,000 die one day, that does not mean the problem is getting better.

The trend for global warming is in fact, warming. At least with the data we have for decades.

The end result may very well be an ice age of some sort, but that does even mean that the problem of 'carbonization' of the atmosphere is resolved. Carbon is causing far more problems than just warming.

The US is responsible for more carbon emissions than any other country, however that will not last long since India and China are industrializing at a pace we cannot even dream of.

I have no kids, I burn 100K gallons of Jet A every year, and I am still trying to do my part to help reduce my footprint at home, at work, wherever I can. But in the end, this will not affect me in the least. It will affect the generations after me.

Funny, somehow, I still actually care

It may be warming and the trends indicate this might be true. My questions are more around who/what is causing it. Looking at "known" history of the planet would "indicate" this "warming" trend is part of the planets natural cycles.

There is a reason the GWing alarmist want to name CO2 as a polutant. And that reason is not because it is.....

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[TankBuster 0]

Quote

Make sense?

Yes, I understand the difference between surface area and volume, that's why I asked the question. What you're saying validates the question. If the ice is thicker at the poles, and it is, then you can lose say, 20% of the surface area at the southern edges, and be losing only a small percentage of the total volume. It just seems more accurate, if we are really concerned, to measure total volume, not surface area. That's all.

The forecast is mostly sunny with occasional beer.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Oh, i dunno, when i have my AC set to 85 degrees and it still runs most of the day all summer...i'd say it's pretty fuckin' hot.

Honestly, i'm past the point of arguing about global warming and moving on to arguing about general responsibility and long-term thinking.

Do i want to leave the earth fucked up for my children but easy and cheaper for me, or leave it a better place?

The decision is easy for me (and i don't even have kids yet!). And I don't do it because of global warming or whatever. i do it because it's the right thing to do.

I tried this approach with him once. He believes we are treating the earth just fine and our environment is in great shape except for 'a few spots here and there'.

He doesn't get it because he doesn't want to.

And your insinuation is as much crap as bikerbabes. But you are more entertaining

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Lindsey 0]

Coolest in 5 years??!!!! WOW! What are the chances of THAT happening? lol....

linz

--
A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail

[wmw999 2,534]

I think 2008's been a pretty cool year so far -- I got to meet Lindsey!
But my son was born in 1983, and, sorry Linz, but that was WAY cooler

As far as global warming and cooling is concerned, I'm actually with BikerBabe. I don't really think she's trying to judge anyone, she's just giving her reasons for doing what she does. I don't like debating all that much (note that I usually don't come back again and again to the same threads), so I'd rather just consider whether easy is right, what the consequences are for each, and live that way.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

Marg,

Is GW real or imagined? If there's anyone on this board whose opinion I trust it would be you. Except on politics of course

Concisely: Yes, anthropogenic climate change is occurring.
Humans have impacted their environment deleteriously in the past, and humans will in the future.
(And yes, non-anthropogenic climate change is occurring too.)

At the same time: No, I don’t accept dystopic ‘doomsday’ climate change scenarios.

All science should be subject to skepticism; it’s an adversarial activity by design. Much of what played out/portrayed as scientific skepticism or counter-arguments in most of the blog-o-sphere is not unlike the majority of what gets played out/portrayed in the commercial media about skydiving.

How the science gets applied (or mis-applied) to policy or how the science/pseudo-science is politicized is the issue. Science is a process that generates data/information/results that can be used for good or for bad, depending on how the human (politician, lobbyist, pundit, corporate shill, venture capitalist, start-up CEO) uses it.

The debate is what to do about anthropogenic climate change, at what cost ($$$, lives, land, etc), when then cost will be paid, and who will pay it. Doing nothing is one policy option. Reverting to a pre-industrial civilization is another policy option (a dumb one, imo … but nonetheless one policy option).

More importantly to me, I'm on the side of informed debate by a larger portion of the citizenry: people aren't stupid and democracy works best when folks have access to information to make decisions.

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[BikerBabe 0]

wow marc, you assume i was talking to you. I really wasn't. And i wasn't insinuating anything except that I think it's the right thing to do to live and act responsibly toward our environment. I actually dislike the way replies are listed on this board for this very reason. I'm replying to the thread in general, but it has to put a name there.

but if you want to feel guilty, go ahead.

Never meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup!

[lawrocket 3]

Because "it's the right thing to do.".

I appreciate the honesty of this approach. It is honest because there is nothing more to be read into it than you think it is the right thing to do. It is your choice based upon your feelings.

Anyone who disagrees with your choice would be telling you either that your feelings are wrong (which is hogwash - you feel what you feel) or that your morality is wrong, which will be at the least unconvincing to you at the least. At the most it will be dowright offensive!!!

However, I think it should also be considered that the argument that ecology is a moral issue will be similarly unconvincing to those who do not share your morality.

My morality is that costs should be minimized and utility maximized. Pollution, I believe, is a "cost.". As Marg was hinting at, complete elimination of the cost would be the stone age. To some that may be acceptable. To me, it is not.

Whe the costs are identifiable and quantifiable, efficiency increases. Hence my thermostat is set for 83 - to save on energy costs!!! Resulting in less cost - primarily to me, and secondarily to society.

Thus we both do, pretty much the same thing, though for different reasons on the basis of different moralities. But using a moral argument is just what the religious do. "Same sex marriage is immoral." "It sneds the wrong message to our children."

"Leave a better world for our children" is the same method of morality.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

Quote

My guess is that if you took volume into account, the numbers would look a a metric crap ton worse.

I disagree. The thin ice near the edge will recede a lot faster than the thick ice near the poles, won't it?

Yes, but the ice does not melt only near the edges. A lot of melting that is not counted via measuring the area delta would be counted by measuring the volume delta.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[rushmc 23]

Quote

wow marc, you assume i was talking to you. I really wasn't. And i wasn't insinuating anything except that I think it's the right thing to do to live and act responsibly toward our environment. I actually dislike the way replies are listed on this board for this very reason. I'm replying to the thread in general, but it has to put a name there.

but if you want to feel guilty, go ahead.

I know who you were talking to. But, you insinuate to those that dont agree with you that they want to polute and destroy the planet. Sorry, but you called called on that bull shit

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

Quote

30,000 children die of starvation every day in the world.

If 25,000 die one day, that does not mean the problem is getting better.

The trend for global warming is in fact, warming. At least with the data we have for decades.

The end result may very well be an ice age of some sort, but that does even mean that the problem of 'carbonization' of the atmosphere is resolved. Carbon is causing far more problems than just warming.

The US is responsible for more carbon emissions than any other country, however that will not last long since India and China are industrializing at a pace we cannot even dream of.

I have no kids, I burn 100K gallons of Jet A every year, and I am still trying to do my part to help reduce my footprint at home, at work, wherever I can. But in the end, this will not affect me in the least. It will affect the generations after me.

Funny, somehow, I still actually care

It may be warming and the trends indicate this might be true. My questions are more around who/what is causing it. Looking at "known" history of the planet would "indicate" this "warming" trend is part of the planets natural cycles.

There is a reason the GWing alarmist want to name CO2 as a polutant. And that reason is not because it is.....

It's so refreshing to find in SC a post on global warming completely devoid of any scientific understanding. Facts are overrated. Thank you, sir. You do your fellow SC readers proud.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[riddler 0]

Comparing data from the last five years to data from before humans existed is like telling a cancer patient that they are not dying after each breath.

"See, you got another breath. Surely you're not dying."

Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD