2015 sets new record for warming

[turtlespeed 220]

gowlerk

Quote

No I meant reversible, that somehow man can change the weather and the sea levels by putting up some solar panels and taking a bus to work.

Oh, well in that case you are misrepresenting the goal. Or, as is a favourite phrase here, "moving the goal posts". (First time I've typed that, I think I owe beer) The goal is not to change the climate, the goal is simply to limit the amount of change to not much more than we have already done. I won't be taking a bus to work anytime soon. Instead I will support alternative energy sources and reducing coal use.

Your outlook is more along the lines of "aim small, miss small"

The climate alarmists are more along the lines of "fire all the scatterguns in the air and see what gets hit."

Evidently, if you sensationalize things, it makes them more believable to idiots.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[gowlerk 2,198]

Quote

So tell me . . . What if the effect is beneficial for the majority?

Why would we want to stop that?

Because it is unlikely that it will be beneficial to the majority. Although an increase in global temperature would likely be beneficial to me personally, given my home on the Canadian prairies. There is great uncertainty regarding the exact effects. But it seems that sea level rise is an absolute. Most of us live near the sea. Allowing the climate to change through our activities when we can both see it coming, and do things to limit it, on an experimental basis is unwise. We only have one Earth, it's not a laboratory.

Quote

Money drives the "Green" industry.

Money drives all industry. It is a tool that we will use. That's what money is, a tool. It's not evil, just ask any capitalist. Yes, money is corrupting. But that is a red herring.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[gowlerk 2,198]

Quote

Evidently, if you sensationalize things, it makes them more believable to idiots.

The world is full of sources of information. Some of them are sensationalist. The majority of sources are not. You are merely attempting to trivialize an important issue with your accusation of sensationalism.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[turtlespeed 220]

gowlerk

Quote

Evidently, if you sensationalize things, it makes them more believable to idiots.

The world is full of sources of information. Some of them are sensationalist. The majority of sources are not. You are merely attempting to trivialize an important issue with your accusation of sensationalism.

No. I'm just showing what the reality is.

The alarmist belong in Oz
"Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain"

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[gowlerk 2,198]

Quote

The alarmist belong in Oz
"Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain"

So, you completely reject the fact that that "man behind the curtain" is the actually most of the scientific community? And the world community? It's all just a giant conspiracy, correct?

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[turtlespeed 220]

gowlerk

Quote

The alarmist belong in Oz
"Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain"

So, you completely reject the fact that that "man behind the curtain" is the actually most of the scientific community? And the world community? It's all just a giant conspiracy, correct?

Not completely.
Not even mostly.

I think there is a lot of exaggeration to dramatize it.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[gowlerk 2,198]

Quote

I think there is a lot of exaggeration to dramatize it.

I'll go with that. Along with quite a few overly emotional people with nonsense solutions. It's a complicated problem, most people can only contemplate simple solutions.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[billvon 2,995]

>So tell me . . . What if the effect is beneficial for the majority?
>Why would we want to stop that?

We wouldn't. And if you want to risk that - that's a valid political position. (Of course, if you gamble that, betting that there will be a good result, you will be held liable if your gamble fails.)

Good to see you accepting the science behind AGW.

>Money drives the "Green" industry.

And money drives the coal and oil industries as well - and there is a hell of a lot more money driving them.

[livendive 8]

turtlespeed

Money drives the "Green" industry.
Money is what makes all the climate scientists stick around instead of going into different fields.
Money is the corrupting factor in all this BS.

As opposed to the altruistic fossil fuel industry, where money is totally eschewed in favor of the good of mankind, amirite?

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[billvon 2,995]

>I think there is a lot of exaggeration to dramatize it.

On both sides.

[turtlespeed 220]

billvon

>So tell me . . . What if the effect is beneficial for the majority?
>Why would we want to stop that?

We wouldn't. And if you want to risk that - that's a valid political position. (Of course, if you gamble that, betting that there will be a good result, you will be held liable if your gamble fails.)

Good to see you accepting the science behind AGW.

>Money drives the "Green" industry.

And money drives the coal and oil industries as well - and there is a hell of a lot more money driving them.

I have always accepted that the worlds climate is in flux.

It would be an insane position to take otherwise.

Kind of like saying that the world is flat, or that matter is not constantly in motion, or claiming the tides are caused by God.

The effect that the change caused by man's excesses will be detrimental to most people s what I question.

I kind of like being an optimist and think that there is a silver lining.

I simply haven't seen much evidence that the changes are bad as a rule, and have seen more benefits.

That is obviously my own myopic view.

Not that the meds s gong to publicize it, but for every bad effect that they are trying to scare us with, there are benefits they will ignore, at best, or cover up at worst. It makes them more money to scare people than it does to make them feel good.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[turtlespeed 220]

livendive

***
Money drives the "Green" industry.
Money is what makes all the climate scientists stick around instead of going into different fields.
Money is the corrupting factor in all this BS.

As opposed to the altruistic fossil fuel industry, where money is totally eschewed in favor of the good of mankind, amirite?

Blues,
Dave

I don't disagree.

I see no difference in the tobacco industry.

Alarmists are just the flip side of the coin. Instead of promoting what makes the oil industry money - they scare you into believing what makes them money.

Alarmists say nonsense stuff just like the tobacco companies did.
Oil proponents say idiotic things just like the Alarmsts do, and thus, just as bad as the tobacco companies.

Thank that the true fight we need to have is to put unadulterated facts out to the public. You know - the truth, not sensationalized, just truth.

BUT - the portion is that you can't do that. The public wouldn't care unless you make it scary. So let's lie to everyone. Let's embellish, massage the numbers, and cherry pick the data so that it looks scary.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[billvon 2,995]

>Not that the meds s gong to publicize it, but for every bad effect that they are trying
>to scare us with, there are benefits they will ignore, at best, or cover up at worst. It
>makes them more money to scare people than it does to make them feel good.

===========
Climate change might open up Northwest Passage to shipping by the middle of the century.

SciAm March 6, 2013

Investigating what is sometimes seen as one of the more favorable effects of climate change, a pair of scientists from UCLA has done a careful analysis of the melting of Arctic sea ice and concluded that it could lead to ships traversing the ice-free Northwest Passage (NWP) by 2050. It would also lead to much shorter transit times through the existing North Sea Passage (NSR). These developments may greatly reduce the time and cost of shipping but would also lead to unforeseen economic and geopolitical complications. . . .

“The emergence of a robust PC6 corridor directly over the North Pole indicates that, in either scenario, sea ice will become sufficiently thin (e.g., <1.2-m thick at 100% ice concentration) and/or diffuse such that a critical technical threshold is surpassed, and the shortest great circle route thus becomes feasible, for ships with moderate ice-breaking capability...the Northwest Passage (NWP), arguably the most historically famed of potential shipping routes through the Arctic, has the lowest navigation potential both historically and at present but opens substantially by 2040–2059.”

The models find that for voyages from Eastern North America, the NWP might be the favored route for shipping by mid-century, essentially allowing transport 100% of the time during the peak season. The report concludes that

“Put simply, by midcentury, September sea ice conditions have changed sufficiently in the NWP such that trans-Arctic shipping to/from North America can commonly capitalize on the ∼30% geographic distance savings that this route offers over the NSR.”
========================
PERC
September 2007
Volume 25 | Number 3

Daniel K. Benjamin

Many people believe that human-caused emissions of greenhouse gases will lead to higher temperatures and increased precipitation during the 21st century. Similarly, it is thought that these changes may have an impact on economic well-being. The question remains: If such changes occur, will their economic effects be positive or negative? A definitive answer to this question is likely to be a long time coming, but recent research has shed new light on one important aspect. Olivier Deschênes and Michael Greenstone (2007) show that the changes in temperatures and precipitation forecast by the standard models of climate change will actually benefit agriculture in America.
===========================
Skeptical Science

Positives and negatives of global warming

Positives:
Agriculture

Improved agriculture in some high latitude regions (Mendelsohn 2006)
Increased growing season in Greenland (Nyegaard 2007)
Increased productivity of sour orange trees (Kimball 2007)
============================
Advantages and Disadvantages of Global Warming
Positive and Negative Effects of Global Warming to People and the Planet

By Matt Rosenberg
Geography

Updated December 19, 2014.

In February 2007, the United Nations released a scientific report that concludes that global warming is happening and will continue to happen for centuries. The report also stated with 90% certainty that the activity of humans has been the primary cause of increasing temperatures over the past few decades.

With those conclusions and the conclusions of innumerable other scientists that global warming is here and will continue into the foreseeable future, I wanted to summarize the likely effects of global warming, into the advantages and disadvantages of global warming. . . .

Advantages of Global Warming

Arctic, Antarctic, Siberia, and other frozen regions of earth may experience more plant growth and milder climates.
The next ice age may be prevented from occurring.
Northwest Passage through Canada's formerly-icy north opens up to sea transportation.
Less need for energy consumption to warm cold places.
Fewer deaths or injuries due to cold weather.
Longer growing seasons could mean increased agricultural production in some local areas.
Mountains increase in height due to melting glaciers, becoming higher as they rebound against the missing weight of the ice.
Boundary disputes between countries over low-lying islands will disappear.
================

[turtlespeed 220]

billvon

>Not that the media is going to publicize it, but for every bad effect that they are trying
>to scare us with, there are benefits they will ignore, at best, or cover up at worst. It
>makes them more money to scare people than it does to make them feel good.

=

What mainstream media outlet made that part of their hourly news report?

What broadcast was interrupted for that breaking news?

How many nightly news organizations made that part of even their smallest of middle of the night broadcast?

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[billvon 2,995]

>What mainstream media outlet made that part of their hourly news report?

I have no idea - I don't watch mainstream news on TV. I would expect very few, because the expected negatives to climate change greatly outweigh the positives.

How may mainstream media outlets reported on all the good effects of the 9/11 attacks? Probably about as many.

[turtlespeed 220]

billvon

>What mainstream media outlet made that part of their hourly news report?

I have no idea - I don't watch mainstream news on TV. I would expect very few, because the expected negatives to climate change greatly outweigh the positives.

How may mainstream media outlets reported on all the good effects of the 9/11 attacks? Probably about as many.

That is supposition. Not fact. Show me facts. Otherwise you are just propagating the scariness and alarmists.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[gowlerk 2,198]

Quote

Alarmists are just the flip side of the coin. Instead of promoting what makes the oil industry money - they scare you into believing what makes them money.

I've been called an alarmist here in this forum. Like most people who are concerned and would be called the same I have absolutely nothing financial to gain. Few of us do. I drive a truck for a living. My job is to turn diesel fuel into CO2. I have a part share in a DZ. A huge waste of fuel. You are wrong about peoples motivations. Most of us will pay a financial cost and pay it willingly. To a point.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[billvon 2,995]

>That is supposition.

As is your claim that warming will be good.

[quade 4]

brenthutch

http://www.fao.org/3/a-I4581E.pdf

I'm curious if you read that all the way to at least the second to last page.

Why do you think they may have included that?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[billvon 2,995]

>I'm curious if you read that all the way to at least the second to last page.

I am guessing no:

"Drought affects more people than any other type of natural disaster, and is also
the most damaging to livelihoods, especially in developing countries. They are
also becoming increasingly frequent and severe, the result being widespread crop
and livestock damage and the degradation of livelihoods, famines and economic
losses usually felt well beyond drought affected areas."

[billvon 2,995]

Meanwhile in the arctic-

===============
Arctic's melting ice creates vicious warming circle
Doyle Rice, USA TODAY 2:15 p.m. EDT June 9, 2016

Arctic sea ice hit a record low in May as scientists discovered the first-ever link between melting ice in Greenland and a phenomenon known to warm the area faster than the rest of the Northern Hemisphere.

The occurrence is called "Arctic amplification" and until now, scientists didn't know Greenland was linked to it, according to a study published Thursday in the British journal Nature Communications.

The phenomenon is fueled by a feedback loop where rising temperatures melt Arctic sea ice, which leaves dark open water that absorbs more warmth from the sun, thereby warming the Arctic even more. White frozen ice, on the other hand, would reflect sunlight back into space.

The study comes two days after scientists announced the average area of Arctic sea ice in May was 4.63 million square miles, about a half million square miles below average. That level sets the stage for new record lows in the coming months.

"It starts it off on a very bad footing for the summer," said Mark Serreze, director of the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC), which monitors Arctic ice.

Sea ice is frozen ocean water that melts each summer and refreezes each winter. It reaches its largest area in March each year and its lowest in September. The all-time low was set in September 2012.

The amount of summer sea ice in the region has been steadily shrinking over the past few decades due to man-made global warming, according to National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
==================

[turtlespeed 220]

billvon

>That is supposition.

As is your claim that warming will be good.

I didn't state it as fact like you did.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[brenthutch 444]

billvon

>That is supposition.

As is your claim that warming will be good.

More food, fewer weather related deaths, more polar bears, fewer tornados, fewer hurricanes, are all documented facts not supposition.

[billvon 2,995]

>I didn't state it as fact like you did.

Then we're good; I did not state it as fact either.

[billvon 2,995]

>More food, fewer weather related deaths, more polar bears, fewer tornados, fewer
>hurricanes, are all documented facts not supposition.

Just as more droughts, more disease, rising sea levels and mass extinctions are all facts, not just scary myths you can ignore.