Forum Index > Stewardship > Global Warming
Previous :: Next Topic  
Author Message
Brian R
Member
Member


Joined: 09 Feb 2018
Posts: 212 | TRs
Location: Fircrest WA
Brian R
  Top

Member
PostTue Nov 12, 2019 5:09 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
coldrain108 wrote:
gazzillions of dollars?  The only ones with gazzillions of dollars at stake are...the oil companies.

Not true. In fact, the lion's share of the world economy is at stake if we precipitously cap the well--including pretty much every single thing we drive, fly, the crops you eat, the heat that keeps you warm--your job and the jobs of almost all your fellow citizens. YOU are the oil company. They drill at your behest. Because you asked them to--and are willing to pay for their products. To believe otherwise reveals a huge disconnect.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 11280 | TRs
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
  Top

Member
PostTue Nov 12, 2019 6:43 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Yeah it's not like we've been told we must spend trillions to stop this non existent problem.

Oh wait, we have

--------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Parked Out
Member
Member


Joined: 18 Sep 2011
Posts: 497 | TRs
Location: Port Angeles, WA
Parked Out
  Top

Member
PostMon Nov 18, 2019 6:49 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote

"Conclusion: IEA scenarios are a more realistic projection of the global energy systems current baseline trajectory; showing we are far from RCP8.5 & RCP6.0.  World currently tracking between RCP4.5 & lower climate change scenarios - consistent with 1.5˚ to 2.5˚C."

https://twitter.com/jritch/status/1196482571443425280

--------------
John
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
Parked Out
Member
Member


Joined: 18 Sep 2011
Posts: 497 | TRs
Location: Port Angeles, WA
Parked Out
  Top

Member
PostMon Nov 18, 2019 7:35 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Interesting graphic of global sea surface temperatures from the Japan Meteorological Agency.  Reminds me of graphics of sea level rise over the same period, more or less linear.

SST 1890-2019
SST 1890-2019

https://www.data.jma.go.jp/gmd/kaiyou/english/long_term_sst_global/glb_warm_e.html

--------------
John
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 11280 | TRs
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
  Top

Member
PostTue Nov 19, 2019 2:49 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Adjustment artifacts for Australian weather hide the fact that the actual measurements, temperatures which actually occurred and actually had physical impact because they are real temperatures, show no rise in very hot days over the last century.


http://joannenova.com.au/2019/11/raw-data-bombshell-no-change-in-very-hot-days-in-australia-since-world-war-i/

--------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Doppelganger
Gorecrow



Joined: 09 Feb 2006
Posts: 1590 | TRs
Location: Pessimising
Doppelganger
  Top

Gorecrow
PostWed Nov 20, 2019 7:58 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
MtnGoat wrote:
Adjustment artifacts for Australian weather

MtnGoat wrote:
http://joannenova.com.au

Joanne's whistling past the Perth graveyards. Nova playing her own fiddle while Binna Burra burns.

Sorry didn't mean to interrupt, you guys can continue. I do wonder if she will rethink her position to any degree (see what I did) after watching Australia burn alive this summer.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 11280 | TRs
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
  Top

Member
PostWed Nov 20, 2019 9:08 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
You're welcome to show an actual problem with the argument, as opposed to blaming warming which the empirical data in this case shows is not occurring.

--------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Cyclopath
Faster than light



Joined: 20 Mar 2012
Posts: 3351 | TRs
Location: Seattle
Cyclopath
  Top

Faster than light
PostFri Nov 22, 2019 10:45 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Brian R wrote:
AGW alarmists are like Watchtower door knockers--on meth.

It's so easy to fake things these days, like climate change and the moon landing.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
RandyHiker
Snarky Member



Joined: 27 Jul 2008
Posts: 6690 | TRs
Location: Bellevue at the moment.
RandyHiker
  Top

Snarky Member
PostFri Nov 22, 2019 4:25 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
U.K. Wine industry expanding -- warmer temperatures and sunnier summer weather a factor.

https://www.npr.org/2018/02/18/586888466/u-k-steps-up-its-wine-game

https://www.ft.com/content/56824c42-3a28-11e9-b72b-2c7f526ca5d0
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail Reply to topic Reply with quote
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 11280 | TRs
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
  Top

Member
PostSat Nov 23, 2019 9:34 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Cyclopath wrote:
Brian R wrote:
AGW alarmists are like Watchtower door knockers--on meth.

It's so easy to fake things these days, like climate change and the moon landing.

and science and valid argument, apparently

--------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Sculpin
Member
Member


Joined: 23 Apr 2015
Posts: 521 | TRs

Sculpin
  Top

Member
PostSun Nov 24, 2019 8:09 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
MtnGoat wrote:
You're welcome to show an actual problem with the argument

rolleyes.gif

Over the years, it has been determined that many measuring sites in Australia, as elsewhere, have been affected by urban heat islands.  Some of those sites have been moved to better locations.  This is far more common than sites moving from cooler rural locations to hotter ones.  Therefore when temperature records are combined, they need to be homogenized.  Here is a description of a typical adjustment made by the Australian BOM:

"An example of the adjustment process

Kerang in northern Victoria is one of the 112 ACORN-SAT locations. The site was moved one kilometre to the north on 18 January 2000, from a location in the town centre near the Post Office to a more open site in parkland.
This site move resulted in a drop in overnight minimum temperatures, particularly in the cooler months. The move, as is common for shifts to more open locations, had a larger impact on clear, calm nights (which are more likely to be cold, especially in winter) than it did on cloudy and windy nights. The adjustment procedure takes this into account (see below), with temperatures from the old site adjusted by 1.0 C on the coldest nights in June, but only 0.2 C on the mildest nights.
As a result of the adjustment for the move in 2000, average pre-2000 minimum temperatures were adjusted by approximately 0.5 C, but extreme low minimum temperatures in the cooler months had a larger adjustment of between 0.9 C and 1.2 C. These adjustments result in the observed trends at Kerang being more consistent with other sites in the region."

This is not "a problem with the argument."  The argument is ignorant of the basic facts and logic, which happens repeatedly when your all your facts are handpicked and partisan.

Incidentally, these homogenization methods were extensively reviewed by - and improved by - the work of none other than Anthony Watts.  I suspect that he would prefer that you stick to facts and logic and not cherry pick data that fits your agenda.

--------------
Even my best friends, they don't know, that my job is turning lead into gold. When you hear that engine drone, I'm on the road again, and I'm searching for the philosopher's stone - Van Morrison
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 11280 | TRs
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
  Top

Member
PostSun Nov 24, 2019 1:09 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Sculpin wrote:
rolleyes.gif

Over the years, it has been determined that many measuring sites in Australia, as elsewhere, have been affected by urban heat islands.  Some of those sites have been moved to better locations.  This is far more common than sites moving from cooler rural locations to hotter ones.  Therefore when temperature records are combined, they need to be homogenized.  Here is a description of a typical adjustment made by the Australian BOM:

"An example of the adjustment process

Kerang in northern Victoria is one of the 112 ACORN-SAT locations. The site was moved one kilometre to the north on 18 January 2000, from a location in the town centre near the Post Office to a more open site in parkland.
This site move resulted in a drop in overnight minimum temperatures, particularly in the cooler months. The move, as is common for shifts to more open locations, had a larger impact on clear, calm nights (which are more likely to be cold, especially in winter) than it did on cloudy and windy nights. The adjustment procedure takes this into account (see below), with temperatures from the old site adjusted by 1.0 C on the coldest nights in June, but only 0.2 C on the mildest nights.
As a result of the adjustment for the move in 2000, average pre-2000 minimum temperatures were adjusted by approximately 0.5 C, but extreme low minimum temperatures in the cooler months had a larger adjustment of between 0.9 C and 1.2 C. These adjustments result in the observed trends at Kerang being more consistent with other sites in the region."

This is not "a problem with the argument."  The argument is ignorant of the basic facts and logic, which happens repeatedly when your all your facts are handpicked and partisan.

Incidentally, these homogenization methods were extensively reviewed by - and improved by - the work of none other than Anthony Watts.  I suspect that he would prefer that you stick to facts and logic and not cherry pick data that fits your agenda.

What you posted is, in fact, a problem with the argument made. This is self evident, since you posted an attempt at  rebuttal...consisting of an actual argument, not a non argument like the poster I responded to.

You're free to show where my argument does not stick to facts...which you have not done. You've not falsified one argument I made. Not *one*. You've merely added what you think is more info, but it does not address the fact that the *actual* temps measured were measured. You claim I'm 'ignorant' of basic facts and logic, yet another ad hom in your ongoing litany of them, but you don't show this to be the case.

All you've done is explain how data is manipulated in order to combine data sets. You did not address the claims I made about actual measurements.

And this speaks to the larger point here...Regardless of the adjustments made to suit temperature inputs for modeling, the results are *not* actual temperatures ever measured, and it is lying to represent them as such.

Further, if the heat island effects were implicitly measured in non homogenized data, you'd see the impact in the heat island effects in steadily rising measurements.  And finally, if that were the case, the 'homogenization' process would cool the later measurements, not the earlier ones...because the heat island effects supposedly increase with time, not shrink.

As initially stated the data set of actual measurements over nearly 100 years of peak heat measurements shows no upward trend. You're pretty impressed with your own claims of cherry picking and ignorance, yet you've failed to show this is not the case. The idea that *real*, actual empirical measurements are some kind of problem shows something else is at work in your arguments.

Using homogenized data and claiming it is real in any empirical way in the real world is false. Not one molecule in the real world was *ever* influenced in any way by another particle at the homogenized temperature. Not one molecule of water vapor, not one molecule of scrub brush, not one molecule of CO2.

Warming or cooling data neither warms nor cools the earth nor shows a warming or cooling earth. It shows warmed or cooled numbers changed from their empirical actual measurement.

The cherry on top...admitting a widely attacked, non climate scientist *improved* their homogenization, thus the implicit admission that science nor judging it is solely the province of climate professionals, but is accessible to *anyone* using proper method.

--------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 11280 | TRs
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
  Top

Member
PostSun Nov 24, 2019 1:42 pm 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
CC wrote:
Not in the least impugning them.  I have an autistic granddaughter.  That's why I know the symptomatology.

I have an autistic son.

I know damn well when someone is using slime to impugn people, and that's what you tried to do, now you're trying to walk back attacking someone who disagrees on mere science via implying very personal mental/psychological conditions.

You didn't need to inject that dig into the argument, it is completely irrelevant to the discussion, you pulled it out and did it to impugn. Intentionally implying that my arguments could be the result of a disorder was neither mistake nor accident.

Nothing is off limits when someone disagrees with you on something which should be a scientific discussion. Now that I know what the limits are, none, I look forward to proceeding on a more valid footing with respect to who I'm dealing with.

--------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Gregory
Member
Member


Joined: 08 Mar 2014
Posts: 318 | TRs

Gregory
  Top

Member
PostMon Nov 25, 2019 5:56 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Nobody here can tell the Goat why he is wrong just that he is wrong and mock him like grade-schoolers. Anonymous grade-schoolers at that.

Unfortunately the science around global warming was spawned from the same vagina as the science used to manage our fisheries. Politics.....Now somebody pretend to be offended it will be the cherry on top.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
Gregory
Member
Member


Joined: 08 Mar 2014
Posts: 318 | TRs

Gregory
  Top

Member
PostMon Nov 25, 2019 7:38 am 
Reply to topic Reply with quote
Nobody here can tell the Goat why he is wrong just that he is wrong and mock him like grade-schoolers. Anonymous grade-schoolers at that.

Unfortunately the science around global warming was spawned from the same vagina as the science used to manage our fisheries. Politics.....Now somebody pretend to be offended it will be the cherry on top.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Reply to topic Reply with quote
  Display:     All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Forum Index > Stewardship > Global Warming
  Happy Birthday Otter, CampChamp, Wolfman!
Jump to:   
Search this topic:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
   Use Disclaimer Powered by phpBB Privacy Policy