maddogdrivethru.net

Open all night
It is currently Sun Sep 24, 2017 5:12 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Forum rules


It's the Gulag of Fun



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 222 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: 2 Questions to Shut Up Nauseating Global Warming Proslet
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 11:07 am 
Offline
Staff Sergeant
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 8:41 pm
Posts: 4511
Reputation points: 3780
mdiehl wrote:
Quote:
Highest temperatures recorded for Antarctic region
Date:
March 1, 2017
Source:
Arizona State University
Summary:
The World Meteorological Organization announced today new verified record high- temperatures in Antarctica, ranging from the high 60s (in Fahrenheit) to the high teens, depending on the location they were recorded in Antarctica. Knowledge and verification of such extremes are important in the study of weather patterns, climate variability and human induced change, report scientists.


https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/03/170301084933.htm



Well that settles it, we are all going to die then....

or you know colonize and exploit Antarctica's likely virgin natural resources...

take your pick.

_________________
Nemo me impune lacessit.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2 Questions to Shut Up Nauseating Global Warming Proslet
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 11:43 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2008 12:33 pm
Posts: 19419
Reputation points: 11537
Hey, I have always said that there's a huge distinction between the science and the policy implications.

IMO the best reasons to cut carbon emissions have nothing at all to do with climate change. That said, there is no doubt that global warming is going to seriously mess up vast parts of the Earth. So the USA needs to have a plan for mitigating the effects within the USA. Starvation in China and India, flooding in Bangladesh, Netherlands, or Italy, heat indices in the 150s in the Yucatan ... those things are not properly American taxpayers' problem to solve.

Lack of water in California's central valley, the US southwest, or the Oglala aquifer ARE Americans' problem to solve because those things affect American food stability and Americans quality of life.

So, either get everyone to curb CO2 emissions (HAH! Good luck getting the BRICs to comply with THAT!) or else make a mitigation plan that allows the USA to survive the worst while the rest of the world (1) goes to hell agriculturally, (2) goes to hell economically, (3) start invading each other in order to blow off the social steam that comes from having billions of starving, underemployed people.

_________________
"Fuck the king." - Sandor Clegane

"And the story was whatever was the song what it was." - Dire Straits


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2 Questions to Shut Up Nauseating Global Warming Proslet
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 11:56 am 
Offline
Staff Sergeant
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 8:41 pm
Posts: 4511
Reputation points: 3780
mdiehl wrote:
Hey, I have always said that there's a huge distinction between the science and the policy implications.

IMO the best reasons to cut carbon emissions have nothing at all to do with climate change. That said, there is no doubt that global warming is going to seriously mess up vast parts of the Earth. So the USA needs to have a plan for mitigating the effects within the USA. Starvation in China and India, flooding in Bangladesh, Netherlands, or Italy, heat indices in the 150s in the Yucatan ... those things are not properly American taxpayers' problem to solve.

Lack of water in California's central valley, the US southwest, or the Oglala aquifer ARE Americans' problem to solve because those things affect American food stability and Americans quality of life.

So, either get everyone to curb CO2 emissions (HAH! Good luck getting the BRICs to comply with THAT!) or else make a mitigation plan that allows the USA to survive the worst while the rest of the world (1) goes to hell agriculturally, (2) goes to hell economically, (3) start invading each other in order to blow off the social steam that comes from having billions of starving, underemployed people.


I'll buy there is a problem at all when the Gaia Watermelon Cult takes their fingers off the scale and their models have less than a 250% margin of error.

To wit, as a Tax Preparation Guy I was trained the IRS looks at recurring deviation of more than 1.5% as a warning sign of fraud....

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/03/10/ ... te-models/

At the end of the day I agree with you and respect your integrity in admitting that the seedcorn for the Kultists(and I am not including you in this approbation) is their mad desire to wreak massive policy change....

thus at best they are a political movement predicated on hysterical fraud, and at worst they are a literal Malthusian Death Cult who wants enforced population reduction and a neo-religion.

No good science starts with "fuck you because I said so."

_________________
Nemo me impune lacessit.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2 Questions to Shut Up Nauseating Global Warming Proslet
PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 12:28 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2008 12:33 pm
Posts: 19419
Reputation points: 11537
The margins of error aren't that high, but I can see how the absence of a precise prediction can be either frustrating or disconcerting.

Basically, the problem is that we know that CO2 forcing causes atmospheric and oceanic heating, and that the major source of CO2 forcing is human activity.

The Earth -- the currents both in the oceans and in the air -- is basically just a big energy distribution system. The energy -- heat -- has to go somewhere. Normally the Earth radiates it away into space, absent CO2 forcing or some other kind of forcing (that has been quite cyclical in the past). Right now, for example, if we were following the usual, natural pattern of climate variation, we'd be in a long term cooling trend. But we're not. That is because of CO2 from fossil fuel combustion, primarily, and also somewhat from methane. (About 72% from CO2 forcing and 28% from methane forcing).

So there's extra heat. It's here. The evidence is overwhelming, and there is no good alternative to why the heat is here other than CO2 and methane forcing. It's not coming from the sun, or orbital dynamics, or god, or unicorns or whatever.

The Earth's currents (oceanic and atmospheric) then attempt to redistribute the heat away from the equator (because the equator is where it's hottest) by convection. It can't NOT redistribute the heat. But it does not do it perfectly. Continents for one thing are a massive physical barrier. So the prediction as to what weill happen where and how bad is sketchy. Also, one way the convection works is to vaporize seawater (mostly) which adds to atmospheric water vapor. That water can also trap heat. But it can also condense and fall... seasonally as temperatures drop... or when hot moist air interacts with cold fronts... or with mountains etc.

So the predictions are naturally probability distributions based on best data so far.

I try to explain it by analogy. When you look at a hurricane forecast, you get a hurricane track. That is a prediction of where the hurricane will go. It's probabilistic, and the farther the hurricane is from land, the wider the possible area of landfall.

CO2 forcing and global warming are a hurricane. It's there. It's beyond dispute that it is happening. We have a pretty good idea of how intense the whole "storm" is ... how much energy is in it. But we don't have a really good idea of where it's going to "hit land" and where the effects will be most adverse.

At this point, I view the "economic suicide pact" model of left wing POLITICAL enthusiasts to be problematic. I don't see how the hurricane can be stopped at this point, and I don't see stopping it or even reducing its intensity as a likely outcome unless you can get the BRICS to play by the same rules as everyone else, and to live up to their promises. They won't. China, India and Brazil sign treaties with the expectation of ignoring their treaty commitments in the hope that they can cheat for a while before everyone else catches on and drops out of the agreement. If they're caught, well, there's always renegotiation for a new treaty that will likewise be ignored, or one can force the whole process through some Global Adjudication process, causing delay, and then ignore the result of the adjudication (as China did with the recent ruling about the illegality of their claims in the south China sea, and as Israel does with the west bank to draw another example). Those nations have NO intention of complying. So the hurricane can't be stopped. At this point it couldn't be stopped even if everyone wanted to. But with the BRICS, it's just going to intensify no matter what the US does.

So the USA should.
1. Plan to mitigate the effects within the USA as the stuff hits the fan,
2. Convert our energy production to renewables anyhow because it will save buttloads of money in the long run and make us more economically competitive, and it will reduce energy loss through our current absurd power distribution systems,
3. Remove the USA "carbon budget" from the litany of Hate-America talking points coming from our foreign "allies" and competitors.

_________________
"Fuck the king." - Sandor Clegane

"And the story was whatever was the song what it was." - Dire Straits


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2 Questions to Shut Up Nauseating Global Warming Proslet
PostPosted: Thu Mar 09, 2017 1:12 am 
Offline
Oppressive Tyrant and Enemy of Truth
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 6:06 pm
Posts: 15170
Location: under the porch
Reputation points: 13321
"Antarctic region" = South Africa, New Zealand, Tasmania, Falkland Islands, etc.

_________________
First, we must kill moose and squirrel


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2 Questions to Shut Up Nauseating Global Warming Proslet
PostPosted: Sun Mar 12, 2017 11:02 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:43 pm
Posts: 12648
Reputation points: 2651
doggie wrote:
"Antarctic region" = South Africa, New Zealand, Tasmania, Falkland Islands, etc.

I understand your substandard geography skills, you being from WV and all. :roll:

But all the areas you mention are to the North of 50thS, South Africa and Falkland Islands to North of 40thS.

Image

By our logic all England and Poland and half of Germany are in the Arctic Region. :roll:

Image

But when science is concerned, you are a not a reliable source. ;)

So it goes.

_________________
The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt

Mit der Dummheit kämpfen selbst Götter vergebens.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2 Questions to Shut Up Nauseating Global Warming Proslet
PostPosted: Sun Mar 12, 2017 4:50 pm 
Offline
Hair in the soap
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2008 12:46 am
Posts: 17030
Reputation points: 13300
nero wrote:
doggie wrote:
"Antarctic region" = South Africa, New Zealand, Tasmania, Falkland Islands, etc.

I understand your substandard geography skills, you being from WV and all. :roll:

But all the areas you mention are to the North of 50thS, South Africa and Falkland Islands to North of 40thS.


By our logic all England and Poland and half of Germany are in the Arctic Region. :roll:


But when science is concerned, you are a not a reliable source. ;)

So it goes.





LOL!

That completely flew over your head, Nero.

Don't make yourself look any worse by continuing to prove the point Doggie was making. :lol:

Perhaps you should think on what his post was really stating, instead of making a shit-post full of fail.

_________________
..
.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2 Questions to Shut Up Nauseating Global Warming Proslet
PostPosted: Mon Mar 13, 2017 1:34 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 4:43 pm
Posts: 12648
Reputation points: 2651
NefariousKoel wrote:
...
LOL!

That completely flew over your head, Nero.

Don't make yourself look any worse by continuing to prove the point Doggie was making. :lol:

Perhaps you should think on what his post was really stating, instead of making a shit-post full of fail.

:lol:

Hyvä yritys.

_________________
The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt

Mit der Dummheit kämpfen selbst Götter vergebens.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2 Questions to Shut Up Nauseating Global Warming Proslet
PostPosted: Wed Mar 29, 2017 12:05 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2008 12:33 pm
Posts: 19419
Reputation points: 11537
New record low Arctic sea ice maximum and Antarctic sea ice minimum.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/03/170322143149.htm

_________________
"Fuck the king." - Sandor Clegane

"And the story was whatever was the song what it was." - Dire Straits


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 2 Questions to Shut Up Nauseating Global Warming Proslet
PostPosted: Wed Mar 29, 2017 12:07 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2008 12:33 pm
Posts: 19419
Reputation points: 11537
Middle East to have precipitation levels 1/5 of amounts currently received.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/03/170322143139.htm

That should stir some pots. :ugeek:

_________________
"Fuck the king." - Sandor Clegane

"And the story was whatever was the song what it was." - Dire Straits


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 222 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


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 post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group