Climate Change: Why aren't more people concerned about it?

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List

This thread has been locked

Messages 1561 - 1580 of total 2200 in this topic

<< First | < Previous | Show All | Next > | Last >>

clifff

Mountain climber

golden, rollin hills of California

Jun 13, 2018 - 01:39pm PT

Global climate change, fueled by skyrocketing levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide, is siphoning oxygen from today's oceans at an alarming pace (similiar to the) Toarcian Oceanic Anoxic Event (T-OAE), an interval of global oceanic deoxygenation characterized by a mass extinction of marine organisms that occurred in the Early Jurassic Period.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/06/180611160510.htm

zBrown

Ice climber

Jun 13, 2018 - 09:33pm PT

Believe it or not, there’s a clear bright side here. Quickly slash emissions, and the ice shelves should still remain stable across most of the continent. Doing so would require an unprecedented era of global cooperation, but the collaborative research taking place right now in Antarctica — an effort shared by dozens of scientists from 17 countries in this week’s update alone — could serve as inspiration. It’s a symbol of what’s possible when people work together for a common cause.

Hulbe, whose first trip to Antarctica was in 1991 but was not directly involved with this week’s report, sees it partly as the culmination of what she’s been working for her entire life. In her view, the way the report is framed — as a stark choice presented to humanity — “accomplishes something that charts and graphs never will.”

In narrative prose unusual for a formal scientific study, the researchers imagine what Antarctica might be like in 2070 — with and without rapid cuts to emissions. Given the incredible size of the Antarctic ice sheets, actions taken in the next decade, the researchers conclude, will reverberate for millennia.

Bad Climber

Trad climber

The Lawless Border Regions

Jun 14, 2018 - 06:51am PT

Malamute:

Do we do nothing and just try to live it up until the day of our demise, or do we try to stave off our extinction by changing things that we know contribute to climate change, like greenhouse gases?

Fair enough. Who's going car-free? No more road trips, bros. You sell your car yet? Until we take PERSONAL responsibility, as you say, it's all sound and fury, signifying nothing.

Thanks.

I'm hear all week.

BAd

August West

Trad climber

Where the wind blows strange

Jun 14, 2018 - 11:27am PT

Fair enough. Who's going car-free? No more road trips, bros. You sell your car yet? Until we take PERSONAL responsibility, as you say, it's all sound and fury, signifying nothing.

I salute those that take PERSONAL responsibility to try and change society for the better.

But for something like climate change, a few people making a few personal decisions isn't going to come close to solving the issue.

Society needs to take a COLLECTIVE issue to get serious.

For instance, I would support policies and politicians to make a real difference.

Ramping up a carbon tax would be a good start. Say over the next 20~30 years, have a carbon tax that ramps up to $100~$200 per ton of CO2 equivalent.

No picking winners or losers. Just sit back and watch the magic of the free market come up with solutions.

Making sure people can't game the system, for instance with fake offsets, is an issue. But I think that issue is far more tractable than the politics.

Splater

climber

Grey Matter

Jun 14, 2018 - 05:34pm PT

The loss of the Antarctic ice sheet is responsible for 7.6 millimeters of sea level rise since 1992, according to the latest assessment of the polar ice cap. The rate of loss has tripled since 2012.

According to the latest data, the loss of Antarctic ice is accelerating. As a result, the rate of sea level rise is also increasing. Prior to 2012, the polar ice cap was shedding 76 billion tons of ice per year. Between 2012 and 2017, the ice sheet lost an average of 219 billion tons of ice per year.

https://www.upi.com/Science_News/2018/06/14/Antarctic-Ice-Sheet-losses-fueling-sea-level-rise-study-shows/8201528992615/

https://www.forbes.com/sites/bridaineparnell/2018/06/14/seeing-is-believing-satellites-show-antarctic-ice-loss-has-tripled-in-6-years/#372847bf1d3a

https://www.npr.org/2018/06/13/619543532/antarctica-has-lost-more-than-3-trillion-tons-of-ice-in-25-years

Jay S

Mountain climber

Silver Gate, Mt

Jun 19, 2018 - 06:19pm PT

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/signs-of-global-warming-are-all-around-2018-06-19/

EdBannister

Mountain climber

13,000 feet

Jun 19, 2018 - 07:00pm PT

We are in the Holocene, it is getting warmer.. and has been for the last 11,000 years, but we won't be out of the ice age until all the ice is gone.. then the Earth will be back to normal, let me know.

monolith

climber

state of being

Jun 19, 2018 - 07:17pm PT

Nope, temps have been declining during the holocene for the last 7k+ years, that is until man started burning fossil fuels at a high rate.

And no, the ice doesn't disappear entirely during the interglacials, it just recedes towards the poles.

EdBannister

Mountain climber

13,000 feet

Jun 20, 2018 - 11:58pm PT

in 1973, the first earth day declared there was a statistical inevitability of a great die off, including 10 million americans, sometime in the 1990s.. Paul Earlich made a ton of money off bad "science."

Following are "inconvenient" facts you cannot manipulate:

Earth high ambient temperature, now attempted to be buried by surface temp data, was set at the Furnace Creek Weather station 10 July 1913. The African temp record was disallowed as inaccurate, as it was measured over pavement. note that new weather stations are being built in hot places to set new "records" where there is no old data to compare it to... meanwhile weather stations that were rural, like Denver as an example, are now urbanized and wishing the urban heat dome, of course raising the temperature as expected. but even with all the dishonest data collection:

Earth's record for most consecutive days over 100 F (37.8 C) 160 days, Marble Bar, Western Australia, 31 October 1923 - 7 April 1924.

Earth's record for most consecutive days above 120 F (48.9 C) 43 days, Furnace Creek, Death Valley, California, July 6 - August 17 1917.. 101 years ago for you scholars.

EdBannister

Mountain climber

13,000 feet

Jun 21, 2018 - 12:10am PT

do you guys know why Yosemite Valley is flat on the bottom and not U shaped as most Glacial Valleys are??

Four separate and distinct recessional moraines.. each records a period of warming, and a long period of stability, then another warming period... Yosemite was full of ice 70,000 years ago. It got warmer.
the moraines, acted as dams and they silted in, the valley has a flat bottom.

or why does Manhattan have high rise only in the south?? Because the north is moraine, unstable.. it was the edge of the continental ice sheet, which covered Canada, it got warmer.. both, a few years before Henry Ford, Eli Whitney, or Linus Pauling.

and speaking of the smartest guy.. you might also want to check out this:

Science is the search for truth, that is the effort to understand the world: it involves the rejection of bias, of dogma, of revelation, but not the rejection of morality.
Linus Pauling

anti, if you are also anti me, i would count myself on the correct side of the fence. i did at least crack one book as, during masters studies in Water Resource Management, i co authored a book on the Colorado River Drainage Basin, so i think we can say i at least opened that one. and the fools at Woods Hole, Stanford, and the Army Map Service all tried to recruit me from just that one word i read, pretty cool huh?

so Moose, if death and mayhem are 20 years away, and Al Gore has been crying death and mayhem for the last 15 or more, what is a milestone.. where will we be in five years?? Ten years ago we were told Polar Bear populations would plummet, they are up. tell me something that we can visit in five years, that if you are not correct, you will admit it.. Last year we had Yosemite flood predictions to three significant figures! They added a figure after the decimal because they were so perfect at predicting runoff 5 days before the storm, three significant figures implies accuracy to within one half of one percent... I said no way, and mentioned that NOAH had been as much as 60% inaccurate in the past.. i was ridiculed and passed off as "that was before high tech" but guess what, when you looked at stream flow, they were 60% inaccurate.. so, i place your hysteria in the same category as the bird flu scare, the Y2K scare, the earth day overpopulation scare, the heterosexual aids death.. remember 20% of heterosexuals were supposed to die by 2010?? All the science grant chasing alarmists, are never held accountable for bad science.. science would deliver flood predictions that were low, one half of the time, but flood predictions are never low.. that is not science, it is something else.

monolith

climber

state of being

Jun 21, 2018 - 06:27am PT

Ed, by citing weather events you are confusing weather and climate.

Here's a link that explains the difference.

https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/weather_climate.html

Ed Hartouni

Trad climber

Livermore, CA

Jun 21, 2018 - 09:02am PT

Last year we had Yosemite flood predictions to three significant figures! They added a figure after the decimal because they were so perfect at predicting runoff 5 days before the storm, three significant figures implies accuracy to within one half of one percent... I said no way, and mentioned that NOAH had been as much as 60% inaccurate in the past.. i was ridiculed and passed off as "that was before high tech" but guess what, when you looked at stream flow, they were 60% inaccurate..

actually, you were provided a link to the uncertainty analysis and the NOAA statements concerning accuracy of their flood warnings and the use of data from that particular web site.

This did not suit your particular narrative at the time (which appears to be the same narrative now).

EdBannister

Mountain climber

13,000 feet

Jun 21, 2018 - 09:15am PT

Ed, posting the prediction, with three significant figures, implied the level of accuracy. and, they were 60% inaccurate!! i looked at the storm at the same time and said less that 17 feet, when the prediction was 23.7. Why is it so difficult to admit the models are bad??

If half of the predictions are not under, and all are overstated, then clearly "science" is not what is going on.

and, Ed, with all your disclaimers and all your computations, i do not recall you actually making a prediction before the flood that was more accurate than NOAH's, or mine. do results count in your calculations? When, how bad how many times, do you need to be so demonstrably wrong, before you simply say, yes the model is bad instead of calling inaccuracy within the limits of uncertainty,,, if i say my model is 99% uncertain do i have a free pass?? At some point there has to be some accountability for bad science. How far off were they again this spring, you tell me, you are the stats man.

EdBannister

Mountain climber

13,000 feet

Jun 21, 2018 - 09:25am PT

Monolith, when you do not acknowledge that weather, is what makes up climate, then you have lost sight of reality.. when the theory, and the facts do not match, it is not the facts that are wrong.

Still waiting for someone to acknowledge a track record of alarmist bad science. Including Paul Erlich.

Still waiting since according to the above, we will all die by 2037, what milestones in 5 years can we set??

Anti, when one runs out of reasonable arguments, then one switches to personal attacks, i am pleased. and still thankful to be on my side of the fence. i assume that you will no longer reply since it is a waste of your time.. also pleased.

monolith

climber

state of being

Jun 21, 2018 - 09:36am PT

Ed, you should learn how averages work. Citing an outlier is just cherry picking.

BTW, are you trying to claim we are not warming by citing some hot weather somewhere 100 years ago?

But you said previously we are in the Holocene and it's natural to warm until we run out of ice.

Try to keep your claims consistent.

EdBannister

Mountain climber

13,000 feet

Jun 21, 2018 - 09:46am PT

Mono, I am saying that the short term 100 year weather watching is stupid. In Geologic terms, yes climate is warming. So we can also invalidate all the sensationalist recent weather "data" blaming global warming? Is that true?? Level playing field would demand we remove weather events on BOTH sides of the argument, not just one.

Still waiting for someone to acknowledge a track record of alarmist bad science. Including Paul Erlich.

Still waiting since according to the above, EDIT correctionMoose says 100 million will die by 2037, what milestones in 5 years can we set??

monolith

climber

state of being

Jun 21, 2018 - 09:48am PT

Glad you are starting go get it, Ed.

We cite climate, not individual weather events.

And I don't know any climate scientist that claims we are all dying by 2037. You are just making stuff up.

EdBannister

Mountain climber

13,000 feet

Jun 21, 2018 - 09:55am PT

EdBannister, you will know when it comes (if you live 20 more years), trust me.

A hundred million of dying and a billion of starving starving people will wake you up.

courtesy of Mossedrool higher on this same page, i can't make stuff up that stupid.

Meanwhile there remains no accountability in the global warming alarmist claims..

Here is another example, sea ice in the north is shrinking, Global Warming alarmist claims were the then Polar Bear population of about 22,500 would plunge to the level of probable extinction! 2015 surveys, now complete, show a population of above 28,000.

https://polarbearscience.com/2017/02/15/baffin-bay-and-kane-basin-polar-bears-not-declining-concludes-new-report/

When your "model" is political, not scientific, it really is not science.