Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Dec 21, 2016 - 11:16pm PT
|
Was the famous hockey-stick graph actually created only after deceptively cutting off earlier and later time periods (one of Tim's claims.)
no it was not a deception, not only was the original "hockey-stick" graph correct, but it is supported by subsequent research expanding on the proxies, and on the time range... it is very much a real thing.
two hours? I don't think I'm going to go through the whole video, skipping through it it would seem there is a bit of ad hominem arguing going on there, too...
|
|
tuolumne_tradster
Trad climber
Leading Edge of North American Plate
|
|
|
Dec 22, 2016 - 12:38am PT
|
Flip Flop asked ^^^ Will there be another Ice Age? Probably not in our lifetime ;-(
Rock weathering as a carbon sink could make a difference but it will take centuries or much longer to begin to reduce the rate of Carbon flux into the atmosphere by this mechanism...
According to future anthropogenic emission scenarios, the atmospheric CO2 concentration may double before the end of the twenty-first century1. This increase is predicted to result in a global warming of more than 6 °C in the worst case1. The global temperature increase will promote changes in the hydrologic cycle through redistributions of rainfall patterns and continental vegetation cover1, 2. All of these changes will impact the chemical weathering of continental rocks. Long considered an inert CO2 consumption flux at the century timescale, recent works have demonstrated its potential high sensitivity to the ongoing climate and land-use changes3, 4
http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v2/n5/full/nclimate1419.html
https://www.skepticalscience.com/weathering.html
|
|
EdwardT
Trad climber
Retired
|
|
|
Dec 22, 2016 - 07:34am PT
|
my posts kind of prove my point..... group think is going around.
There's a hyper-zealous defensiveness among the warmists. Kind of makes you wonder who they're trying to convince.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Dec 22, 2016 - 08:06am PT
|
Material nature is very balanced and harmonious in its natural true state.
In humanities present day state, it is completely out of sync with its own true self and material nature, inharmonious.
When this is predominate as we see now on this planet then the climate will become completely inharmonious to cause pain to humanity.
Without pain, no change to go back to the natural harmonious state that all humanity so naturally always is part parcel.
In summary, humanity is the cause of all climate change .......
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Dec 22, 2016 - 09:50am PT
|
Anyway, even if coal and fossil fuels do prove the cause, you yourself are not a climate scientist so you are simply taking another's word for it.
From a scientific standpoint, fossil fuels (coal is a fossil fuel) are a major part of climate change, the vast amount of scientific research indicates that failing to account for the increased CO2 from fossil fuel energy production leads to a very different climate than the one we are currently experiencing.
There are no other hypotheses that provide quantitative predictions of the climate. The other hypotheses that have been made have not been able to account for all of the observations and often require other mechanisms that are found not to exist.
For example, rick sumner's advocacy of solar activity, which is an obvious possible cause, fails for a number of reasons, the first being that over the last few solar cycles the solar activity has decreased while the surface temperatures have increased. Since this happens over decades, we are left to try to understand how the this might be. A number of suggestions have been proposed but fail to have effects remotely large enough to explain the large temperature increases.
Even the linkage between the Maunder Minimum and the Little Ice Age is not at all clear, yet the proxy of sunspots is presumed to directly relate to solar output, and the social stories of the history used as evidence of a major climatic event.
The relationship between the solar magnetic behavior and the solar irradiance is an ongoing scientific question. The climate proxies regarding that period also tend to be less dramatic than the various statements.
And while there seems to be a connection, it is a far smaller effect than the current increases in temperature, which cannot be explained by the data without accounting for the CO2 increases due to human activity.
When the effect of solar activity as implied by the Maunder Minimum are put into the various climate models, they impose a small variability on top of the much larger CO2 increases.
Unfortunately, and I know this from experience, if you watch one climate denial YouTube video, you'll be inundated with recommendations to watch more of the same. And while you'll have some "mainstream" climate science video recommendations, these are far less frequent.
So it's relatively easy to go down a path of watching climate change denial videos, most are relatively old, and think this represents a legitimate standpoint.
Yet putting the same time and effort into learning about climate science from climate scientists seems to be troublingly rare. The reason is simply stated in the quote above: "...you yourself are not a climate scientist so you are simply taking another's word for it."
The simplest analysis of this objection is that you don't know anything about climate science at all, you are taking someone's word for it. If you object to any expert's "opinion" regarding their field of expertise, and are not willing to develop some understanding about that field yourself, what are you adding to the discussion? You are talking about something you don't know anything about... you can not even judge the experts' expertise.
While one might protest the ipse dixit of experts, at least the scientific experts can point to the body of work that leads to their opinion, non-scientific experts have nothing to point to, their scientific case being absent.
Anyway, you have the opportunity to ask people on this forum familiar with the science to explain it to you... to the extent they are willing to spend time doing it... while for those videos, you have no access to ask questions of the speaker.
In science we believe that "the only authority is nature" so we look there for evidence, all other authority is questioned. It turns out that scientists are much more skeptical than any of the so-called skeptics.
|
|
tuolumne_tradster
Trad climber
Leading Edge of North American Plate
|
|
|
Dec 22, 2016 - 10:05am PT
|
Malemute: that DOE Lake Charles Methanol (LCM) Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) Project is essentially stripping CO2 from petroleum coke refining operations and using that CO2 as a "surfactant" for Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR), so the net benefit to the environment is marginal at best. For CCS to be a significant process to reduce future CO2 emissions, it really needs to be decoupled from the oil production process and stored in deep geologic repositories, like saline aquifers.
“Essentially what we’re doing is decarbonizing oil,” said Hunter Johnston, an attorney with Steptoe and Johnson who represents Lake Charles Methanol. “We’re lowering the carbon impact of oil, because we’re taking a part of the refining process that would otherwise be associated with CO2 emissions and we’re capturing that to produce more oil. So there’s this huge benefit of domestic production as a result while improving the environment.”
WTF "decarbonizing oil" I'm going to call bulls*t on that statement.
There may be a "huge" benefit for domestic oil production
LCM will support domestic oil production of 12,500 barrels per day, or 4.5 million barrels per year, through the sale of its CO2 for use in enhanced oil recovery (EOR) operations along the Gulf Coast
but improving the environment ??
that's a highly questionable to dishonest statement IMO.
|
|
tuolumne_tradster
Trad climber
Leading Edge of North American Plate
|
|
|
Dec 22, 2016 - 02:27pm PT
|
OK, better than "denial" and I applaud the CO2 capture part of the LCM project but the sequestration part is what I take issue with. The CO2 that is being captured at the LCM Plant is being used to produce more oil that, when burned, will add more heat trapping gases to the atmosphere. IMO the maximum environmental benefit from CO2 sequestration is injection of CO2 into geologic repositories without using it to produce more oil.
|
|
AP
Trad climber
Calgary
|
|
|
Dec 22, 2016 - 02:43pm PT
|
Well said Ed
Scientists are way more skeptical than most people.
Maybe you in the US want an "alternative" opinion on the Supreme Court.
Why not hire a dentist? After all a most dentists are smart and he or she won't be tainted by knowledge of the law. Then you can get a truly independent viewpoint.
I just think people are getting even dumber in this age of excessive information.
By the way I have a degree in Physics and work in oil and gas exploration. We always work with an incomplete data set, one that is not as solid as the climate change data set. We are forced to fill in the gray areas and use probabilities to make business decisions. For all of this we can be very successful if we handle things correctly.
Remember the Manhattan Project built a bomb yet were working beyond the established theories.
|
|
Flip Flop
climber
Earth Planet, Universe
|
|
|
Dec 22, 2016 - 04:48pm PT
|
We could agree that environmental degradation is detrimental and agree that nourishing our ecosystem is desirable. Shazaam! Value agreed upon leads to prosperity. It's a thing.
|
|
August West
Trad climber
Where the wind blows strange
|
|
|
Dec 22, 2016 - 04:53pm PT
|
Anyway, even if tobacco and smoking do cause cancer, you yourself are not a health researcher so you are simply taking another's word for it.
|
|
rick sumner
Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
|
|
|
Dec 22, 2016 - 05:56pm PT
|
Now TGT you know none of those recent papers are worth the paper they are printed on. Obviously Koch bros or big oil funded becuz every good lib/xtreme green/commie knows good guvments don't fund non anthropogenic nor non end of the world findings. Just ask Ed, he knows all.
|
|
rottingjohnny
Sport climber
Sands Motel , Las Vegas
|
|
|
Dec 22, 2016 - 06:02pm PT
|
TGT to...Alls i saw was the xmas tree....
|
|
rick sumner
Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
|
|
|
Dec 22, 2016 - 09:33pm PT
|
Natural capital? It's in the fission and fusion of atoms as well as the black gold beneath your feet. It's in the sun and the soil that feeds us, the animals raised up from same. It resides between the ears of individuals whose flash of genius has propelled the technological revolution that established Homo Sapiens Sapiens as the apex species.
Google Maurice Strong/Club of Rome/global warming.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Dec 23, 2016 - 12:42am PT
|
The data in the link in the link needs some splaining by the warmists.
the link is very strange, I looked at 10 of the papers and a general trend emerged, but first...
the signal of climate change is based on global spatial averages compared to a 30 year average time which defines the point against which a difference can be calculated, for temperature this is referred to as a temperature anomaly.
Global warming is just that, global, which is to say that not every location on the Earth's surface is warming.
Most of the plots which TGT erroneously refers to as "data" are actually taken from the same time series used to calculate the global averages. Some of the papers referenced on that link, use the time series to calibrate their proxies, then provide, for that location, a time series back before the instrumentation period to get an idea of what the "recent" paleoenvironment was.
Doing this all around the globe would provide a means of averaging the paleoclimate and getting an idea of the pre-industrial global temperature. This is the "hockey-stick" graph.
You can go an look at each paper (nearly) and decide for yourselves, I provide my notes below.
One more thing, the link TGT provides via his "if all you see" site does not survey all of the 2016 papers on paleoclimatology, only those which make a point of disagreeing with the "hockey-stick." That site concludes that the "hockey-stick" collapses, but that is a silly assertion, as the climate is quantified by the average of many sites.
Neither TGT nor rick read any of those papers... they don't need to, they know the all the answers.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921818115301478
Recent temperature trends in the South Central Andes reconstructed from sedimentary chrysophyte stomatocysts in Laguna Escondida (1742 m a.s.l., 38°28 S, Chile)
R. De Jong, T. Schneider, I. Hernández–Almeida, M. Grosjean
...
The reconstruction shows that recent warming (onset in AD 1980) in the southern Chilean Andes was not exceptional in the context of the past century. This is in strong contrast to studies from the Northern Hemisphere. The finding is also in contrast to the cooling temperature trends which were detected using meteorological measurement data in low altitude sites along the Chilean coast. This finding confirms that coastal meteorological station data in this region do not reliably reflect recent temperature trends at high altitudes. Moreover, it implies a southward shift of the northern border of the Westerlies wind belt. This study clearly illustrates the importance of quantitative, high resolution studies from remote sites, in particular at high elevation mountain areas.
http://www.clim-past.net/12/1485/2016/cp-12-1485-2016.pdf
A 368-year maximum temperature reconstruction based on tree-ring data in the northwestern Sichuan Plateau (NWSP), China
Liangjun Zhu, Yuandong Zhang, Zongshan Li, Binde Guo, and Xiaochun Wang
...Samples were collected from spruce (Picea purpurea) growing at timberline of the mountain Ayila in the township of Chali, located in the NWSP (32º 43′ 49" N, 102º 06′ 17" E; 3900 m above sea level, a.s.l.)...
http://pc70.gvc.gu.se/dc/PUBs/Zhang_etal2016.pdf
1200 years of warm-season temperature variability in central Scandinavia inferred from tree-ring density
Peng Zhang, Hans W. Linderholm, Björn E. Gunnarson, Jesper Björklund, and Deliang Chen
...
C-Scan suggests a moderate MCA warm-peak during ca. 1000 to 1100 CE in central Scandinavia and a LIA lasting from the mid-16th century to the end of the 19th century. During the last millennium, the coldest 10and 30-year periods occurred around 1600 CE in central Scandinavia. The warmest 10and 30-year periods were found in the 20th century. C-Scan indicates lower temperatures during the late MCA (ca. 1130–1210 CE) and higher temperatures during the LIA (1610–1850 CE) than G11.
...
[note this is 9 sampling sites in central Sweden, not all of Scandinavia, Figure 4b, shows that the observed and reconstructed temperatures from tree rings track in the 1890-2011 time period. Figures 5a shows the data with a 70%-80% correlation with the "...warm-season temperature from the CRU TS3.23 0.5º × 0.5º data set (Harris et al., 2014)..." from which one set of global averages is derived.]
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165232X15001767
Inferring the variation of climatic and glaciological contributions to West Greenland iceberg discharge in the twentieth century
Yifan Zhao, Grant R. Bigg, Steve A. Billings, Edward Hanna, Andrew J. Sole, Hua-liang Wei, Visakan Kadirkamanathan, David J. Wilton
[note that the Labrador Sea Surface Temperature (LSST)is an input to the analysis performed in the paper, not a result of the paper. "The one input variable generated for this paper is LSST ( Fig. 1). This comes from averaging the Kaplan v2 SST (Kaplan et al., 1998), over the Labrador Sea area east to 45ºW, and south from the Davis Strait to 55ºN. While this is on the edge of the area covered by the Kaplan et al. global analysis, their error analyses suggest that the field in this region is not especially dependent on differences in the analysis method, and errors do not vary substantially over the twentieth century."]
http://www.nonlin-processes-geophys.net/23/361/2016/
Wavelet analysis of the singular spectral reconstructed time series to study the imprints of solar–ENSO–geomagnetic activity on Indian climate
Sri Lakshmi Sunkara and Rama Krishna Tiwari
[once again, the paper uses the "the mean pre-monsoon temperature anomalies of the Western Himalayas (Yadav et al., 2004)" in Fig. 1b as an input, the paper does not produce the time series. Yadav uses 16 sample sites in Northwestern India. I could not find a table of the later 20th century Yadav et al. uses to calibrate their tree ring data, but in their paper we read "Monthly temperature anomalies (relative to 1961–1990 mean) of three weather stations (Dehra Dun, Mukteswar, and Shimla) covering the entire 20th century were used to develop a mean temperature series (Figures 4a–4c)."]
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v535/n7612/full/nature18645.html
Absence of 21st century warming on Antarctic Peninsula consistent with natural variability
John Turner, Hua Lu, Ian White, John C. King, Tony Phillips, J. Scott Hosking, Thomas J. Bracegirdle, Gareth J. Marshall, Robert Mulvaney & Pranab Deb
abstract:
Since the 1950s, research stations on the Antarctic Peninsula have recorded some of the largest increases in near-surface air temperature in the Southern Hemisphere1. This warming has contributed to the regional retreat of glaciers2, disintegration of floating ice shelves3 and a ‘greening’ through the expansion in range of various flora4. Several interlinked processes have been suggested as contributing to the warming, including stratospheric ozone depletion5, local sea-ice loss6, an increase in westerly winds5, 7, and changes in the strength and location of low–high-latitude atmospheric teleconnections8, 9. Here we use a stacked temperature record to show an absence of regional warming since the late 1990s. The annual mean temperature has decreased at a statistically significant rate, with the most rapid cooling during the Austral summer. Temperatures have decreased as a consequence of a greater frequency of cold, east-to-southeasterly winds, resulting from more cyclonic conditions in the northern Weddell Sea associated with a strengthening mid-latitude jet. These circulation changes have also increased the advection of sea ice towards the east coast of the peninsula, amplifying their effects. Our findings cover only 1% of the Antarctic continent and emphasize that decadal temperature changes in this region are not primarily associated with the drivers of global temperature change but, rather, reflect the extreme natural internal variability of the regional atmospheric circulation.
[note, I added emphasis]
https://www.blogs.uni-mainz.de/fb09climatology/files/2012/03/Tejedor_2015_IJB.pdf
Tree-ring-based drought reconstruction in the Iberian Range (east of Spain) since 1694
Ernesto Tejedor & Martín de Luis & José María Cuadrat & Jan Esper & Miguel Ángel Saz
"We compiled a tree ring network from 21 different locations in the eastern Iberian Range of the Iberian Peninsula" within a 100 km region, the annual temperature is not a result of the paper, "Monthly temperature and precipitation instrumental data (provided by AEMET) from 30 stations within a maximum distance of 50 km, and spanning 1951–2010, were used to calibrate the tree ring data. In addition, gridded instrumental data from CRU TS v.3.22, (1901–2012 period, 0.5° × 0.5° resolution) were used for comparative purposes (Harris et al. 2014). Due to the size of the study area, the average of the three closest grid points was used to construct a regional time series." The figure was taken from the paper, "Fig. 2 Climate data. a) Climate diagram of the study area made from 30 meteorogical stations for the period 1950–2010 b)Annual temperature, and c) precipitation from 1950–2010."
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s41063-016-0024-1
Recent retreat at a temperate Icelandic glacier in the context of the last ~80 years of climate change in the North Atlantic region
Benjamin M. P. Chandler, David J. A. Evans, David H. Roberts
"The annual moraines at Skálafellsjökull—and elsewhere in Iceland—primarily reflect seasonally driven submarginal processes active in a given year (cf. [13], and references therein), and will therefore largely reflect short-term climate variability. This rapid short-term behaviour at the ice-front (glacier reaction time) should be distinguished from the integrated longer-term behaviour of the whole glacier (glacier response time), which is usually of the order of decades in maritime glaciers (cf. [2, 5, 10, 16, 27, 34])."
note that this means that these glaciers respond seasonally... once again, the temperature plot in the paper, Fig. 2 (b) is taken from an external source: "Meteorological data was supplied by Veðurstofa Íslands (the Icelandic Meteorological Office)"
http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v6/n10/full/nclimate3103.html
http://eisenman.ucsd.edu/papers/Jones-et-al-2016.pdf
Assessing recent trends in high-latitude Southern Hemisphere surface climate
Julie M. Jones, Sarah T. Gille, Hugues Goosse, Nerilie J. Abram, Pablo O. Canziani, Dan J. Charman, Kyle R. Clem, Xavier Crosta, Casimir de Lavergne, Ian Eisenman, Matthew H. England, Ryan L. Fogt, Leela M. Frankcombe, Gareth J. Marshall, Valérie Masson-Delmotte, Adele K. Morrison, Anaïs J. Orsi, Marilyn N. Raphael, James A. Renwick, David P. Schneider, Graham R. Simpkins, Eric J. Steig, Barbara Stenni, Didier Swingedouw & Tessa R. Vance
Note the the figure comes from the papers Figure 1 "Antarctic atmosphere–ocean–ice changes over the satellite-observing era" and is not a result of the paper, Figure 2, "Antarctic climate variability and trends over the past 200 years from long observational and proxy-derived indicators" shows the data presented by this paper. A more complete quote from the conclusion:
"Our synthesis has emphasized that less than 40 years of instrumental climate data is insufficient to characterize the variability of the high southern latitudes or to robustly identify an anthropogenic contribution, except for the changes in the SAM. Although temperature changes over 1950–2008 from the average of individual stations have been attributed to anthropogenic causes(99), only low confidence can be assigned, owing to observational uncertainties(100) and largescale decadal and multi-decadal variability. Detection and attribution studies depend on the validity of estimates of natural variability from climate model simulations. This is particularly the case for variables such as Antarctic sea ice, which have problematic representation in climate models(36) and short observational time series from which to estimate real multi-decadal variability. The strong regional variability on all timescales implies that the sparsity of observations and proxy data is a clear limitation, especially in the ocean, and that averaging climate properties over the entire Antarctic or Southern Ocean potentially aliases the regional differences."
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/joc.4906/abstract
A 211-year growing season temperature reconstruction using tree-ring width in Zhangguangcai Mountains, Northeast China: linkages to the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans
Liangjun Zhu, Zongshan Li, Yuandong Zhang, Xiaochun Wang
couldn't find the paper on the internet outside of the paywall, but interestingly, it seems another paper which does much the same analysis sees a quite robust "hockey stick"...
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/309073466_A_414-year_tree-ring-based_April-July_minimum_temperature_reconstruction_and_its_implications_for_the_extreme_climate_events_northeast_China
|
|
Dave
Mountain climber
the ANTI-fresno
|
|
|
Dec 23, 2016 - 06:40am PT
|
Maybe for some of us, its more about the reality of modern society and needs of other people.
Do you believe in helping the poor - hear and in other countries? Do you believe in subsidies or fair competition among businesses? Do you believe in keeping all the modern conveniences in your life of relegating those to the past?
2% of the energy mix is now from solar and wind. After all the growth. 2%. The environmental crowd protests dams and nuclear, both of which are carbon free AND bigger sources of power. Gas is cleaner than coal but the "keep it in the ground" crowd is targeting it. So... what can we use?
http://www.visualcapitalist.com/u-s-energy-consumption-one-giant-diagram/
|
|
AP
Trad climber
Calgary
|
|
|
Dec 23, 2016 - 07:21am PT
|
One of the big problems in our society is the ignorance regarding science among many of the general public. Even if a person lacks the aptitude or knowledge to appreciate the details there are many good science books for the lay person.
What a lot of people don't realize is that science is very good at self correcting. There may be a poorly run experiment or in some cases outright fraud but this gets sorted out quickly. Bad data and results get exposed and discredited.
|
|
rick sumner
Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
|
|
|
Dec 23, 2016 - 09:50am PT
|
Exactly Dave.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Dec 23, 2016 - 10:02am PT
|
Maybe for some of us, its more about the reality of modern society and needs of other people.
"The reality of modern society" has to face up to the reality of the availability of resources, and the consequences of using those resources.
One of the resources is the atmosphere, which we use to dump exhaust and use for respiration (both plants and animals) and as a source of water, as a shield from harmful radiation, and to provide a moderated climate.
The increase of CO2 into the atmosphere is 10 times the rate of any natural increase in the last 66 million years. The continuation of this pursuit of "modern society" unabated will significantly change the climate, various studies suggest that these changes would not make the world "better" in anyway.
There is no simple solution to this, the cost of energy to support "the reality of modern society" will go up as the cost of climate change is levied, a cost that will go up whether or not governments act, the atmosphere, the climate, affect all of us regardless of policy, regardless of the desire to maintain our particular "reality of modern society."
This will be a time of disruption, especially in the "energy market." It has already started, investors looking at the future of fossil fuel use are starting to wonder what the value of those resources are, and those "owning" those resources are having to explain how they are priced. Those reserves are quite valuable in the current market, tens of trillions of dollars, so facing the prospect that the reserves lose all of their value is not going be a "smooth" transition to any other form of energy production.
Further, because of the facts regarding the science, the CO2 we put up now will be around long after we are gone, a legacy to future generations.
Whether or not you believe in that science, it represents a very plausible scenario for the future. Viewed as a risk, the vast majority of scientists think is highly plausible, it is not at all foolish to begin to find a way to mitigate against that risk.
In fact, it is foolish to ignore the most likely scenarios of the future and assume that nothing will happen and fail to plan for those futures.
A venerable football coach explained this week the logic behind activating a third quarterback from injured reserve as his team headed for the playoffs this way: "you don't know you need insurance until you need insurance." He's a smart cookie, he's not waiting until he knows.
|
|
rick sumner
Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
|
|
|
Dec 23, 2016 - 10:33am PT
|
"studies suggest". Your guys just don't get it Ed. The "reality" is that the natives of the western world you attack for their exhalations into commons of the atmosphere don't want to go quietly into that long night the proponents of your "climate science" prescribe to deal with the "unsustainability" of their lives.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Dec 23, 2016 - 10:36am PT
|
^^^idiots gonna idiot
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!