Climate Change skeptics? [ot]

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
This thread has been locked
Messages 18921 - 18940 of total 20264 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
jonnyrig

climber
Jan 23, 2015 - 04:11pm PT
58% of the people in the world are having a hard enough time living to see the next day to give a f*#k about whether it gets two degrees warmer. In a hundred years, their progeny may give a f*#k, but that's not a given. By then, maybe the oil will run out and the rest of us "educated" and vastly over-consuming sheep will have something more important to worry about than whether our internet-fueled global warming rants meant a goddamn thing besides "oops we're f*#ked", regardless of the cause.
Bob D'A

Trad climber
Taos, NM
Jan 23, 2015 - 04:16pm PT
Chief, a boy's mind stuck in a man's body.
Bob D'A

Trad climber
Taos, NM
Jan 23, 2015 - 05:00pm PT
Chief's whole life has been one big shouting match.
k-man

Gym climber
SCruz
Topic Author's Reply - Jan 23, 2015 - 05:01pm PT
What would those actions look like?

Really, that is the key question.


It's a rock and a hard place. On one hand, everybody wants to be able to hit a switch to turn on the lights, turn up the heat, and if it's weltering, jack up the AC.

We want to eat tomatoes in mid-winter, we want our latest X-boxes. And so do millions in "developing" nations, such as Brazil, India. And as these emerging areas take a step into the "Western world," they also want to eat higher on the food chain. No more gruel, Where's the Beef!

It all take energy.

Including the perpetual growth needs of neo-liberal capitalism and her over-weight sister, the multi-national corporations that run "what we build, where we build, and how we build it."

So, what actions will it take to break the deadly cycle we are facing. On one hand, we continue with the status quo. And we have a pretty darn good idea where that leads (3C+ degree rise in global temps in the not-too-distant future). And boy, is that gonna wreck our current standard of living! Not to mention our entire economic system--how the "markets" will crash!

So we ask, what action can we take where we get to keep the status quo? I mean, isn't that what everybody wants. Stay warm, turn up the heat. Too hot, crank the AC. And give me another steak for dinner, with lobster!

Yeah, but it ain't gonna happen that way.

We know the real answer is that the status quo cannot exist for long. You're not going to be able to just flick the switch and have whatever you want happen on the other end--there is the full weight of your action to consider.

For many, that is too much to consider. That's why it's so easy for the denier crowd to hitch on to what the Heartland Instititue sells. It's all a hoax, go home and turn up the heat, turn on all your incandescent lights. You see, no problem. And...Gas is CHEAP! It's EVERYWHERE.

Yes, the actions needed will break all of that. Are we up for the challenge, or do we say just say "screw it" and see how fast we can fly off the cliff?
k-man

Gym climber
SCruz
Topic Author's Reply - Jan 23, 2015 - 05:08pm PT
I'm not sure what you're smoking there The Chief, but I'm not talking politics.
TLP

climber
Jan 23, 2015 - 05:39pm PT
EdwardT asks
If all the nations of the World agree do their part, what would be required of the US? What would be required of the average US citizen?

It depends on how all the nations agree to define "doing their part." Despite the paranoid shrieking you read here about return to a Paleolithic lifestyle, from one simplistic viewpoint, the U.S. and its individual citizens wouldn't have to do much at all, because the country's GHG emissions have fallen some 10% or so (someone can supply an accurate figure) since 2007. One lawyer might argue, that's totally doing our part, especially if we keep that trendline going a while. Same thing for western Europe. But another (Chinese or Indian) lawyer would say, all this accumulated 400ppm is mostly yours, you have to achieve a way greater reduction while we keep increasing our emissions to ratchet our standard of living up to your 3-SUVs-in-every-garage standard; that's what "doing your part" means.

So it's not simple at all. Had the U.S. gone ahead with sane fuel economy standards way back in the 70s, and not made a bunch of loopholes to placate the auto and oil industries, a huge part of the issue would never have arisen. For the U.S., it would take almost no new action to keep the downward trend in GHG emissions going, and would be pretty easy to implement even greater reductions. But until there's a carbon import tax that creates a financial incentive for China not to build a new giant coal-fired plant every 3 weeks (or whatever the rate now is - it's almost that bad), the planet is basically terminally screwed.
k-man

Gym climber
SCruz
Topic Author's Reply - Jan 23, 2015 - 05:42pm PT
The Chief, first you say I present no actual remedies, then you say my remedies will have everybody living like cavemen. Did I get that right?

You are right in one thing, though; I never articulated precise actions as EdwardT asked. Instead I presented a philosophy about how we need to live our lives, and I argue that it's got to be different than the current status quo. Both on a community level, and on a multi-national corporation level.

If there is nothing in your mind between the current status quo and being a cave man, I am not surprised.
monolith

climber
SF bay area
Jan 23, 2015 - 05:58pm PT
Chiefy, your little 1910-1945 denier meme didn't keep Muller from changing his mind.

He says the CO2 concentration warming signal is an excellent fit against the historical temps.



rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
Jan 23, 2015 - 06:03pm PT
Really TLP? With your attitude you might as well put your head between your legs and kiss your azz goodbye. Please start an excerise class and enlist the other hopeless alarmists here to perform this maneuver all day every day.

Where is it proven that this modest .8 c rise out of the LIA is a bad thing? Where is the proof, given the 18 year plateau of temps we are on, that the warming will continue unabated past the 2.0c , or less, climate sensitivity to a doubling of CO2 that scores of new studies are claiming. And what would be the disaster if we actually got to 2.0c above the cold of the LIA? Isn't preperation for adaptation more cost effective than torpedoing your electricsl grid with intermittent and inadequate renewables? Most all of you alarmists claim we have reached, or soon will reach, peak oil, after which new technologies of energy production will have to be sufficiently perfected to provide on par replacement. So, why not relax and let the depletion of FF runs its course while the engineers perfect the replacement. If we weren't wasting hundreds of billions of dollars funding this phony climate disaster gravy train we could have some serious money for R&D and adaptation.
monolith

climber
SF bay area
Jan 23, 2015 - 06:15pm PT
But, Chiefy, Muller studied the history of temps and CO2 and changed his mind.

Therefore, your 1910-1945 denier meme doesn't rate much with him.
Dingus Milktoast

Gym climber
Maestro, Ecosystem Ministry, Fatcrackistan
Jan 23, 2015 - 06:22pm PT
There is something odd but refreshing about this thread today... Like a gentle breeze blowing the pig farm smell to some other place.

Ahhhhhhhhh it's like the fresh maker!

DMT
TLP

climber
Jan 23, 2015 - 06:50pm PT
Puzzling numbers, Rick. You quote 0.8 C rise since the LIA, which ended in about 1850 or not much after, and a few inches higher on my screen I see a graph showing roughly 1.4 C rise in that time period, and nearly all of that rise in the last 50 years not 150. As for "where is it proven," that's a very strange concept of what "proof" means. Nothing future can ever be proven, you just wait and see what you see. When the first shuttle exploded, the engineer said, don't do it, it's too cold, bad sh^t will probably happen. But he couldn't "prove" it, and was overruled. We know how that worked out. Might have been a good thing to listen to that particular alarmist, no?

It would be nice to know what R&D department or company is spending hundreds of billions of dollars on climate research. There's trillions sloshing around the capital markets, plenty of excess for that R&D. Doing science isn't getting in the way at all.

Edit to add: Ding, all I can say is :-)
monolith

climber
SF bay area
Jan 23, 2015 - 06:58pm PT
Let's see how many surface temp data sets Sumner can find to support his claim of 18 year temp halt.

The BEST chart above doesn't support it.
Splater

climber
Grey Matter
Jan 23, 2015 - 08:12pm PT
TLP,
The auto industry (unlike the oil industry and republican lobbyists) has not really been against fuel taxes, and in fact a revenue neutral fuel tax is many time more efficient than our past or future CAFE fuel economy standards. A fuel tax provides real incentives to modify behavior.
USA: 1100 kg/year oil equiv road fuel consumption per capita
Germany: 223 kg/year per capita

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/IS.ROD.SGAS.PC/countries/all?display=default

The problem/conflict now is that gas is cheap, and CAFE stds are going up, so the idiots in charge have created conflicting policy. Few are going to want to buy high mpg cars for now, maybe the only way CAFE stds can be met could be to start subsdidizing efficient cars. The CAFE stds call for passenger car mpg to go up approx. 1 mpg per year every year for the next 10 years.

Also, I recommend you stop responding to the idiot deniers/trolls as that is a 100% waste of time, until such time as they pass or demonstrate 9th grade science ability.
rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
Jan 23, 2015 - 11:47pm PT
Do you want to restate that 1.4 c rise since 1850 TLP? Surely your confused by the land temp graph on this page, but we're talking global here and the seas are 70% of the surface, or perhaps you are just confusing fahrenheit for celsius. At any rate, I didn't think you were the type to misrepresent intentionally. If you go to UCAR or the IPCC it is quite clearly spelled out as a global ( that includes all surface areas, both land and sea) temp rise of approx .8c since 1850 which isn't inconsistent with a natural rise out of the LIA.

As far as there being trillions sloshing around for funding frivolous science you'd be mistaken again. A trillion here a trillion there and pretty soon your talking serious money, like our current sovereign debt which stands at 18.1 trillion. This is a far greater danger to our future health and welfare than climate scientism claims will ever pan out to be.
Chiloe

Trad climber
Lee, NH
Jan 25, 2015 - 10:54am PT
Surface temperatures were not the only climate records set by 2014. NOAA has updated their 0-2000m ocean heat content index, and that too reached both 3-month and annual high points. As with the surface temperatures, the 3-month record is not a record by very much (though the annual jump is), so if you're desperate you might cling to that. But as grownups such as Tamino note (regarding surface temps), It's the Trend, Stupid. Gavin Schmidt also has a good piece about the surface temperatures, explaining the uncertainty calculations as well -- Thoughts on 2014 and ongoing temperature trends.

Meanwhile, here's what the deep ocean was doing:

rottingjohnny

Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
Jan 25, 2015 - 04:55pm PT
The Chief...I think the town has to move all those hideous eyesore storage hangars away from the runway to get the big birds to land....FAA codes or something like that...Too bad the town didn't do their home work before they let Ballas build his hangars...LMAO
Malemute

Ice climber
great white north
Jan 25, 2015 - 05:29pm PT
Last Monday, thousands of Perth, Australia, residents discovered that the Internet had melted. Australia’s second-largest DSL Internet service provider, iiNet, had crumbled under soaring temperatures of up to 112 degrees — Perth’s third hottest January day on record.
http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2015/01/internet_infrastructure_and_climate_change_resilience.html
TLP

climber
Jan 25, 2015 - 06:44pm PT
Rick wrote,
we're talking global here and the seas are 70% of the surface,

You mean like the amount of heat added to the ocean that's shown in Chiloe's graph above? (and also documented in peer-reviewed publications)

I'm not sure who the we is, because the repeaters of "it's not warming since 2000" always remain remarkably silent when it is mentioned that the ocean has absorbed a lot of heat energy, and that it doesn't take much temperature rise of a body of water to amount to a LOT of heat.

That said, you are right, that's land temperature, my bad not to focus on this, but it is C and not F. It's pretty basic thermodynamics that the amount of heat that has been absorbed by the planet (including the 70% that's ocean) in the last 50 years is not just going to mysteriously go away. I'm a lot more concerned about the shape of the curve than the numbers on the axis, and about the fact that the alterations of long-standing patterns by small numerical changes can be a real problem.

I happened to be in southern Asia for a few months when the effects of the last big El Nino event really hit home in the form of drought in that part of the globe. Maybe we'll luck out and it will turn out that a warmer globe overall will experience fewer El Nino events, but I doubt it, and the geopolitical and sociological changes wrought by changes in these patterns can be huge.
rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
Jan 25, 2015 - 08:02pm PT
I wonder how many grant proposals for funding Senor Chiloe, his grad students under his supervision, or his associate scientists in conjunction with him, have written in the last three decades mentioning AGW as an agent of change in the areas of his studies?

Does anyone here doubt he is beholden to the AGW gravy train for very significant funding?

Does anyone here believe he is impartial or unbiased in his practice of science in relation to CAGW.

Would any of you bite the hand that has fed you over the last several decades?
Messages 18921 - 18940 of total 20264 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews