Climate Change skeptics? [ot]

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 24421 - 24440 of total 28535 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
dave729

Trad climber
Western America
Sep 8, 2014 - 04:58pm PT
FortMental wants to get on the right side of history.
His is a cry for help like all the catastropharians.

Just like Nat Geo seems to be trying in this report. The human polar populations are exploding and burning tons of wood and fossil fuels to stay warm and darkening the ice causing it to melt faster.

><
Soot and Dirt Is Melting Snow and Ice Around the World
New report highlights increased loss in Greenland ice cap from
dust and soot.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/06/140610-connecting-dots-dust-soot-snow-ice-climate-change-dimick/

...snow and ice is increasingly being darkened by air pollution.
(and so melting much faster than normal even with the cooler temps)
Splater

climber
Grey Matter
Sep 8, 2014 - 07:20pm PT
Here's a better overall look at soot.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_carbon

That Nat. Geographic article does not lead to your conclusion.
It is based on two papers. First this paper: http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/v7/n7/full/ngeo2180.html
which particularly points out much of the dust is coming from areas already melted out. Carbon soot is an additional factor.

The point is that soot (which is partly BC=Black Carbon) and dust are only one part of global warming. And soot is highly correlated with burning fossil fuels, so reduction in one will also reduce the other. Also, much of the soot in the arctic is from flaring, which is completely from fossil fuel production. How would you reduce that? In developed countries, we already have many large efforts to reduce soot emissions, so I'm not at all sure what you're proposing that will make a huge difference. Maybe cleaner burning in developing countries that could be their contribution to reducing climate change. Other soot comes from burning forests. How do you propose to reduce those? And much of the warming effect on ice is a positive feedback that combines with the albedo change due to meltwater.

Since most "skeptics" are opposed to big policy to reduce GHGs, why are you in favor of big policy to reduce soot?

"The surface energy balance and mass balance of the Greenland ice sheet depends on the albedo of snow, which governs the amount of solar energy that is absorbed. The observed decline of Greenlandís albedo over the past decade1, 2, 3 has been attributed to an enhanced growth of snow grains as a result of atmospheric warming1, 2. Satellite observations show that, since 2009, albedo values even in springtime at high elevations have been lower than the 2003Ė2008 average. Here we show, using a numerical snow model, that the decrease in albedo cannot be attributed solely to grain growth enhancement. Instead, our analysis of remote sensing data indicates that the springtime darkening since 2009 stems from a widespread increase in the amount of light-absorbing impurities in snow, as well as in the atmosphere. We suggest that the transport of dust from snow-free areas in the Arctic that are experiencing earlier melting of seasonal snow cover4 as the climate warms may be a contributing source of impurities. In our snow model simulations, a decrease in the albedo of fresh snow by 0.01 leads to a surface mass loss of 27 Gt yr−1, which could induce an acceleration of Greenlandís mass loss twice as large as over the past two decades5. Future trends in light-absorbing impurities should therefore be considered in projections of Greenland mass loss."

Second this 2010 paper:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2009JD013795/full

https://apps.webofknowledge.com/full_record.do?product=UA&search_mode=CitingArticles&qid=2&SID=4ADakJD5NINFUNI7aFi&page=1&doc=6

Numerous other papers
Of the articles citing that, the most cited itself is from 2013,
https://apps.webofknowledge.com/full_record.do?product=WOS&search_mode=CitingArticles&qid=6&SID=4ADakJD5NINFUNI7aFi&page=1&doc=1
which I don't quite follow. First it says carbon soot has a big impact and then the abstract seems to end by saying it has overall a very small effect. Additionally, The uncetainty is huge.

More:
https://apps.webofknowledge.com/full_record.do?product=WOS&search_mode=CitingArticles&qid=8&SID=4ADakJD5NINFUNI7aFi&page=1&doc=7

dave729

Trad climber
Western America
Sep 8, 2014 - 07:51pm PT
People who are emotionally invested with CO2 have a difficult time
seeing the truth about soot.

Never have suggested any plan to stop soot melting the ice.

What impossible actions would that involve? Stopping all jet travel over the pole? Evacuating all people north of 60degree latitude? Shutting down
oil/gas production on Alaska's north slope? Your best bet is
changing the jet stream so Chinese air pollution does not drift into the polar regions?
Splater

climber
Grey Matter
Sep 8, 2014 - 08:28pm PT
To people who think general global action can't be done:

That is exactly what the Montreal Protocol did to preserve the ozone layer.

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10962247.2013.791349?queryID=%24%7BresultBean.queryID%7D&&

http://www.wunderground.com/resources/climate/ozone_skeptics.asp
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Sep 8, 2014 - 08:53pm PT
what does "slope =3.4 (+/- 2.6 )% /decade" mean?

you are claiming an increasing coverage, and stating an uncertainty... care to take a crack at it?
and how do they even assess the uncertainty?

jammer

climber
Sep 8, 2014 - 08:58pm PT
Chief and Sketch,

If your saying that the fact that some thermometers were located in urban environments means the readings are off, you guys have no argument. I would expect nearly every thermometer in an urban environment to be near some kind of roof, reflective surface, or heat source such as AC units.

The question is whether urban environments were over-represented in the sample, and I might point out you guys have not provided an argument for this.

k-man

Gym climber
SCruz
Topic Author's Reply - Sep 8, 2014 - 09:04pm PT
Here's the relevant source.

http://www.surfacestations.org/

It's fairly well documented.


Yeah I see what you mean. Even though the first reference on this page is a blog that was retired in 2005, this stuff really hits home. Even though all of the blog authors have been shown to work in well-funded "think-tanks," this data is really gonna put a hole in that crazy climate change stuff.


Now, can we just get some rain here in the West? Like, LA is going to be in the 100's this weekend, and I hate to think of Texas.

Say Sketch, it's going to be a mini ice age. Invest is some ski companies, they're gonna Kill it.
Malemute

Ice climber
great white north
Sep 8, 2014 - 09:05pm PT
Skeptical Science has launched a 97-hour social media event starting today, 9/7. Each hour, the site will publish a relevant quote from a climate scientist, along with a playful caricature drawn by Skeptical Science founder and University of Queensland researcher John Cook. Each caricature lists the scientistsí name, title, expertise, and academic institution.

http://skepticalscience.com/nsh/


k-man

Gym climber
SCruz
Topic Author's Reply - Sep 8, 2014 - 09:19pm PT
That's a cool link Malemute.

Climate change is coming. If you want to know what it looks like, just look at the Midwest right now. Itís drought; itís heat. Warmer temperatures donít mean barbecues and tank tops. It means drought; it means fire; it means suffering.
Bruce Kay

Gym climber
BC
Sep 8, 2014 - 09:19pm PT
To people who think general global action can't be done:

That is exactly what the Montreal Protocol did to preserve the ozone layer.

An interesting article that one showing the similarities of denial and corporate sponsorship. Its obviously diferent this time around, not just the scale but the level of beligerance and recalcitrance is way greaterand and not just the usual corporate interests but also the lap dog stooges. Back in the eighties and ninties the majority of us were laughing and mocking all the Archie Bunkers. Something shifted in the meantime. Nowadays an idiot like Ted Nugent actually gets respect and every Red State Republican would lose their job if they even hinted the slightest doubt about Jesus riding dinosaurs. When someone as stupid as the Chuff can dominate a thread that dosn't involve bilge pumps or sardine fishing you know the odds of a good outcome just arn't that great.

I really don't think America's got what it takes and we sure know the Russians don't.
The Chief

climber
Laughing at all you angry blinded asshat Sheep
Sep 8, 2014 - 09:21pm PT
Now, can we just get some rain here in the West?


You mean like this that occurred yesterday and today....

Torrential rain from the remnants of a Pacific Ocean hurricane swamped the Desert Southwest Monday, with Phoenix and Tucson seeing some of the worst flooding.

Rain and floods also soaked parts of Southern California and Nevada.


Monday was the rainiest single day in the history of Phoenix, where weather records go back to 1895.


http://www.usatoday.com/story/weather/2014/09/08/phoenix-arizona-rainfall-flooding/15284743/



Be patient and very careful what you ask for, KMAN. Hope you do not live on any hillside there in Santa Cruz. Cus this Winter is going to be doozey along the coast.

You all will be begging for the ENSO rains to stop. And they have absolutely NOTHING to do with CC/AGW. Nothing.

ENSO has been happening on a regular basis for a longass time. Long before you and your vehicle that takes you to your weekend climbing spots, showed up

When someone as stupid as the Chuff can dominate a thread that dosn't involve bilge pumps or sardine fishing you know the odds of a good outcome just arn't that great.

Just another example your BS Brucee KY.


You have far more posts on this thread than I do. SO, per your own theory, you are truly the stoooooooooooopid one here.

Dumbass.
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Sep 8, 2014 - 09:27pm PT
The question is whether urban environments were over-represented in the sample, and I might point out you guys have not provided an argument for this.

another important consideration is whether or not the thermometers measure a long term trend... this particular hypothesis being that as weather stations become incorporated into urban settings, they tend to read high...

urbanization corresponds with time, so the temperature trends would show an apparent time dependence... the correlation of time and temperature rise, since the beginning of the 20th century.

There are obvious ways to check if this hypothesis is correct or not. And hypothesis checking is statistical when it comes to looking at large quantities of data. Establishing these systematic effects of the ground based "thermometer" network is essential to calculating the global mean surface temperature (which includes a similar set of studies for the sea surface).

There are a number of papers describing this process and the corrections that need to be performed on the temperature data to reduce and/or eliminate such biases... some of those papers had even been posted on this thread on the last cycle of this "ground hog day" deja vu surfacing...

...and even soot was considered before... though it is possible that not everyone posting now would know that, and if those posts were still accessible, the standard operating procedure for the "ground hog day" posters would be not to have looked to find them.

It doesn't take an internet genius to find the references to the treatment of the temperature measurements. And certainly, the criticisms of the methods, e.g. what has been posted above from the WUWT blog have been met with serious scientific study and addressed in a manner that demonstrates that those particular issues are not relevant.

If you have an issue with the BEST paper above, in particular, if you don't understand the analysis, that would be an interesting discussion.

More interesting: if you think it is wrong and can make an argument or show a flaw in their analysis.

Not at all interesting is to dismiss it as irrelevant to the discussion because of the presumed political motives of the authors of the report (though even that is problematic... Judith Curry being a co-author)...

The interesting lesson is that the blog criticisms are not getting stronger, they are getting irrelevant as they are considered.

There are scientific criticisms that are relevant, but not criticisms questioning the current foundations of our understanding.
jammer

climber
Sep 8, 2014 - 09:31pm PT
Chief,

Do you contend that urban environments were over-represented in the sample data? If so, could you provide a link or something which shows this to be the case?

Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Sep 8, 2014 - 09:54pm PT
The Chief
Be patient and very careful what you ask for, KMAN. Hope you do not live on any hillside there in Santa Cruz. Cus this Winter is going to be doozey along the coast.

you made a similar type of forecast last year, in particular, about the snow pack, and it didn't work out the way you thought...

jus sayin...

The Chief:

When it is said and done the middle of April, I am willing to bet you $10 we will have a total of over 200+ inches. The MJO has shifted to Sector 7 and on the move to 6. That means shifting the regular Asian Tropical Jetstream south with wet and copious storms for Central California.

Spring of 90' saw less snow through February here in the Sierra than we have had this season. Then the exact same thing occurred with the MJO. The MJO shifted west to Sector 6, it let loose and we received over 260" of snowfall @ Mammoth and Bishop Passes in two and half months from the last week of Feb through the end of April.


http://www.supertopo.com/climbing/thread.php?topic_id=970221&msg=2351537#msg2351537

Credit: Ed Hartouni
(the vertical black line marks Feb. 25)
the snow depth at Bishop Pass didn't get above 200" did it?
Bruce Kay

Gym climber
BC
Sep 8, 2014 - 11:09pm PT
Just another example your BS Brucee KY.

Problem is Chuff, it isn't BS. You are stupid. Look, you can assert the opposite all you want and if you base merit on how confident and assertive your presentation is then fine, you win. That is precisely what the problem is with you and your ethic. You figure that all you have to do is dig your heels in and never give an inch. You don't understand a single thing you trot out as evidence to your claims but it really dosn't matter. If you presented us with Unicorns and your own special honorary helicopter pilot cerificate it all amounts to the same thing as the only thing that matters is a nice strong willed assertive attiude. Its the delivery that counts.

You know what I'm getting at? Thats how you get arround that little tricky detail of low IQ. Attitude. You are all style and no substance. This whole thing with the weather stations is a prime example, almost as good as the East Anglia emails. You don't even have a clue what it means but the last thing you'll ever hint at is uncertainty in your belief that you know exactly what is going down.

Kinda like your climate forecasts. You know.... the ones you spin a bottle for. Your pretty damn confident of those just like all your opinions. So if your confidence never varies regardless of the subject you are either an expert on everything or an expert on nothing.

My money - I'd I'll bet more than a lousy ten bucks on it - is on the latter but hey you're just one of many which is why I doubt America will pull through on this. Too stupid and proud of it.

rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
Sep 8, 2014 - 11:37pm PT
Ed, you know Judith Curry had problems with the BEST team and announcements made in her name. Here is a quote from her, " the scientific analyses that the BEST team has done with the new data set are controversial, including the impact of station quality on interpreting the temperature trends and urban heat island effect".

Put down the bottle Bruce and kindly crash your sorry drunken ass. Nobody here sympathizes with your projections by self psycho analysis nor your shear quantity of endlessly repetitive bloviating .
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Sep 8, 2014 - 11:42pm PT
Her name is on the paper, rick, you do not understand just what that means. She could have asked to have her name taken off the paper... that is not an uncommon request when there is a significant disagreement among co-authors which cannot be settled.

If it was put on against her wishes, she could have written the editors of the publishing journal and had it changed...

When you put your name on a paper, you are vetting that paper, and its conclusions, in a very public manner.
The Chief

climber
Laughing at all you angry blinded asshat Sheep
Sep 8, 2014 - 11:55pm PT
The Chief:
When it is said and done the middle of April, I am willing to bet you $10 we will have a total of over 200+ inches. The MJO has shifted to Sector 7 and on the move to 6. That means shifting the regular Asian Tropical Jetstream south with wet and copious storms for Central California.

Spring of 90' saw less snow through February here in the Sierra than we have had this season. Then the exact same thing occurred with the MJO. The MJO shifted west to Sector 6, it let loose and we received over 260" of snowfall @ Mammoth and Bishop Passes in two and half months from the last week of Feb through the end of April.

Well Professor, where in that post did I specify "Bishop Pass" for the Spring of 2014 as the "we"?

Where?



And Brucee KY is the true stooopid one here for eating up EDH's assumptions as to my claim of "we" meant, BISHOP PASS.

EDH or BRUCEE KY, please do indicate where in my post that EDH cited, I specifically stated "BISHOP PASS" snow depth total for April of 2014.

Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA

Sep 8, 2014 - 09:54pm PT

you made a similar type of forecast last year, in particular, about the snow pack, and it didn't work out the way you thought.


the snow depth at Bishop Pass didn't get above 200" did it?

Appears you were once again doing what you do best EDH, you were "assuming".


Am truly glad that neither of you two are actually currently doing anything that entails critical decision making based on facts and not on your consistent poor abilities to "assume".


BTW, "we" did receive a 200" of snowfall by the middle of April of this year. Keep looking at ALL the sources you utilized for your nice graph EDH and you will find it.


Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Sep 9, 2014 - 12:37am PT
you were comparing two winters... and your comparison wasn't very good...



but by your latest silly dodge, I suppose you'll get a lot of rain your way this winter, but I suspect that k-man doesn't have to take you seriously... you have no idea what will happen this winter.

The Chief

climber
Laughing at all you angry blinded asshat Sheep
Sep 9, 2014 - 06:03am PT
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA

Sep 9, 2014 - 12:37am PT
you were comparing two winters... and your comparison wasn't very good...



but by your latest silly dodge, I suppose you'll get a lot of rain your way this winter, but I suspect that k-man doesn't have to take you seriously... you have no idea what will happen this winter.




"dodge"?


Sorry ED. But like the rest of your insistent "ASSUMING", you failed. Again.






You see Professor, in all your smartassness, YOU did not look at ALL the sources that "WE" includes.

My analysis was not very good you say. Let's see about that ED H.


212" through 15 April 2014 and a total of 247" through 30 May. The two seasons were almost identical.


1990 Total Snowfall for Mammoth Mtn: 241.9"
2014 Total Snowfall for Mammoth Mtn: 247"

http://www.mammothmountain.com/winter/ski-ride/mountain-information/snow-conditions-and-weather

Now, look at the "Snow History-This Season" window and also open up the "Extended Snow History" tab. The totals are for the USFS placed snow sensor at 11,053' at the top of the mountain.



you have no idea what will happen this winter.

This coming from an individual that is on this thread insisting that he and his fellow scientists know what is going to happen in the next 100 years through your science and statistical formulas.


You are seriously a terrible "assuming" sheep, EDH. Both you and LARRY H. Definitely appears that you are also sharing that gallon bottle of funkass "Night Train" with Brucee KY boy.
Messages 24421 - 24440 of total 28535 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Trip Report and Articles
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews