2011 was the ninth warmest year on record

[Darwin333]

There is a recurring natural cycle, as shown by ice core samples, which increases and decreases the temps of the planet. The cycle, two times go (the one we are in being one, the one previous to this one being the second) had its peak at a higher temp than we have today.

Why would you believe that science but you flat out refuse to believe science that uses basically the same evidence to theorize that we could be speeding the warming up?

Frankly I find these debates rather amusing. On one hand you have the irony of people trying to debate a very advanced subject that spans multiple disciplines in science, in which very few people here have more than a basic understanding of maybe one of those disciplines, and on the other hand if it is true there is very little that we can do about it on a global scale.

 

[Paul98]

Might have missed it, dunno, but I answered that question on this page already. I can repeat it, no big deal.

The natural cycle which caused the changes for at least the last 400,000 years is still working and is causing the current changes. It will continue to operate well into the future.

I will say it again this is meaningless, saying it's natural means nothing. What you are saying is that you have no idea what causes climate change. Which makes your previous posts make more sense.

 

[Darwin333]

I do not know, I was not here. It is irrelevant, since the natural cycle is too powerful for us to alter, short of painting all the non-white portions of the planet white to reflect back all the solar heat.

And why exactly is it to powerful for us to nudge it one way or another or speed up/slow down? Hell we had the technology and the ability to basically put the entire world into an ice age in the 60's.

The one thing I do know for a fact is that you can't answer my question and neither can I. The entire system is way to complex for either of us to say a damned thing about it with any certainty at all. Now that we have that out of the way, I would still appreciate to hear your attempt at answering my question.

 

[cybrsage]

And why exactly is it to powerful for us to nudge it one way or another or speed up/slow down? Hell we had the technology and the ability to basically put the entire world into an ice age in the 60's.

Yeah, but that is a club (I assume you mean nuclear weapons being unleashed en masse).

The one thing I do know for a fact is that you can't answer my question and neither can I. The entire system is way to complex for either of us to say a damned thing about it with any certainty at all.

Agreed, which is why it is smarter to wait a scant decade or two and see what happens and continue to increase our understanding of how the system works than to decimate entire economies on a "what if".

Now that we have that out of the way, I would still appreciate to hear your attempt at answering my question.

There have been a lot of questions, can you repeat it? I will give it my best shot, since you understand that the system is exceedinly complex.

 

[Darwin333]

The problem with this is we know why the temp is rising. There is a natural temperature cycle which has caused the Earth to be hotter long before man started to use fire.

I am sorry, I missed this post and have already responded to previous ones but this one intregues me.

You say that we already know why the temp is rising and it is due to a "natural temperature cycle". Could you please explain exactly how this natural temperature cycle works and what are the mechanisms behind it? In order to know why you kind of need to know the how too. Or does the Earth have one of those programmable thermostats that is really slow?

 

[Darwin333]

Yeah, but that is a club (I assume you mean nuclear weapons being unleashed en masse).



Agreed, which is why it is smarter to wait a scant decade or two and see what happens and continue to increase our understanding of how the system works than to decimate entire economies on a "what if".



There have been a lot of questions, can you repeat it? I will give it my best shot, since you understand that the system is exceedinly complex.

Why do you flat out refuse to believe that man can not possibly be nudging the "natural cycle" of temperatures or otherwise affecting this natural cycle was the main question I was asking.

I am truly in the "hell if I know" camp. If most of the scientists say its happening then I'll go with that until they either improve upon their understanding or change it. I don't have anywhere near the knowledge of the subject to debate if it is or is not happening.

OTOH, I do know that I have yet to hear anything even resembling a reasonable global solution nor can I even begin to fathom one. I personally don't think it would be possible short of going nuclear (the bombs not the power) and killing a fuckload of people that are literally dying to increase their standards of living in the fastest and cheapest way possible which also is almost always the "dirtiest". Almost anything we do to reduce our emissions will simply be replaced by someone else, hell we already offshore a lot of our pollution.

But that has very little to do with the actual science.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

I can...the real question is whether you can form coherent thoughts. So far, it appears to be no, at least on this subject.




Not only did i reply with one word to a statement where a one word reply would actually suffice to make my opposition clear and as such be an explanation in itself, i also provided an explanation for my usage of the word yes.

I supported my statement as well as you did.




You should slap your autnie May for being so mean to you as to prevent you from having human interaction. It does explain why you act like you do, though.



There is no try needed, basic genetics already put me leagues ahead of you in the intelligence department. Even your poor attempts at ridicule fall below that expected from even a common street thug. It is not your fault, your poor genetics were transmitted to you by your parents. Maybe you need to slap them too, since you are in needing to slap your relatives.

You would be better to stop embarrassing yourself and your nation and just give it up already.

Well, at least you got some balls, good on you for that.

Still stupid as fuck though but that's probably from the inbreeding so i can't really blame it on you.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Why do you flat out refuse to believe that man can not possibly be nudging the "natural cycle" of temperatures or otherwise affecting this natural cycle was the main question I was asking.

I am truly in the "hell if I know" camp. If most of the scientists say its happening then I'll go with that until they either improve upon their understanding or change it. I don't have anywhere near the knowledge of the subject to debate if it is or is not happening.

OTOH, I do know that I have yet to hear anything even resembling a reasonable global solution nor can I even begin to fathom one. I personally don't think it would be possible short of going nuclear (the bombs not the power) and killing a fuckload of people that are literally dying to increase their standards of living in the fastest and cheapest way possible which also is almost always the "dirtiest". Almost anything we do to reduce our emissions will simply be replaced by someone else, hell we already offshore a lot of our pollution.

But that has very little to do with the actual science.

Considering how much and how fast the Siberian and Greenland ice is melting, i sincerely doubt that any measures would make a difference at this point in time, we already passed the limit of when we could change the outcome.

 

[monovillage]

Considering how much and how fast the Siberian and Greenland ice is melting, i sincerely doubt that any measures would make a difference at this point in time, we already passed the limit of when we could change the outcome.

How much and how fast is it melting? Just a link for some solid information or something.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

How much and how fast is it melting? Just a link for some solid information or something.

I normally don't do other peoples research for them but i have a link on another tab so here ya go: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/10/111025163128.htm

 

[HeXen]

good. its cold where i'm at.

 

[cybrsage]

I will say it again this is meaningless, saying it's natural means nothing. What you are saying is that you have no idea what causes climate change. Which makes your previous posts make more sense.

The natural cycle is certainly not meaningless. It has caused many ice ages in the past, and will cause them again in the future. It is what makes the world heat up and cool down.

For you to say the natural temperature cycle is meaning is to say the change of seasons is meaningless...and then cry that no one understands why temps go up and down throughout the year.

 

[cybrsage]

I normally don't do other peoples research for them but i have a link on another tab so here ya go: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/10/111025163128.htm

It is not his research, but your own. You claimed the melting was happing fast and he asked you how fast.

Still, we should not do anything to change the natural temperature cycle. Once it starts to go down again we are on our way to another ice age.

 

[cybrsage]

Why do you flat out refuse to believe that man can not possibly be nudging the "natural cycle" of temperatures or otherwise affecting this natural cycle was the main question I was asking.

I am truly in the "hell if I know" camp. If most of the scientists say its happening then I'll go with that until they either improve upon their understanding or change it. I don't have anywhere near the knowledge of the subject to debate if it is or is not happening.

Ah, now I see what you mean. Sure, it is possible we are, but it is also possible we are not. We simply do not have enough understanding to say either way. I personally side with nature, since it continuously shows us it is the boss and we are just small creatures living within its realm.

OTOH, I do know that I have yet to hear anything even resembling a reasonable global solution nor can I even begin to fathom one. I personally don't think it would be possible short of going nuclear (the bombs not the power) and killing a fuckload of people that are literally dying to increase their standards of living in the fastest and cheapest way possible which also is almost always the "dirtiest". Almost anything we do to reduce our emissions will simply be replaced by someone else, hell we already offshore a lot of our pollution.

But that has very little to do with the actual science.

Correct, though the bomgs would be a faster solution - block much of the sun for a few months and the temps will plummet. We need to develop clean power sources, reduce our pollutants, etc. These have always been good things to do. Cap and Trade does nothing (not that you were advocating it), for it simply means those who pollute less will sell their non-used pollution rights to those who pollute more. Nothing changes pollution wise but prices do go up.

Personally, when people who say I must reduce my standard of living because they are afraid of rising temps stop eating meat and dairy products, and stop using anything which comes from a cow, then I will take them seriously. Methane is FAR worse than CO2, and cows release that constantly. When the warmers give up their cow products, then I will take their demands seriously. Until then, why should I bother?

 

[monovillage]

According to Myan Prophecy this hear 2012 is the last year in this cycle and the earth is suppose to be nearing the end of an active cycle. What led them to this belief and what do they know that we dont?

They didn't know anything we don't, there's always "Doom&Gloom" fanatics that think "the end of the world as we know it" is right around the corner. You'd have the whacktards standing on corners or in cult churches getting the gullible to buy into their meme. Usually making sure the gullible gave up all their possessions first. Nothing has really changed, you still get the gullible sucking up the fear factor. A minor difference is now they want national governments to cough up trillions of dollars to solve a non existing problem.

 

[Paratus]

I do not know, I was not here. It is irrelevant, since the natural cycle is too powerful for us to alter, short of painting all the non-white portions of the planet white to reflect back all the solar heat.

Really? To powerful for us to change? That's quite a definitive statement. You wouldn't happen to have a reference for that?

Because the input to our system is the sun, which has been fairly quiet. Plus with La Nina it should have been a cool year. But instead it was the hottest La Nina year ever recorded.

 

[EndGame]

Forget global warming - it's Cycle 25 we need to worry about (and if NASA scientists are right the Thames will be freezing over again)Met Office releases new figures which show no warming in 15 years
By David Rose

Last updated at 5:38 AM on 29th January 2012


The supposed ‘consensus’ on man-made global warming is facing an inconvenient challenge after the release of new temperature data showing the planet has not warmed for the past 15 years.
The figures suggest that we could even be heading for a mini ice age to rival the 70-year temperature drop that saw frost fairs held on the Thames in the 17th Century.
Based on readings from more than 30,000 measuring stations, the data was issued last week without fanfare by the Met Office and the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit. It confirms that the rising trend in world temperatures ended in 1997.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...ight-Thames-freezing-again.html#ixzz1krLUDCi2

Well, not the Science Journal or anything but, I did check their referenced articles and contributers to this article and everything stated in the article is printed elsewhere and being discussed and argued.

 

[cybrsage]

Really? To powerful for us to change? That's quite a definitive statement. You wouldn't happen to have a reference for that?

It is not really possible to prove a negative, so no, I do not.

Because the input to our system is the sun, which has been fairly quiet. Plus with La Nina it should have been a cool year. But instead it was the hottest La Nina year ever recorded.

The natural cycle has caused the glaciers which covered about 1/4 of the planet to mostly go away. We have yet to reach the peak of the natural cycle, so we should expect it to be still getting hotter.

Every summer, parts of the planet get hotter. We understand this is part of a natural cycle. We do not blame man for the warming every year, as we know we are powerless (sans something huge, such as a massive global nuclear war) to stop it from getting hotter. The natural cycle which causes and removes ice ages is the same thing, only over a longer period of time.

Maybe we should be trying to figure out how to make volcanos erupt...we could quickly cool down the planet that way...

 

[cybrsage]

Forget global warming - it's Cycle 25 we need to worry about (and if NASA scientists are right the Thames will be freezing over again)Met Office releases new figures which show no warming in 15 years

It is this type of thing I am talking about. We simply do not know enough yet to say we have to seriously damage world economies. We need to learn more first.

 

[Tom]

based on this chart temps were fine from the 1950s to the mid 1970s..

when the EPA was founded.

So the answer is to get rid of the EPA ?

Seriously, what's the scientific reason for the flat chart from 1950 to 1975 ? I thought people used a lot of coal during those years ?

 

[boomerang]

Why in the world do you all keep responding to these threads by shira? His issue is more with the people he perceives to be his enemy. Republicans, right-wingers, etc. His anxiety levels peak about every 60 days and we get another post from him on this issue.

I understand that control over issues and people is very important to some on the left and for virtually all progressives. I understand that it's a very scary situation to them that our planet might not support life one day. I also understand that it's a very important part of their psyche and philosophical leanings to have a lot of anxiety over situations they have little control over and that their tendency is to lash out in whatever manner is available or they deem appropriate to try and "remedy" the situation.

It doesn't mean you have to keep feeding his angst. It does him no good. These posts used to have some entertainment value, now they're just sad. Look at his opening post. Things are messed up. It's somebody with a different political philosophies fault and I dare one of them to tell me it's not true.

Well, maybe when the changes come, posts like his will be considered trollish and will be killed off. But don't hold your breath on that one.

 

[Paratus]

It is this type of thing I am talking about. We simply do not know enough yet to say we have to seriously damage world economies. We need to learn more first.

Ah the old appeal to ignorance.

We know why the seasons happen- its due to the axial tilt relative to the sun. Power from the sun falls off with the cosine of the angle to the sun.

Climate change is a much smaller effect raising the average temperature a degree or two over a long period of years.

As to the Thames freezing, England is only as warm as it is because of the Gulf stream current in the Atlantic warms England and Ireland. The effects of the excess energy observed by our satellites can change the flow if these currents causing local areas to become cooler. Rember all air and oceanic currents are driven by heat.

The real argument you are trying to make is that the cost of doing anything to negate the effects of climate change are ruinous compared to the cost of allowing climate change to occur. That's at least a defensible arguement. But instead of making it deniers hide behind disbelief in observed facts.

 

[monovillage]

Here you go Paratus, Dr. Judith Curry, a very well known climatologist has a site that has several articles that you can use.

Is it necessary to lie to win a controversial public debate?
http://judithcurry.com/2012/01/16/is-it-necessary-to-lie-to-win-a-controversial-public-debate/

The real holes in climate science.
http://judithcurry.com/2012/01/03/the-real-holes-in-climate-science/

On the dangerous(?) naivete of uncritical acceptance of scientific consensus
http://judithcurry.com/2012/01/02/o...ncritical-acceptance-of-scientific-consensus/

 

[Paul98]

It is not really possible to prove a negative, so no, I do not.



The natural cycle has caused the glaciers which covered about 1/4 of the planet to mostly go away. We have yet to reach the peak of the natural cycle, so we should expect it to be still getting hotter.

Every summer, parts of the planet get hotter. We understand this is part of a natural cycle. We do not blame man for the warming every year, as we know we are powerless (sans something huge, such as a massive global nuclear war) to stop it from getting hotter. The natural cycle which causes and removes ice ages is the same thing, only over a longer period of time.

Maybe we should be trying to figure out how to make volcanos erupt...we could quickly cool down the planet that way...

What you are saying

Magic has caused the glaciers which covered about 1/4 of the planet to mostly go away. We have yet to reach the peak, so we should expect it to be still getting hotter.

Every summer, parts of the planet get hotter because of magic. We do not blame man for the warming every year, as we know we are powerless (sans something huge, such as a massive global nuclear war) to stop it from getting hotter. Magic causes and removes ice ages is the same thing, only over a longer period of time.






Do you not understand that something has to cause these natural cycles? What is the cause of the natural cycle?

 

[monovillage]

What you are saying

Magic has caused the glaciers which covered about 1/4 of the planet to mostly go away. We have yet to reach the peak, so we should expect it to be still getting hotter.

Every summer, parts of the planet get hotter because of magic. We do not blame man for the warming every year, as we know we are powerless (sans something huge, such as a massive global nuclear war) to stop it from getting hotter. Magic causes and removes ice ages is the same thing, only over a longer period of time.

Do you not understand that something has to cause these natural cycles? What is the cause of the natural cycle?

You know that really bright thing up in the sky? You know the one that when it's out it's light and warmer and when it's not out it's darker and colder? It's called the sun and it's the ultimate driver of all things climate in one way or another.

I know it's an overly simplistic answer, but you anthropogenic CO2 climate alarmists seem to want simple answers to complex questions.