Climate Change -- conspiracy theory or is it time we all drive a Prius?

Quote: boymimbo

The change 12,000 - 10,000 years, according to the record, occurred over 2,000 years at a rate of about .1 degree F per century. And the result of that change was the end of the Ice Age.

By comparison, humans (or nature, so you would believe) is working at a clip of about 4 to 11 degrees Fahrenheit in one century, which is between 40 and 110 faster than what nature did 10,000 years ago (which was caused by a change in the Earth's orbit).

Lets try this again. FIrst the entire link to comply with DT/ToS.

Now, a few more points. First, there are no "records" from 2,000 years ago. There are no accurate records from 200 years ago.

Second, we had this kind of warming before. That it happened over 200 or 2,000 or 20,000 years is meaningless. The climate changed on its own. 10,000 vs 100 years is meaningless when you are talking a span of billions of years. 1 degree vs 10 degrees vs even 100 degrees is meaningless when you consider the range of temperatures a planet can have on its surface in our solar system.

I will file it with my common sense reasons I don't buy what they are selling.

Oh, and the scientists we are told to shut up and listen to because they are in consensus? Check out TIME magazine. Now they say they were "wrong" about butter and fat. Science has a history of changing its mind, often 100% on a dime.

AZ, you can't sit on both sides of the fence and choose which "facts" you want to believe. If you believe that there are no records from two thousand years ago, then what you read from both sides about ice cores, tree rings, the solar records, and other proxies need to be ignored.

And yes, we've had this warming before, just not in such a short period of time, save a major asteriod impact, which pretty much killed off the dinosaurs. And the short time period (less than a century) is important. While humans will adapt, no problemo, with money, animals and plants won't adapt particalarly well, and that puts stress on the entire food chain, from the fish and plankton which feed on the dying coral all the way to humans. The end result is that agriculture (farming) and fisheries will be stressed, which will make food more expensive overall as supplies dry up.

Now, if the climate change was slow, then farmers and animals would have time to adjust, to find new food sources, to move farms and zones to areas where soil has had time to build up. That's why humans were able to survive a big adjustment over 2,000 years 10,000 years ago. Shorten up the time frame to 100 - 200 years, and it becomes stressful.

The question is "will the spending for alternative fuels and carbon taxes, etc" be greater than the cost of doing nothing? I suspect the libertarian in you will say "no".

Quote: boymimbo

AZ, you can't sit on both sides of the fence and choose which "facts" you want to believe. If you believe that there are no records from two thousand years ago, then what you read from both sides about ice cores, tree rings, the solar records, and other proxies need to be ignored.

It is not me "believing" a fact, it asking the scientist that if it happened 10,000 years ago then why must it be man-made this time?

Quote:

And yes, we've had this warming before, just not in such a short period of time, save a major asteriod impact, which pretty much killed off the dinosaurs. And the short time period (less than a century) is important. While humans will adapt, no problemo, with money, animals and plants won't adapt particalarly well, and that puts stress on the entire food chain, from the fish and plankton which feed on the dying coral all the way to humans. The end result is that agriculture (farming) and fisheries will be stressed, which will make food more expensive overall as supplies dry up.

Plants and animals will adapt fine, just like after the asteroids.

q[]The question is "will the spending for alternative fuels and carbon taxes, etc" be greater than the cost of doing nothing? I suspect the libertarian in you will say "no".

Plants and animals didn't adapt fine after the asteroids. Major extinctions happened.

Quote: boymimbo

Plants and animals didn't adapt fine after the asteroids. Major extinctions happened.

Yup, and we are here now as are many plants. If the planet is going to shake us off like annoying fleas on its back that we are there is really nothing we can do about it.

But since the evidence of a warming trend gets thinner and thinner I wouldn't lose any sleep over it. The asteroid hit will at least get "Here Comes Honey Boo Boo" off the air.

Nerts, government data find yet another cooling trend.

Quote: AZDuffman

Nerts, government data find yet another cooling trend.

'While objective temperature data show there has been no global warming (worldwide) since sometime last century, the USCRN data confirm this ongoing stagnation in the United States, also.'

But Obama just said in May that it's
a done deal, GW is here and it's a
non arguable fact. Discussion over.

lol

Even the UN is being laughed at for its ridiculous
(and stupid) predictions on Global Warming.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2681812/Its-politics-not-science-driving-climate-change-mania-UN-predictions-subject-ridicule-stunning-failure.html

Quote: Evenbob

Even the UN is being laughed at for its ridiculous
(and stupid) predictions on Global Warming.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2681812/Its-politics-not-science-driving-climate-change-mania-UN-predictions-subject-ridicule-stunning-failure.html

One of my favorite parts:

"Similarly, climatologists’ difficulties with the sea ice may be of little scientific significance in the greater scheme of things.

We have only a few decades of data, and in climate terms this is probably too short to demonstrate that either the Antarctic increase or the Arctic decrease is anything other than natural variability. "

Who here has been stating this all along? That we have not been measuring things long enough to matter?


Then this part:

In recent days a new scandal over the integrity of temperature data has emerged, this time in America, where it has been revealed as much as 40 per cent of temperature data there are not real thermometer readings.

Many temperature stations have closed, but rather than stop recording data from these posts, the authorities have taken the remarkable step of ‘estimating’ temperatures based on the records of surrounding stations.

Hmmmm, I also remember some smart, good-looking guy on here saying that over the period we have measured we have moved the points we measured the temps at.


Chalk one up for "common sense" over "listen to the scientists." But if you still want your skyrocketing Obamalecric bill just send more in, [joke]as long as it is generated by natural gas of course. [/joke]

Hottest June on record. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/world-sets-mark-for-hottest-june-on-record/