Weather events

[IUFLA]

2 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

I'm not exactly looking to argue, but he didn't refute anything. He pretty much just stated he's a skeptic but should be treated differently than other "deniers" (his words, not mine) but gave no evidence to refute the overwhelmingly accepted position of climatologists. 

That's right, he didn't...but he did say that people who're making these predictions can be wrong as they are staking their claim on only a part of the data, and they are still theories.

"All scientists should be skeptics. Climate is too complicated to attribute its variability to one cause. We first need to understand the natural climate variability (which we clearly don’t; I can debate anybody on this issue). Only then we can assess the magnitude and reasons of climate change. Science would have never advanced if it were not for the skeptics. All model projections made for the 21st century failed to predict the slowdown of the planet’s warming despite the fact that carbon dioxide emissions kept on increasing. Science is never settled. If science were settled, then we should pack things up and go home."

I would bet there are far more skeptics among climatologists than you realize.

[FKIM01]

Again...the "overwhelmingly accepted position" of climatologists in the '70's was that we were headed for an ice age.  The further out climatologists attempt to project, the worse their record is. As the sun ages, it's fair to assume that it's power to warm this ball of dirt will wane.    You don't hear global warming anymore because climatologists realized it wasn't a defendable term.  Climate change, on the other hand, is pretty universally accepted and easy to defend. I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone would would argue that climate doesn't change over time.

[KoB2011]

1 minute ago, IUFLA said:

That's right, he didn't...but he did say that people who're making these predictions can be wrong as they are staking their claim on only a part of the data, and they are still theories.

"All scientists should be skeptics. Climate is too complicated to attribute its variability to one cause. We first need to understand the natural climate variability (which we clearly don’t; I can debate anybody on this issue). Only then we can assess the magnitude and reasons of climate change. Science would have never advanced if it were not for the skeptics. All model projections made for the 21st century failed to predict the slowdown of the planet’s warming despite the fact that carbon dioxide emissions kept on increasing. Science is never settled. If science were settled, then we should pack things up and go home."

I would bet there are far more skeptics among climatologists than you realize.

Of course anyone making a prediction can be wrong, what's your point?

That doesn't mean that the data overwhelmingly supports our climate is changing at drastic, catastrophic levels. We can even table how much responsibility humans have for climate change as it doesn't matter at this point, but it's very clear that as a species we need to do everything we can to curb what impact we do have. The IPCC report painted a pretty bleak outlook, and the leak for the next report doesn't look any better. 

And just so we are clear, when scientists talk about theories it is something they have a reasonably high-level of certainty towards. Kind of like the theory of gravity, germs making us sick, or evolution. 

[KoB2011]

6 minutes ago, FKIM01 said:

it's fair to assume that it's power to warm this ball of dirt will wane.    

This is the exact opposite of how stars work, FYI. 

[mrflynn03]

Seems alot of people who are proponents of climate change own mansions, beachfront properties and private jets ect.  They don't seem too concerned about their carbon footprint/emissions and rising sea levels. 

Manbearpig being one good example. 

Edited September 2, 2021 by mrflynn03

[rico]

5 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

Of course anyone making a prediction can be wrong, what's your point?

That doesn't mean that the data overwhelmingly supports our climate is changing at drastic, catastrophic levels. We can even table how much responsibility humans have for climate change as it doesn't matter at this point, but it's very clear that as a species we need to do everything we can to curb what impact we do have. The IPCC report painted a pretty bleak outlook, and the leak for the next report doesn't look any better. 

And just so we are clear, when scientists talk about theories it is something they have a reasonably high-level of certainty towards. Kind of like the theory of gravity, germs making us sick, or evolution. 

...and Pluto and the Brontosaurus....

[KoB2011]

2 minutes ago, rico said:

...and Pluto and the Brontosaurus....

I’m not sure I’m following what you’re saying, can you explain your point?

[rico]

3 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

I’m not sure I’m following what you’re saying, can you explain your point?

Science has been wrong plenty of times.

[IUFLA]

13 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

Of course anyone making a prediction can be wrong, what's your point?

That doesn't mean that the data overwhelmingly supports our climate is changing at drastic, catastrophic levels. We can even table how much responsibility humans have for climate change as it doesn't matter at this point, 

It certainly does if our politicians are using it as a bludgeon and government is shaping policy around it...

[KoB2011]

1 hour ago, IUFLA said:

It certainly does if our politicians are using it as a bludgeon and government is shaping policy around it...

And we aren’t supposed to be talking about that on this board, thus we should table it. The fact that the climate is rapidly changing is relevant to the discussion and within board rules, the fact that humans play a part in that and what policies should be put in place are not. 

[KoB2011]

1 hour ago, rico said:

Science has been wrong plenty of times.

Science is a process, not something to be right or wrong. I’m genuinely curious how you think anyone was wrong about Pluto or dinosaurs, though. Care to enlighten me?

Well, I will grant you that place in Kentucky is laughably wrong about dinosaurs. 

[FKIM01]

2 hours ago, KoB2011 said:

This is the exact opposite of how stars work, FYI. 

You don't think stars eventually lose power and wink out?  Sure, there's a part of the lifecycle where it will get pretty warm regardless of how we get our power, whether we raise and eat cows or how how many carbon credits Al Gore buys, but there are also a couple of gradual cooling cycles before it completely burns out.  From the BBC life cycle of stars:

"The Sun is currently a main sequence star and will remain so for another 4-5 billion years. It will then expand and cool to become a red giant, after which it will shrink and heat up again to become a white dwarf. The white dwarf star will run out of nuclear fuel and slowly cool down over many billions of years."

In one sense, it's comical to even have the climate change debate.  It's not like this earth will go on in perpetuity if humans do or don't do something.  We could completely torch the U.S. economy and we might add 0.0000000000001% to the viable lifespan of the earth.  If you want to add 0.0000000000003% to the viable lifespan of the earth, you should focus your efforts on China and India since their populations are huge and expanding and there is virtually no effort in either country to combat climate change.

We like to feel important and in our minds, we are, but in the arc of the universe, we're collectively nothing more than a bug on the windshield of the galaxy.  We make grand pronouncements and predictions to much hand-wringing, chest-beating and general bloviating but I'm not at all convinced we humans have nearly as much influence as we think we do.  My prediction:  In 20 years, we'll be laughing at the epic forecast fails that are today held out as the gold standard in predictive climatology.

[KoB2011]

6 minutes ago, FKIM01 said:

You don't think stars eventually lose power and wink out?  Sure, there's a part of the lifecycle where it will get pretty warm regardless of how we get our power, whether we raise and eat cows or how how many carbon credits Al Gore buys, but there are also a couple of gradual cooling cycles before it completely burns out.  From the BBC life cycle of stars:

"The Sun is currently a main sequence star and will remain so for another 4-5 billion years. It will then expand and cool to become a red giant, after which it will shrink and heat up again to become a white dwarf. The white dwarf star will run out of nuclear fuel and slowly cool down over many billions of years."

In one sense, it's comical to even have the climate change debate.  It's not like this earth will go on in perpetuity if humans do or don't do something.  We could completely torch the U.S. economy and we might add 0.0000000000001% to the viable lifespan of the earth.  If you want to add 0.0000000000003% to the viable lifespan of the earth, you should focus your efforts on China and India since their populations are huge and expanding and there is virtually no effort in either country to combat climate change.

We like to feel important and in our minds, we are, but in the arc of the universe, we're collectively nothing more than a bug on the windshield of the galaxy.  We make grand pronouncements and predictions to much hand-wringing, chest-beating and general bloviating but I'm not at all convinced we humans have nearly as much influence as we think we do.  My prediction:  In 20 years, we'll be laughing at the epic forecast fails that are today held out as the gold standard in predictive climatology.

I’d expect our Sun to continue getting hotter: https://faculty.wcas.northwestern.edu/~infocom/The Website/evolution.html

I’m really trying to avoid making this political, we don’t need to keep bringing up the human impact (or lack of) on climate change. 

[FKIM01]

18 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

I’d expect our Sun to continue getting hotter: https://faculty.wcas.northwestern.edu/~infocom/The Website/evolution.html

I’m really trying to avoid making this political, we don’t need to keep bringing up the human impact (or lack of) on climate change. 

It may for awhile before it cools off...who knows.  Obviously, the sun is the closest star we have to observe and study so one would like to think scientific forecasts re the sun would be more accurate than those of other stars. 

I'll say this and shut up...(my opinion obviously) if it gets a lot hotter on earth, it's gonna be mostly stuff way beyond human control and influence.

Edited September 3, 2021 by FKIM01

[Muckraker]

22 hours ago, KoB2011 said:

A long period of time, where as if we are talking about the weather on a given day or forecasting weather 10 days out, that's a short period of time.

Climate would be like saying IU is one of the the best 5 or so programs in the history of basketball. Weather would be like saying they're one of the worst because of how the past couple seasons has gone. People that think they can debunk climate change by talking about the weather would be like someone who said Duke is a crappy program (climate) because they had a bad year last year.

I haven't seen anybody debunking climate change in this thread. Got a link? 

[mrflynn03]

Let the world end, who cares. This planet sucks. I don't hate life but I don't remember being born and I won't remember after. So whatever.

[FKIM01]

9 minutes ago, Muckraker said:

I haven't seen anybody debunking climate change in this thread. Got a link? 

You haven't been reading...no one is even trying to debunk climate change.😂

[mrflynn03]

2 hours ago, KoB2011 said:

I’d expect our Sun to continue getting hotter: https://faculty.wcas.northwestern.edu/~infocom/The Website/evolution.html

I’m really trying to avoid making this political, we don’t need to keep bringing up the human impact (or lack of) on climate change. 

I posted this earlier yet seems to be conviently ignored? Because you people have no argument against the obvious.  

Explain to me why you're climate change disciples aren't living what they preach. If you cannot see the hypocrisy then 🤷

"Seems alot of people who are proponents of climate change own mansions, beachfront properties and private jets ect.  They don't seem too concerned about their carbon footprint/emissions and rising sea levels."

Manbearpig(Al Gore) being one good example. 

Edited September 3, 2021 by mrflynn03

[KoB2011]

18 minutes ago, mrflynn03 said:

I posted this earlier yet seems to be conviently ignored? Because you people have no argument against the obvious.  

Explain to me why you're climate change disciples aren't living what they preach. If you cannot see the hypocrisy then 🤷

"Seems alot of people who are proponents of climate change own mansions, beachfront properties and private jets ect.  They don't seem too concerned about their carbon footprint/emissions and rising sea levels."

Manbearpig(Al Gore) being one good example. 

I can't speak for anyone else is why I didn't respond to whatever reasons other people have for the choices they make? I make plenty of personal sacrifices to lower my carbon footprint, but I can't control what Al Gore or anyone else does. 

But again, I'm really trying to avoid talking about the human caused part of climate change because I don't want to get political. 

[Lostin76]

6 hours ago, mrflynn03 said:

I posted this earlier yet seems to be conviently ignored? Because you people have no argument against the obvious.  

Explain to me why you're climate change disciples aren't living what they preach. If you cannot see the hypocrisy then 🤷

"Seems alot of people who are proponents of climate change own mansions, beachfront properties and private jets ect.  They don't seem too concerned about their carbon footprint/emissions and rising sea levels."

Manbearpig(Al Gore) being one good example. 

And then there are people like us who are both vegetarian, chose not to have kids, and ride public transportation. Those three are HUGE reductions in our carbon footprint. We have flown twice in the last three years and live in a tiny 500 sq ft apartment. We also recycle and drop off our compost weekly. 

[rico]

55 degrees and sunny here in Warsaw...

[IUFLA]

43 minutes ago, rico said:

55 degrees and sunny here in Warsaw...

🥵🥵🥵

[Reacher]

14 hours ago, FKIM01 said:

My prediction:  In 20 years, we'll be laughing at the epic forecast fails that are today held out as the gold standard in predictive climatology.

Really going out on a limb there! 

[Reacher]

14 hours ago, KoB2011 said:

I’d expect our Sun to continue getting hotter: https://faculty.wcas.northwestern.edu/~infocom/The Website/evolution.html

I’m really trying to avoid making this political, we don’t need to keep bringing up the human impact (or lack of) on climate change. 

I do believe sun spot activity has much more influence on events here than many other factors

[dgambill]

I know I'm super late to the climate change discussion (probably happy about that) but I think we should look on the bright side....now that beach front property in Arizona might actually appreciate! 👍  Who get's the last laugh now! 🤣

Edited September 3, 2021 by dgambill