Australian Politics Forum - Climate Change Debate

Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register

Forum rules, Recent posts (with text), RSS, Search options, Browse all uploaded images
Home, Articles, Green Tax Shift, Evolution,

Australian Politics Forum › Member Run Boards › Environment › Climate Change Debate

(Moderators: Sir_Bobby, Bobby.)

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

Pages: 1 ... 14 15 16

Climate Change Debate (Read 26249 times)

Linus

Senior Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 471
Gender: male

Re: Climate Change Debate
Reply #225 - Sep 22^nd, 2023 at 11:08pm

lee wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2023 at 9:07pm:

Linus wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2023 at 8:41pm:

I said with respect to the impact of GHG: "...leading to more rapid and severe climate changes than the Earth has experienced in thousands of years". I wasn't talking about their longevity

Ok then CO2 is a stable gas with an impact lasting about 5 years. And the thousands of years? You want to forget about The Roman, The Minoan, The Holocene Optimum and the Mediaeval Warm Period? You can't even relate to your preferences. Grin

Linus wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2023 at 8:41pm:

But, anyway, with respect to to your barn-missing retort about the average lifespan of individual carbon dioxide molecules, you're hiding the overall cumulative amount in the atmosphere. We've gone from around 280ppm to the current 480 ppm ( Keeling Curve ring any bells?).

And? What exactly has it done. BTW- The Keeling curve doesn't go back that far. And it hasn't reached anywhere near 480ppm. And the "around 280ppm"? That is theoretical, working backwards with many uncertainties. Roll Eyes

So once again, you prove you don't know what you are talking about. Grin

Linus wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2023 at 8:41pm:

"University of Chicago oceanographer David Archer, who led the study with Caldeira and others, is credited with doing more than anyone to show how long CO2 from fossil fuels will last in the atmosphere. As he puts it in his new book The Long Thaw, “The lifetime of fossil fuel CO2 in the atmosphere is a few centuries, plus 25 percent that lasts essentially forever. The next time you fill your tank, reflect upon this”3.

“The climatic impacts of releasing fossil fuel CO2 to the atmosphere will last longer than Stonehenge,” Archer writes. “Longer than time capsules, longer than nuclear waste, far longer than the age of human civilization so far.”
https://www.nature.com/articles/climate.2008.122

So what exactly have the climate impacts been from increased CO2? And no, attribution "science", is not science but computer games. Roll Eyes

Linus wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2023 at 8:41pm:

Clauser? Physicist who never wrote a peer reviewed climate paper.

And yet somehow he won a Nobel Prize, go figure. Grin

Linus wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2023 at 8:41pm:

Happer? Physicist and a fossil fuel industry shill as exposed by Greenpeace. Oh, and selected for Trump's Committee on Climate Security.

Oh dear, Linus exposes his conspiracy theory roots. Grin

Linus wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2023 at 8:41pm:

Try harder, Lee.

I don't need to you have a fistful of nothing. Someone has been p*ssing in your pocket and told you it is raining. Grin

Lol, you provide a reference to support your case, then you're shown it doesn't, and then you proceed to criticise your reference. Do you know whether you're coming or going, Lee? What a riot. Grin

The impacts of the increased CO2? Here are some:

>Global Warming
>Sea-Level Rise
>Ocean Acidification:
>Disruption of Ecosystems:
>Glacial Retreat:
>Extreme weather events
>Feed back loops. Eg. Co2 induced global warming thawing permafrost and releasing more methane into the atmosphere.

I've already pointed out your bullshit on climate modelling. Like the paper you marshaled today to support your case that didn't, the climate scientists you thought supported your case against modelling didn't.

Climate modelling has been more successful than anything that your empty rhetoric or gaggle of crackpots have come up with:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJGVvLO2FcU

Moving on, we have Lee dabbling in the fallacious appeal to authority. The authority, of,Clauser, a Nobel Prize winner, who isn't even a climate scientist and who has been laughed off court by the climate science field as not getting the basics right.

https://skepticalscience.com/clauser-latest-climate-denying-physicist.html

Go on, Lee, prove that Quantum Mechanics is crap by appealing to a highly awarded plumber. Cheesy

Oh, and the ice core sampling, tells us very well what CO2 levels were like before the industrial revolution for the past 800,000 years and show us that post industrial revolution CO2 has been rising precipitously. I'd trust what the British Antarctic Survey pisses into my pocket over the codswallop you've been dishing up.

https://www.bas.ac.uk/data/our-data/publication/ice-cores-and-climate-change

So here you are, Lee, referencing papers or articles that you claim support you and then when we look they're actually shooting you down. You appeal to a scientists who aren't even in the field of climate science. And then there was your gibber about CO2 longevity and crap about us not knowing what CO2 was like preceding the industrial revolution, all pure codswallop.

The only person who's been pissing around here and telling everyone that it's raining is you, Lee. You have have not yet been able to provide a decent argument against AGW. Roll Eyes

« Last Edit: Sep 22^nd, 2023 at 11:25pm by Linus »

IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21498
Gender: male

Re: Climate Change Debate
Reply #226 - Sep 23^rd, 2023 at 12:45pm

Linus wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2023 at 11:08pm:

>Global Warming

Please cite the paper that has proved CO2 has increased temperatures. No paper has. But try anyway.

Linus wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2023 at 11:08pm:

Sea-Level Rise

Sea level has been rising for thousands of years. And there is no acceleration. GTF (good Try - Fail)

Linus wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2023 at 11:08pm:

Ocean Acidification:

The Ocean is a huge ALKALINE body of water. There is no change of it to Acid. There are too many calcium deposits for it to be otherwise. Roll Eyes

Linus wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2023 at 11:08pm:

Disruption of Ecosystems:

Exactly how does CO2 disrupt eco-systemes. Man disrupts eco-systems, not CO2.

Linus wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2023 at 11:08pm:

Glacial Retreat:

The Glaciers have been retreating since way before you were born. It is why we are in an INTER-Glacial period. Roll Eyes

Linus wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2023 at 11:08pm:

Extreme weather events

Extreme weather events have always been with us. But please tell us how much they have varied with CO2. Grin

Linus wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2023 at 11:08pm:

Feed back loops. Eg. Co2 induced global warming thawing permafrost and releasing more methane into the atmosphere.

There is no such thing as Cobalt2. Please show us the paper that says Methane is increasing from permafrosts. Roll Eyes

"Human-induced climate warming by 2100 is expected to thaw large expanses of northern permafrost peatlands. However, the spatio-temporal dynamics of permafrost peatland thaw remain uncertain due to complex permafrost–climate interactions, the insulating properties of peat soils and variation in model projections of future climate. "

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-022-01296-7

Bow down to the models. "It is going to happen, trust us) Grin

Linus wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2023 at 11:08pm:

I've already pointed out your bullshit on climate modelling.

Climate modelling has no initiation point, has not been ratified or verified.

Linus wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2023 at 11:08pm:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJGVvLO2FcU

Oh dear. Linus goes to youtube for his science. Grin

Linus wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2023 at 11:08pm:

Like the paper you marshaled today to support your case that didn't, the climate scientists you thought supported your case against modelling didn't.

You mean because CO2 has a lifespan in the atmosphere of about five years on average, it can last thousands of years? I will let you work out the minimum time in the atmosphere to get to the average. Grin

Linus wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2023 at 11:08pm:

Moving on, we have Lee dabbling in the fallacious appeal to authority.

And yet you cite no one because you can't find any authority for your cause.

Linus wrote on Sep 22^nd, 2023 at 11:08pm:

The authority, of,Clauser, a Nobel Prize winner, who isn't even a climate scientist and who has been laughed off court by the climate science field as not getting the basics right.

Really. Then as you know so much, you will be able to point me to this rebuttal. You do know quantum mechanics is the basis of climate science? Grin

"Dr. John F. Clauser, joint recipient of the 2022 Nobel Prize in Physics, has criticized the climate emergency narrative calling it “a dangerous corruption of science that threatens the world’s economy and the well-being of billions of people.” "

https://gript.ie/nobel-laureate-climate-science-has-metastasized-into-massive-sh...

NOTE: he doesn't say there is no AGW, just that there is no Climate EMERGENCY.

BTW- I looked under "Clauser rebuttal", and Clauser debunked" and guess what? Not ONE hit. So where does that leave you? Wink

Talk about an empty vessel. It defines you perfectly. Wink

IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 21498
Gender: male

Re: Climate Change Debate
Reply #227 - Sep 23^rd, 2023 at 6:02pm

"Contrary to the impression given by Zeke Hausfather’s rather misleading graph, CMIP5 models have not been at all skillful in predicting future warming; they have matched the illustrated 1970–2020 observed warming (which was past rather than future warming until the late 2000s, when CMIP5 models were still being tuned) due to their over-sensitivity being cancelled out by their use of ERF that increased much less than the IPCC’s latest best estimates of the actual ERF increase."

Nic Lewis 5 September 2023

https://judithcurry.com/2023/09/05/do-cmip5-models-skillfully-match-actual-warmi...

Edit:

« Last Edit: Sep 23^rd, 2023 at 6:36pm by lee »

IP Logged

Belgarion Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 6164 Gender:	Re: Climate Change Debate Reply #228 - Sep 30^th, 2023 at 8:54am Let's hear from a real expert: https://www.tiktok.com/@lemonde_fou2/video/7283746729449557281?q=ian%20plimer&t=...
Back to top	"I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." Voltaire.....(possibly) IP Logged

lee Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 21498 Gender:	Re: Climate Change Debate Reply #229 - Oct 1^st, 2023 at 1:48pm And then we have the wailing and gnashing of teeth over the hottest warming in the Northern Hemisphere EVAH. But was it? Well not according to REMSS. https://images.remss.com/msu/msu_time_series.html
Back to top	IP Logged

Pages: 1 ... 14 15 16

‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›

« Forum

‹ Board

Top of this page