Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 ... 19
Send Topic Print
Anthropogenic Global Warming (Read 15457 times)
miketrees
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 6488
Gender: male
Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming
Reply #30 - Feb 22nd, 2017 at 6:24pm
 



I dont care,,, I live 300plus metres above sea level.

You bottom dwelling scum suckers can drown.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
TheFunPolice
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 9009
waggawagga
Gender: male
Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming
Reply #31 - Feb 22nd, 2017 at 6:25pm
 
lee wrote on Feb 22nd, 2017 at 6:19pm:
TheFunPolice wrote on Feb 22nd, 2017 at 6:16pm:
lee wrote on Feb 22nd, 2017 at 6:12pm:
TheFunPolice wrote on Feb 22nd, 2017 at 6:04pm:
We don't drill for water



Yes we do. That's why we have windmills and electric pumps; to draw water to the surface.

Just ask Lee to get you some blue-chip shares  Roll Eyes



Perhaps if you wanted a different answer you should have proposed a better statement.  Roll Eyes

You can't give an answer so who the bugger cares  Cheesy
Back to top
 

......Australia has an illegitimate Government!
 
IP Logged
 
lee
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 16350
Gender: male
Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming
Reply #32 - Feb 22nd, 2017 at 6:52pm
 
TheFunPolice wrote on Feb 22nd, 2017 at 6:25pm:
You can't give an answer so who the bugger cares



lee wrote on Feb 22nd, 2017 at 6:12pm:
AnotherJourneyByTrain wrote Today at 4:04pm:
We don't drill for water



Yes we do. That's why we have windmills and electric pumps; to draw water to the surface.



That's an answer. Although obviously not the one you wanted. Tough titties (Ma Sheela)
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Jovial Monk
Gold Member
*****
Online


Dogs not cats!

Posts: 43289
Gender: male
Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming
Reply #33 - Feb 23rd, 2017 at 7:54am
 
Rift in Antarcticas fourth biggest ice shelf grows:

...

Quote:
The crack now stretches more than 100 miles in length. . . . [and] 1,500 feet across


When this crack reaches the end of the ice—it may not but I think it will—a giant iceberg will break off.

Quote:
The rift is expected to soon cleave a monster iceberg off the Larsen C ice shelf. Scientists estimate the iceberg could be up to 1,930 square miles in size, or roughly 10 percent of the whole ice shelf.


As these ice shelves collapse the warmer waters, that caused the ice shelves to collapse, can reach the base of the glaciers, causing them to melt faster.

Quote:
Scientists at Project MIDAS, an Antarctic research group monitoring the rift, wrote in January that the breakup “will fundamentally change the landscape of the Antarctic Peninsula” and leave the ice shelf in a less stable state.

That could eventually cause it to collapse, a fate that befell the Larsen A and B ice shelves in 1995 and 2002, respectively. The Project MIDAS scientists wrote that the Larsen B breakup followed a similar massive iceberg calving event, which was caused by abnormally warm air in one of the world’s fastest warming places.

Ice shelf health is a key metric researchers are watching all around Antarctica. The shelves act like bookends, holding up the massive stores of ice on the continent. If they disappear, it will cause more land ice to tumble into the ocean, raising sea levels. Since Larsen B’s collapse, the glaciers behind it have flowed to the sea six times faster.


Six times faster. Not a guess, not a wild unsupported claim, a measurement. This is science, measurement, not propaganda. ” “Could. . .” not will, the careful language and thought scientists use.

Quote:
The West Antarctic has some shelves very vulnerable to breakup, including the Pine Island Glacier ice shelf. It recently calved a comparatively small “aftershock” iceberg following a major July 2015 calving event. But satellites show that it has started to develop a large crack as well.

Previous research has shown that an unstoppable melt that would drive oceans at least 10 feet higher could already be underway in West Antarctica, though it would take centuries for the process to play out. Warming oceans and air are the main culprits.

Even East Antarctica, which is colder and thus considered to be more stable, has started to concern scientists. Research published late last year chronicled a massive meltwater lake inside the Roi Baudouin ice shelf due to warm winds blowing down from the ice sheet.


Not looking good. Really is time to act to reduce GHG emissions. You know, the four gases we emit by burning fossil fuel that cause an increase in the amount of water vapor in the air and the combined action of those GHG block more and more heat from escaping into space, warming the globe. This we have seen is shown to be happening by the use of spectroscopy—not a theory, fact.

http://grist.org/article/watch-the-ever-growing-rift-in-antarcticas-fourth-bigge...
Back to top
« Last Edit: Feb 23rd, 2017 at 8:27am by Jovial Monk »  

Get the vaxx! 💉💉

If you don’t like abortions ignore them like you do school shootings.
 
IP Logged
 
lee
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 16350
Gender: male
Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming
Reply #34 - Feb 23rd, 2017 at 10:56am
 
"Luckman says climate change is certainly influencing this region. Larsen C used to have two neighbors to the north, Larsen A and Larsen B. As the air and water warmed, those ice shelves started melting and then splintered into shards in 1995 and 2002.

But the crack in Larsen C seems to have happened on its own, for different reasons.

"This is probably not directly attributable to any warming in the region, although of course the warming won't have helped," says Luckman. "It's probably just simply a natural event that's just been waiting around to happen." "

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/01/16/509565462/an-ice-shelf-is-crac...

So a scientist who believes in AGW thinks this is just a natural event. Roll Eyes
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
lee
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 16350
Gender: male
Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming
Reply #35 - Feb 23rd, 2017 at 11:48am
 
Jovial Monk wrote on Feb 23rd, 2017 at 7:54am:
This we have seen is shown to be happening by the use of spectroscopy—not a theory, fact.



"Infrared astronomers are quite familiar with the problem of atmospheric IR. IR astronomy is not easily done on the earth’s surface because the lower atmosphere is nearly opaque to IR because of moisture in the air. Consequently IR astronomy is done at high altitudes, at very cold, or at very dry locations, or all three. The Atacama Desert in Chile, the top of Mauna Kea in Hawaii, the south pole, airborne observatories, or satellites are the favored locations."

https://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2012/09/15/ed-caryl-modtran-shows-co2-doubling-w...



...

Based on Callendar.

Please show the catastrophic warming that is yet to take place.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Jovial Monk
Gold Member
*****
Online


Dogs not cats!

Posts: 43289
Gender: male
Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming
Reply #36 - Feb 24th, 2017 at 11:05am
 
Hmmm something strange is happening—and it refutes all notions of a LIA caused by a solar minimum:

Quote:
The sun has been going through a period of weakness for years; It radiates less energy into space. The activity of the sun fluctuates regularly. It reaches a low point every eleven years, when there are hardly any dark spots on the stars. Climate calculations calculate that the ground-level air temperature on the earth cools down slightly when the sun weakens.


But now measurements show: during the last drop in activity, intensified warming radiation reached the earth. "The data is extremely surprising," says the renowned solar researcher Sami Solanki from the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research.

Scientists around Joanna Haigh from the Imperial College in London have analyzed satellite data from the years 2004 to 2007. During this time, the activity of the star continually declined; In 2009, it reached its minimum. The data show that solar radiation has developed differently than climate models predict: as the sun weakened, more visible radiation and more infrared light came to the earth. UV radiation, on the other hand, weakened about five times more than expected. The results: The sun radiation did not lower the ground-level temperature on the earth, but it let it rise - about a twentieth degree, Joanna Haigh and her colleagues in the science magazine "Nature" report .


http://www.spiegel.de/wissenschaft/natur/klima-paradoxon-entdeckt-sonne-waermt-s...

So a solar minimum will actually very slightly INcrease the global temperature. Oh dear. How can this be?

Calculations showed—a bit of cooling but MEASUREMENT showed—a bit of warming! How?

“as the sun weakened, more visible radiation and more infrared light came to the earth” while UV radiation decreased. This changes the composition of the upper atmosphere—UV can split atoms etc.

So, no end to AGW. We really do have to show maturity and accept responsibility and act to reduce GHG emissions.

But the article cited is a scientific one, not bombastic propaganda:
Quote:
Predictions about the effect of the sun on the climate are therefore wrong - the cycles of solar activity do not seem to be in harmony with their climate effect. It is, however, too early to change past theories about the effects of the sun, writes Rolanda Garcia, an atmospheric chemist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, USA, in a commentary on Nature . Finally, it is unclear whether the sun behaves the same in every activity cycle.

In addition, it would have to be shown how reliable the radiation data were. However, the experts clearly do not have a clue to question the measurements. The data comes from the satellite "Sorce" of the US space agency Nasa, which orbits the earth at an altitude of 645 kilometers and measures the sun radiation for seven years. "The conclusions of the study are plausible if one believes the measurement data," says Solanki. However, it will be time to see if the results are correct.

The sun also amazes science in other ways. Although a new solar cycle has begun last year, there are hardly any new spots on the star. Two experts have recently prognosticated a spotless sun for decades - a slight cooling on Earth could be the result . According to the new "Nature" study, however, this conclusion seems more daring than ever: for clearly the sun's activity and the climate impact of the sun are not in harmony. However, the ever-increasing heat effect of the greenhouse gases would hardly be alleviated by the fluctuations of the solar radiation anyway. However, the speculations on the solar patches have also shown that reliable predictions of the climate effect of the sun are not yet possible.


Want more?
http://www.nature.com/articles/nature09426.epdf?referrer_access_token=lhOykOb1k7...
Back to top
« Last Edit: Feb 24th, 2017 at 11:37am by Jovial Monk »  

Get the vaxx! 💉💉

If you don’t like abortions ignore them like you do school shootings.
 
IP Logged
 
lee
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 16350
Gender: male
Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming
Reply #37 - Feb 24th, 2017 at 11:36am
 
Jovial Monk wrote on Feb 24th, 2017 at 11:05am:
Calculations showed—a bit of cooling but MEASUREMENT showed—a bit of warming! How?



Which shows we really know very little. We obviously don't know all the parameters. How sad for AGW tragics who like to tell us the science is settled. Wink
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
greggerypeccary
Gold Member
*****
Online


Australian Politics

Posts: 130913
Gender: male
Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming
Reply #38 - Feb 24th, 2017 at 12:01pm
 
lee wrote on Feb 24th, 2017 at 11:36am:
Jovial Monk wrote on Feb 24th, 2017 at 11:05am:
Calculations showed—a bit of cooling but MEASUREMENT showed—a bit of warming! How?



Which shows we really know very little. We obviously don't know all the parameters. How sad for AGW tragics who like to tell us the science is settled.


That's the bit that annoys me.

Saying the science is settled is unscientific, and extremely narrow-minded.

I'm an AGW skeptic, however, I keep an open mind on the subject.

If someone can show me some credible, reliable evidence that humans are causing global warming, I'm willing to be persuaded to subscribe to the AGW theory.

Until then, I remain skeptical (yet open-minded).

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
AiA
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 18405
Gender: male
Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming
Reply #39 - Feb 24th, 2017 at 12:05pm
 
If humans had never evolved on this planet or they had remained in the hunter-gatherer stage, this planet would be cooler than it presently is.
Back to top
 

“Jerry, just remember: It’s not a lie … if you believe it.” George Costanza
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Jovial Monk
Gold Member
*****
Online


Dogs not cats!

Posts: 43289
Gender: male
Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming
Reply #40 - Feb 24th, 2017 at 12:10pm
 
greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 24th, 2017 at 12:01pm:
lee wrote on Feb 24th, 2017 at 11:36am:
Jovial Monk wrote on Feb 24th, 2017 at 11:05am:
Calculations showed—a bit of cooling but MEASUREMENT showed—a bit of warming! How?



Which shows we really know very little. We obviously don't know all the parameters. How sad for AGW tragics who like to tell us the science is settled.


That's the bit that annoys me.

Saying the science is settled is unscientific, and extremely narrow-minded.

I'm an AGW skeptic, however, I keep an open mind on the subject.

If someone can show me some credible, reliable evidence that humans are causing global warming, I'm willing to be persuaded to subscribe to the AGW theory.

Until then, I remain skeptical (yet open-minded).


No, Greg, you are just a common or garden AGW denier like Lees.

I have gone out of my way in this thread (and others) that scientists use careful language and look for ways to falsify theories etc.

Compare that to Dubyne who points out a bit of snow on a mountain in winter and says: global cooling.
Back to top
 

Get the vaxx! 💉💉

If you don’t like abortions ignore them like you do school shootings.
 
IP Logged
 
greggerypeccary
Gold Member
*****
Online


Australian Politics

Posts: 130913
Gender: male
Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming
Reply #41 - Feb 24th, 2017 at 12:14pm
 
Jovial Monk wrote on Feb 24th, 2017 at 12:10pm:
greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 24th, 2017 at 12:01pm:
lee wrote on Feb 24th, 2017 at 11:36am:
Jovial Monk wrote on Feb 24th, 2017 at 11:05am:
Calculations showed—a bit of cooling but MEASUREMENT showed—a bit of warming! How?



Which shows we really know very little. We obviously don't know all the parameters. How sad for AGW tragics who like to tell us the science is settled.


That's the bit that annoys me.

Saying the science is settled is unscientific, and extremely narrow-minded.

I'm an AGW skeptic, however, I keep an open mind on the subject.

If someone can show me some credible, reliable evidence that humans are causing global warming, I'm willing to be persuaded to subscribe to the AGW theory.

Until then, I remain skeptical (yet open-minded).


No, Greg, you are just a common or garden AGW denier like Lees.


Why must you lie?

I just told you that I have an open mind on the subject, and now you turn around and say I don't.

I can tell you buddy, I know a lot more about what I'm thinking than you do.

This is the reason the AGW cult gets such a bad rap.

You don't listen to reason, and you continue to tell lies.

Now, for the last time: I am not an AGW denier. I am a skeptic, with an open mind.

If you continue to spread lies about me, it will be no more Mr Nice Guy from me.

Instead of attacking forum members, find some reliable, credible evidence to support your theory.


Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Gordon
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20202
Gordon
Gender: male
Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming
Reply #42 - Feb 24th, 2017 at 12:15pm
 
greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 24th, 2017 at 12:01pm:
lee wrote on Feb 24th, 2017 at 11:36am:
Jovial Monk wrote on Feb 24th, 2017 at 11:05am:
Calculations showed—a bit of cooling but MEASUREMENT showed—a bit of warming! How?



Which shows we really know very little. We obviously don't know all the parameters. How sad for AGW tragics who like to tell us the science is settled.


That's the bit that annoys me.

Saying the science is settled is unscientific, and extremely narrow-minded.

I'm an AGW skeptic, however, I keep an open mind on the subject.

If someone can show me some credible, reliable evidence that humans are causing global warming, I'm willing to be persuaded to subscribe to the AGW theory.

Until then, I remain skeptical (yet open-minded).



AGW is real. What is as clear as mud is what % of it can be attributed to human activity, and what effect our current activities will have in the future.

We should switch to clean energy for reasons of pollution which is a very real and measurable problem of which there is no doubt whatsoever.
Back to top
 

IBI
 
IP Logged
 
greggerypeccary
Gold Member
*****
Online


Australian Politics

Posts: 130913
Gender: male
Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming
Reply #43 - Feb 24th, 2017 at 12:16pm
 
Gordon wrote on Feb 24th, 2017 at 12:15pm:
greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 24th, 2017 at 12:01pm:
lee wrote on Feb 24th, 2017 at 11:36am:
Jovial Monk wrote on Feb 24th, 2017 at 11:05am:
Calculations showed—a bit of cooling but MEASUREMENT showed—a bit of warming! How?



Which shows we really know very little. We obviously don't know all the parameters. How sad for AGW tragics who like to tell us the science is settled.


That's the bit that annoys me.

Saying the science is settled is unscientific, and extremely narrow-minded.

I'm an AGW skeptic, however, I keep an open mind on the subject.

If someone can show me some credible, reliable evidence that humans are causing global warming, I'm willing to be persuaded to subscribe to the AGW theory.

Until then, I remain skeptical (yet open-minded).



AGW is real.



There is no reliable, credible evidence to support that statement.

It's a real theory, sure.

But that's all, at this stage.

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Jovial Monk
Gold Member
*****
Online


Dogs not cats!

Posts: 43289
Gender: male
Re: Anthropogenic Global Warming
Reply #44 - Feb 24th, 2017 at 12:18pm
 
I posted the article on how spectroscopes on land and on satellites showed that GHGs do prevent long wave radiation from escaping into space.

You said it didn’t show anything—you gave no real argument why the study didn’t show AGW happening. You can reflect heat back to land and sea and it doesn’t warm land and sea? Not really believable.
Back to top
 

Get the vaxx! 💉💉

If you don’t like abortions ignore them like you do school shootings.
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 ... 19
Send Topic Print