Blast of Global Warming in Early April
- Thread starter canada-man
- Start date
i agree some people like youwill never learn that today's Earth's Climate is much colder today than in ancient and pre-historic times and getting butt hurt over CO2 which is 0.039% of air
"getting butt hurt over CO2"
I am not an expert on the topic but I don't believe CO2 is the major contributor. CO2 does contribute to global warming however it's "destructive" effect diminishes as more CO2 is produced. Think of a greenhouse. One set of window panes will heat the interior and trap in heat. If you add a second pane of glass you will see a slight increase temperature. By the time you add a 4th or 5th layer of glass there is not really any noticeable increase in temperature....the first layer or two is enough to trap the heat. CO2 in the atmosphere acts the same way. Once it reaches a certain level (or "thickness") any more CO2 added has less and less of an effect
I believe the main gas to worry about is methane. Again not being an expert on the topic I believe one simple way to help reduce methane is to simply eat less beef and red meat. Cows are a major contributor of methane gas when they fart. Reduce the demand for cows and it will help cut methane emissions. Yeah I know this is "simple" solution and will not solve all the world's problems etc etc etc but again I am not an expert and not looking to solve all the world's problems just wanted to point out that if we are going to focus on a greenhouse causing gas then we should focus on the correct one (at least based on what I am aware of)
I am not an expert on the topic but I don't believe CO2 is the major contributor. CO2 does contribute to global warming however it's "destructive" effect diminishes as more CO2 is produced. Think of a greenhouse. One set of window panes will heat the interior and trap in heat. If you add a second pane of glass you will see a slight increase temperature. By the time you add a 4th or 5th layer of glass there is not really any noticeable increase in temperature....the first layer or two is enough to trap the heat. CO2 in the atmosphere acts the same way. Once it reaches a certain level (or "thickness") any more CO2 added has less and less of an effect
I believe the main gas to worry about is methane. Again not being an expert on the topic I believe one simple way to help reduce methane is to simply eat less beef and red meat. Cows are a major contributor of methane gas when they fart. Reduce the demand for cows and it will help cut methane emissions. Yeah I know this is "simple" solution and will not solve all the world's problems etc etc etc but again I am not an expert and not looking to solve all the world's problems just wanted to point out that if we are going to focus on a greenhouse causing gas then we should focus on the correct one (at least based on what I am aware of)
We may be headed for a big La Nina later this year.
https://weather.com/news/climate/news/el-nino-noaa-february-2016-update
If that happens, the people who have tried to link the recent El Nino weather patterns to the hypothesis of anthropogenic global warming could be in for a rough stretch.
https://weather.com/news/climate/news/el-nino-noaa-february-2016-update
If that happens, the people who have tried to link the recent El Nino weather patterns to the hypothesis of anthropogenic global warming could be in for a rough stretch.
Your metaphor expansion doesn't work, since adding glass panes is not similar to adding more CO2 to the atmosphere.
Do a little reading on the subject.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_effect
You mean the deniers you have been reading.
Climatologists are fully aware of the differences in effects between El Nino and climate change, whereas the kooks you read try to use El Nino as an explanation for the latest global temp records.
you now calling the weather channel kooks? earth today is colder than 1000 years ago and during antiquity. it's time you climate crybabies get over it
You've confirmed my point.
Since you insist the temperature changes aren't due to El Nino and La Nina, you better hope the temperature doesn't drop.
I don't claim to be an expert however the metaphor was a reference from experts. The main point being made is CO2 is not the main contributor to raising temps (according to some experts). Methane is a much more "destructive" gas
I am not a tree hugger that runs around screaming about doomsday senarios if the Earth warms up. However I am not naive enough to suggest humans have not altered the environment. Experts agree that the world is warming and it is warming faster than Prehistoric times because of human consumption however experts can't all agree by how much it will warm and what the end results will be. However based on history there have always been doomsday seekers and they have always been wrong. Sure humans have created "problems" however humans tend to also be very creative and find solutions to problems.
I am not against Global Warming. The trend is a warming climate however to play "devil's advocate" if you go back a few decades the predictions were the exact opposite. With sulphur and other harmful particle released into the atmosphere as coal etc was used to fuel the Industrial Revolution doomsday seekers were talking about global cooling and the coming of an ice age. The release of sulphur acted similar to volcanic eruptions and "clouded" out the sun causing global cooling. There is some indication as we clean up our air (i.e. remove sulphur and other particles) it is allowing more sun through causing more warming. Cleaner air may be part of Global Warming
Again I don't claim to be an expert all I suggest is 1- methane and other gases can be more harmful than CO2. And 2- don't listen to extremist on either side. To claim Global Warming does not exist or compare climate to weather is naive. However to suggest the world will flood and we will all die can be just as naive. Humans as a whole can come up with some very innovated solutions to problems.
Yep, all those El Ninos caused the 15 of the 16 hottest years on record to occur since 2000. Strange that 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, and 2015 were all El Nino years.
Actually, they were years where the Earth's temperature was stagnant.
Throughout the 21st century, the predictions of how man-made emissions would affect the Earth's temperature have been spectacularly wrong (I'm sure I've explained that to you before).
http://www.nature.com/articles/ncli...trZLMnaUyec=&tracking_referrer=www.nature.com
That's just anti-science spin. No one disputes that there was warming in the late 20th century and that the Earth's temperature plateaued at around the turn of the century.
The fact remains that the Earth's temperature has been stagnant in the 21st century. Your own favourite IPCC authors have confirmed that to be the case.
http://www.nature.com/articles/ncli...trZLMnaUyec=&tracking_referrer=www.nature.com
By the way, are you saying the temperature increase in the latter half of 2015 wasn't due to El Nino?
How often are you going to repeat that claim after you've been shown to be wrong?
The bet that you lost showed that the IPCC projections are quite good, you put your word on the line, betting that the IPCC projection of a 0.4ºC increase in temperatures wouldn't happen and 2015 wouldn't hit 0.83ºC. It went to 0.87º, showing that the IPCC is much smarter then you.
For you to make this claim after the bet is ridiculous.
And as you know, 15 of the 16 warmest years recorded happened this century, 2015 beat all those records and Feb of this month smashed even those records.
Even your favourite deniers are, at wattsupwiththat.com are losing face, coming out with crazier and crazier conspiracy theories and nonsense.
I know you suffer Dunning-Kruger effect, and in fact lied about the study that you posted that chart from. One of the authors of the study that chart comes from says this:
Michael Mann, one of the authors of the Fyfe paper:
You posted a link and lied about what the study says.
No one wants to see you derail yet another thread with your fairy-tale claims about who won the bet.
As for the IPCC's predictions, they remain consistently and spectacularly wrong.
Great! I could use some warmer temps!
Mother nature has been teasing us with some nice weather in Feb, then again in March, and now we have this freakin ice storm...
I'm ready for some nicer weather!
Mother nature has been teasing us with some nice weather in Feb, then again in March, and now we have this freakin ice storm...
I'm ready for some nicer weather!
Your claim that the IPCC is wrong has been proven to be wrong through the bet, every time you make that false claim you will be referred to the bet, where you put your claim on the line and lost. If you don't want to be reminded of the bet you lost, stop making this claim. Easy as that.
And as a reminder, you are lying about that study you posted the chart from just as much as you are lying about the bet.
Michael Mann, one of the authors of the Fyfe paper:
You keep posting a chart and lying about the findings of the study, as noted by that quote.
Total Dunning-Kruger incompetence.
