20,000 Scientists Have Now Signed 'Warning to Humanity'

[Moviefan-2]

So what is wrong with the above statement?

Britain used to have snow on a regular basis in the 1960's and 70's. It was not a lot but there was snow without fail every year even in cites like London. That started tapering off in the 1980's when there was an occasional year of snow. But this year Britain got a real pounding of that snow due to the Arctic melt and warm air driving the cold air further South. All in line with Climate change. What is the big deal and conspiracy theory that the right wing constantly misinterpret?

In fact, there have been a number of years since Viner made his predictions where Britain has been pounded by heavy snowfall.

Do you actually believe that snow has become such a rare event that children in the U.K. and elsewhere "just aren't going to know what snow is"?

https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordp...-just-a-thing-of-the-past-the-independent.pdf

Seriously??

January 2018: https://www.express.co.uk/news/weat...BC-weather-forecast-update-Met-Office-warning

January 2017: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...weather-warnings-across-uk-will-reach-london/

January 2016: http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-35333366

January 2015: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...-chaos-disruption-weather-manchester-scotland

January 2014: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/weather/10598611/First-snow-of-winter-hits-south-of-England.html

Etc...

Let's try another prediction: Do you believe the Himalayan glaciers will "disappear altogether" by the year 2035?

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2009/nov/09/india-pachauri-climate-glaciers

 

[Moviefan-2]

Three books were important to their message, Paul Ehrlich’s The Population Bomb (1968) and Ecoscience: Population, Resources and Environment (1977) co-authored with John Holdren, Obama’s Science Czar, and Meadows et al., Limits to Growth, published in 1972 that anticipated the IPCC approach of computer model predictions (projections).

The Population Bomb should be required reading for anyone who wonders why people are skeptical about "expert" predictions of a coming apocalypse. Pretty much every prediction in that book proved to be completely wrong.

https://www.thestar.com/news/insigh...lation_predictions_keep_getting_it_wrong.html

http://business.financialpost.com/o...ng-and-50-years-on-they-keep-getting-it-wrong

https://www.investmentu.com/article/detail/57337/why-population-bomb-never-exploded#.WreNKPnwbcu

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

I don’t want to speak for frank, but what comes to mind is that “less snowfall” doesn’t necessarily “prove it’s getting colder.”

As you know, snow will fall if ground temperature is at or below 0C, and at around -10C heavy snowfall is less likely, and after -18C, it’s uncommon.

https://www.accuweather.com/en/features/trend/too-cold-to-snow/6953983

Obviously, “less snowfall” during a given winter could also be the result of increasing frequency of ground temperatures at or above 0C. I live outside of Toronto and commute. My anecdotal observations is that snow falls and stays on the ground much more frequently from about Hwy 7 and north, when compared to the South due to increasing impact of the lake effect. It’s warmer the closer you get to the lake

Warmer near the lake??!! The complete opposite is true. Its always colder near the lake.
Read: https://www.theweathernetwork.com/n...e-lake-the-science-behind-a-lake-breeze/66310

Also there were very few days in late December, January and February where it was over 0C this winter.
So the conditions for snow were there

Out of curiosity, is the proof “it’s getting colder” based on data? Or your observations?

I actually think winters have stayed about the same temperature wise.
Maybe we're getting less snow, thats possible. But I dont know what that proves (if anything).

Can you really say this winter has been warm (or warmer)?? I dont think so, and I have my heating bill to prove it.
Its almost April and it was -6C when I woke up this morning. The forecast for April 1st is up to 3cm of snow and a low of -1C.
See here: https://www.theweathernetwork.com/ca/14-day-weather-trend/ontario/toronto

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

You do understand the difference between weather and climate don't you? Perhaps not

Of course I do, thats why I said over the last 25 years I havent noticed warmer winters

 

[managee]

Warmer near the lake??!! The complete opposite is true. Its always colder near the lake.
Read: https://www.theweathernetwork.com/n...e-lake-the-science-behind-a-lake-breeze/66310

Also there were very few days in late December, January and February where it was over 0C this winter.
So the conditions for snow were there


I actually think winters have stayed about the same temperature wise.
Maybe we're getting less snow, thats possible. But I dont know what that proves (if anything).

Can you really say this winter has been warm (or warmer)?? I dont think so, and I have my heating bill to prove it.
Its almost April and it was -6C when I woke up this morning. The forecast for April 1st is up to 3cm of snow and a low of -1C.
See here: https://www.theweathernetwork.com/ca/14-day-weather-trend/ontario/toronto

When I live in Southern Ontario, I ski every weekend during the winter and have for my whole life. Over my lifetime, where I ski has struggled every year with warmer temperatures, which threaten to shorten ski seasons. Sometimes it’s warmer average temperature for the whole season that causes problems, sometimes it’s short but extreme (upward) temperature swings.

Over the past 30 years we have combatted this by investing (which means I have to spend more money) in artificial snow making technology. Every (about) 10 years we make massive changes, all in the hopes of having seasons that are reminiscent of the ones from the first 30 years of our existence, a time before artificial snow.

If you think this proves “winters are getting colder,” it doesn’t. We will continue to make snow until around -35C with our technology. I believe we last turned guns off because it was too cold was 2015, and only for a day or two. But, unlike in the 1950s, 1960s, 1970s and early 1980s, it would be absolutely impossible to ski for 3 months in S. Ontario if you relied on natural snow alone.

Just ask anyone in southern Ontario who has a snowmobile how their season was, and how the past 30 seasons have compared to the 30 before.

As for “Lake Effect,” the article you posted doesn’t just talk about temperatures being cooler by large bodies of water, the same phenomena increases temperature in places where the water is warmer than ground/air temperature, which is obviously almost always the case if Lake Ontario isn’t frozen over in the winter.

Water temperature is at its lowest, around 0C (it’s actually around 2C right now), so as colder than freezing air blows across it, the cold air is “warmed” by the above freezing water temperatures.

Lake effect “should” produce increased (compared to areas that surround Toronto but don’t have Lake-effect snowfall) levels of precipitation (snow), as it does in places like Barrie and Collingwood, as that warmer air picks up moisture over lakes and meets with colder, dyer air as it makes landfall. But in Toronto, that comes in the form of rain or sleet, not snow (and if it is snow, it more often melts than accumulate), because temperatures are frequently too warm to produce anywhere near the kind of snow and/or conditions for accumulation that my parent’s generation grew up with in Toronto.

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

When I live in Southern Ontario, I ski every weekend during the winter and have for my whole life. Over my lifetime, where I ski has struggled every year with warmer temperatures, which threaten to shorten ski seasons. Sometimes it’s warmer average temperature for the whole season that causes problems, sometimes it’s short but extreme (upward) temperature swings.

Over the past 30 years we have combatted this by investing (which means I have to spend more money) in artificial snow making technology. Every (about) 10 years we make massive changes, all in the hopes of having seasons that are reminiscent of the ones from the first 30 years of our existence, a time before artificial snow.

If you think this proves “winters are getting colder,” it doesn’t. We will continue to make snow until around -35C with our technology. I believe we last turned guns off because it was too cold was 2015, and only for a day or two. But, unlike in the 1950s, 1960s, 1970s and early 1980s, it would be absolutely impossible to ski for 3 months in S. Ontario if you relied on natural snow alone.

Just ask anyone in southern Ontario who has a snowmobile how their season was, and how the past 30 seasons have compared to the 30 before.

As for “Lake Effect,” the article you posted doesn’t just talk about temperatures being cooler by large bodies of water, the same phenomena increases temperature in places where the water is warmer than ground/air temperature, which is obviously almost always the case if Lake Ontario isn’t frozen over in the winter.

Water temperature is at its lowest, around 0C (it’s actually around 2C right now), so as colder than freezing air blows across it, the cold air is “warmed” by the above freezing water temperatures.

Lake effect “should” produce increased (compared to areas that surround Toronto but don’t have Lake-effect snowfall) levels of precipitation (snow), as it does in places like Barrie and Collingwood, as that warmer air picks up moisture over lakes and meets with colder, dyer air as it makes landfall. But in Toronto, that comes in the form of rain or sleet, not snow (and if it is snow, it more often melts than accumulate), because temperatures are frequently too warm to produce anywhere near the kind of snow and/or conditions for accumulation that my parent’s generation grew up with in Toronto

Lets forget the snow for one second, can you honestly say Toronto winters have gotten noticably warmer over the last 25 to 30 years??

 

[managee]

Lets forget the snow for one second, can you honestly say Toronto winters have gotten noticably warmer over the last 25 to 30 years??

What does noticeably mean? And why would that matter?

I’ve certainly noticed that Toronto and the suburbs gets a lot less snow than they used to. I certainly notice that Collingwood gets arguably the same snow, but it lasts for a much shorter amount of time.

Do I physically notice that on average it’s 0.5C or 1C or 2C warmer than it was when I was a child? Probably not, but I know how to read, I understand some basics of ecology and so I take note of it.

What matters is how these warmer temperatures are affecting larger global ecosystems, and what more accurate predictive simulations suggest will be medium and long-term consequences for these changes.

Anyone who enjoys outdoor winter sports in Southern Ontario knows what’s up, and knew what was up before assholes made this an ideological issue.

I study coral bleaching events on behalf of various research groups as a hobby, and what we’ve been seeing over the last 3 years is something that should scare anyone who’s younger than 40 and/or planning to have (or already have) children.

 

[Moviefan-2]

....nd what more accurate predictive simulations suggest will be medium and long-term consequences for these changes.

What really matters is whether the models have accurately calculated any possible influence from man-made emissions.

In the short term, the answer is no.

The calculations about past temperatures (which are used to support the assertion that something unprecedented has occurred in recent times) haven't stood up to scrutiny. And the simulated predictions about the impact of man-made emissions have been completely wrong, as the leading climate forecasters themselves have acknowledged in peer-reviewed journals.

https://www.nature.com/articles/ngeo2973

In the long term, it doesn't matter, as the world will continue to evolve and new innovations will almost certainly replace fossil fuels as the source for producing energy.

For the developed world and much of the developing world, life on this planet has never been better. Most of the worrying about "future generations" is just baseless virtue signalling.

Relax.

 

[Moviefan-2]

Anyone who enjoys outdoor winter sports in Southern Ontario knows what’s up, and knew what was up before assholes made this an ideological issue.

You mean like this New York Times writer who has gone the full Naomi Klein route and wants to replace capitalism with socialism?

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/20/opinion/climate-capitalism-crisis.html

 

[Frankfooter]

In fact, there have been a number of years since Viner made his predictions where Britain has been pounded by heavy snowfall.

Do you actually believe that snow has become such a rare event that children in the U.K. and elsewhere "just aren't going to know what snow is"?

Attempts to conflate weather with climate.
Anecdotal evidence isn't science.

 

[Frankfooter]

I actually think winters have stayed about the same temperature wise.
Maybe we're getting less snow, thats possible. But I dont know what that proves (if anything).

Anecdotal evidence isn't science.

 

[Frankfooter]

What really matters is whether the models have accurately calculated any possible influence from man-made emissions.

In the short term, the answer is no.

In the correct term, the answer is yes.

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

Anecdotal evidence isn't science

You're right, its called common sense. And apparently common sense isnt so common with most people, including you

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

Do I physically notice that on average it’s 0.5C or 1C or 2C warmer than it was when I was a child? Probably not

Right, so mankind has been pumping CO2's into the atmosphere since approximately 1900, and our winters havent gotten any noticably warmer, nor has the weather around the equator gotten warmer (I vacation in Panama quite often, and I always ask that of the locals).

So what does that tell you?? It tells me CO2's has only a very slight affect on climate.
I do believe earth is perhaps getting slightly warmer, but its probably in the 0.05 degree range

 

[managee]

Right, so mankind has been pumping CO2's into the atmosphere since approximately 1900, and our winters havent gotten any noticably warmer, nor has the weather around the equator gotten warmer (I vacation in Panama quite often, and I always ask that of the locals).

So what does that tell you?? It tells me CO2's has only a very slight affect on climate.
I do believe earth is perhaps getting slightly warmer, but its probably in the 0.05 degree range

You keep using the word “noticeably.”

Do you mean “measurably”?

Either way, in my daily work I can see how consistent, upwardly trending changes in oceanic temperatures are having a massive impact on some of the world’s most fragile and productive ecosystems (coral reefs - which help you breathe). It takes me to the Great Barrier Reef once or twice a year, and I’m glad I saw it before it died, throughout the Caribbean, and South Pacific. The change is measurable, the impact is visible.

So your knowledge and understanding on this is all based on your scientific study of asking locals in Panama? Were they local climatologists?

When you say you haven’t “noticed” a difference, are you intentionally being obtuse? You live in a Southern Ontario city and don’t sound like you do much outside of Toronto. Your little tiny life is comfortably insulated by these small, but consistent changes. We’re actually poised in this country and this part of the country to become some of the real benefactors of global warming, at-least in the short-term.

Go to Fiji, the Solomons, Maldives, Malaysia, and you won’t have to look far to meet citizens forced from ancestrial homes by a rising sea level.

I’m sure you’ll be part of the crowd of “free thinkers” who will loudly oppose groups of migrants coming to places like Canada when Bangladesh is actually under water.

 

[Frankfooter]

Right, so mankind has been pumping CO2's into the atmosphere since approximately 1900, and our winters havent gotten any noticably warmer, nor has the weather around the equator gotten warmer (I vacation in Panama quite often, and I always ask that of the locals).

So what does that tell you?? It tells me CO2's has only a very slight affect on climate.
I do believe earth is perhaps getting slightly warmer, but its probably in the 0.05 degree range

Anecdotal evidence based on your personal experiences as your reasoning show that your 'common sense' is just confirmation bias.

Check the increase in billion dollar damage extreme weather events in the US and tell us this change is slight.

 

[canada-man]

[h=2]Scientists in the Netherlands have found a new excuse as to why sea levels are stubbornly refusing to rise in line with Al Gore’s doomsday predictions: “ocean bottom deformation.”[/h]Apparently, they claim in a study by Thomas Frederikse et al, the weight of the extra water caused by all those melting glaciers and icecaps is so great that it is causing the sea bed to sink.

​

Their paper – titled ‘Ocean Bottom Deformation Due To Present-Day Mass Redistribution and Its Impact on Sea Level Observations’ – is published in Geophysical Research Letters.Here is the abstract:

Present-day mass redistribution increases the total ocean mass and, on average, causes the ocean bottom to subside elastically. Therefore, barystatic sea level rise is larger than the resulting global mean geocentric sea level rise, observed by satellite altimetry and GPS-corrected tide gauges. We use realistic estimates of mass redistribution from ice mass loss and land water storage to quantify the resulting ocean bottom deformation and its effect on global and regional ocean volume change estimates. Over 1993–2014, the resulting globally averaged geocentric sea level change is 8% smaller than the barystatic contribution. Over the altimetry domain, the difference is about 5%, and due to this effect, barystatic sea level rise will be underestimated by more than 0.1 mm/yr over 1993–2014. Regional differences are often larger: up to 1 mm/yr over the Arctic Ocean and 0.4 mm/yr in the South Pacific. Ocean bottom deformation should be considered when regional sea level changes are observed in a geocentric reference frame.
​

What this means is that seas are expanding much faster than is shown either by satellite altimetry or tide gauges. We just can’t see it because it’s happening, unnoticed, on the deep sea beds.
If you believe the environmental website Earther.com this is very worrying.

For the average reader, though, there’s an even simpler takeaway, which is that humans are messing with the planet in some very profound ways.
“The Earth itself is not a rigid sphere, it’s a deforming ball,” Frederikse said. “With climate change, we do not only change temperature.”
​

Newsweek is similarly appalled, though without being quite able to explain why.
It says, rather desperately:

Recently, rising temperatures have caused much of the frozen water on the planet’s glaciers to melt and join the ocean as liquid. This mass melting ice rising sea levels, a problem whose consequences we’re already starting to see. The first to notice the repercussions of rising sea levels are those who live in coastal areas. Rising waters mean less land to live on.
​

Yes, it’s true that sea level rise is a major concern to climate alarmists. So important, in fact, that they’ve felt the need to fake it to make it look far more dramatic than it actually is.
But if this study is correct – something we can’t be certain of, given that a lot of it seems rather too dependent on calculations based on models rather than rigorously measured data – then surely the alarmists should be celebrating rather than panicking.
As Benny Peiser of the Global Warming Policy Foundation puts it:

So the sea levels aren’t rising too fast after all because of climate change? Problem solved.


http://www.breitbart.com/big-govern...rent-rising-because-ocean-bottom-deformation/
​

 

[FAST]

^

Seems like another of the sky is falling brigades "models" was wrong again.

But the advanced countries of the globe are supposed to blindly, and not question their models/guess work,... and the need to waste and transfer billions to shit hole countries,... I think not.

 

[Moviefan-2]

In the correct term, the answer is yes.

According to Frankfooter, the peer-reviewed papers that his favorite climate researchers have published in Nature and elsewhere are wrong. As those papers -- including the most recently published ones -- clearly say the short-term answer is 'no'.

https://www.nature.com/articles/ngeo2973

https://www.nature.com/articles/srep31789

The IPCC also said in its most recent report that the short-term answer is no.

Readers will have to decide for themselves whether they want to accept the data from the peer-reviewed papers and the IPCC or prefer to believe Frankfooter.

 

[Moviefan-2]

The Earth's temperature has increased by about 1 C over the past 135 years. I don't think that would be "noticeable" to most people, even if they had been around for most of those 135 years.