Global warming hits Los Angeles
- Thread starter Phil C. McNasty
- Start date
Climate models are designed to predict climate is to change.
irrespective of global emission level. I talked to a climate scientist many
years ago well before Greta Thunberg was born. I was told global warming
would not abate even if global emission level dropped to zero the next day.
I think this time around climate scientists can't go wrong. Global climate
will be bad if global emission level continue rising. It will still be
bad if emission is halved in a few years. Climate beyond 2030
however it turns out will fulfill climate scientists' predictions of
worsening climate change.
All of the climate models have co2 as a driver, they would soon lose their funding if they did not
they have grossly overestimated the climate sensitivity of a trace gas, measured in parts per million
as one might expect when still emerging from an ice age
Do not sell them short
their 50 year track record is abysmal & they have not altered their pre-determined conclusion
there is no....... this time around .
either you have sufficient understanding of a system in order to create an accurate and repeatable predictive model or you do not
climate science does not have a good understanding of cloud formation , which is critical as water vapor interacts / interferes with radiative transfer
how does one accurately model what one does not understand ?
climate is a non-linear , dynamic and chaotic system
how does one model a chaotic system ?
it is quite unscientific to maintain a pre-determined conclusion while attempting to adjust the predictive model in order to get it right 'this time around'
that is ass backwards to the scientific method, hypothesis, test , evaluate vs hypothesis and then draw a conclusion based on the test results
bad predictions based on the bad predictive models ?(see above)
thus far the earth is greener and crop yields have increased as Co2 has increased
no increase in the frequency or intensity of extreme weather events for years
ocean acidification ? - the addition of salts to a solution creates a ph stabilizing buffer. the oceans are filled with salts
sea rise?- the same pace as the last 10,000 years
that sounds like good news
what will be very bad/ evil is govt messing with agriculture and adversely impacting crop yields
no model needed
emissions halved in a few years will not happen
climate models can not reproduce the past, why are you confident they can accurate predict the future ?
Last edited:
Rideau Canal Skateway won't open this winter | CBC News
The Rideau Canal Skateway will not open this winter, making this season the first one ever without the popular pastime and tourist draw.
This must be a mistake. Phil's father and grandfather both say the winters have not changed in their lifetimes.
If Los Angeles proves that there's no global warming, what does the Rideau Canal say? This is a first ever for the RC but I'd be willing to bet that LA has had snow before.
How often has it snowed in Los Angeles?
Snow also made appearances in 2019, 2007, 1998, 1987 and 1974, according to Times archives. In 1962, heavy snow fell in the mountains and high deserts and dusted parts of downtown and West Los Angeles before melting quickly. Stay up to speed on the biggest stories from the West, in your inbox every morning.
The Rideau Canal Skateway will not open this winter, making this season the first one ever without the popular pastime and tourist draw.
This must be a mistake. Phil's father and grandfather both say the winters have not changed in their lifetimes.
If Los Angeles proves that there's no global warming, what does the Rideau Canal say? This is a first ever for the RC but I'd be willing to bet that LA has had snow before.
How often has it snowed in Los Angeles?
Snow also made appearances in 2019, 2007, 1998, 1987 and 1974, according to Times archives. In 1962, heavy snow fell in the mountains and high deserts and dusted parts of downtown and West Los Angeles before melting quickly. Stay up to speed on the biggest stories from the West, in your inbox every morning.
What part of 'global warming causes climate change' are some people having trouble understanding?
You include a bigger amount of CO2 in a climate model
and run a computer simulation with the software implementation of
the model. A higher global temperature in the future is obtained in
the output which led climate scientists to draw the conclusion of
climate change without providing details on what climate/weather
events are predicted by the software. I have no trouble understanding
this. What I have trouble to understand is not climate sheeple's
understanding of climate change but their response to it.
and run a computer simulation with the software implementation of
the model. A higher global temperature in the future is obtained in
the output which led climate scientists to draw the conclusion of
climate change without providing details on what climate/weather
events are predicted by the software. I have no trouble understanding
this. What I have trouble to understand is not climate sheeple's
understanding of climate change but their response to it.
How Al Gore Built the Global Warming Fraud
By Jay Lehr, Tom Harris
October 19, 2018
Although his science is often seriously wrong, no one can deny that Al Gore has a flare for the dramatic. Speaking about climate change in an October 12 PBS interview, the former vice-president proclaimed, “We have a global emergency.” Referring to the most recent UN climate report, Gore claimed it showed that current global warming “could actually extend to an existential threat to human civilization on this planet as we know it.”
Al Gore’s overblown rhetoric makes no sense, of course. Yet his hyperbolic claims beg the question: How did this all start?
Back in the 1970s, media articles warning of imminent climate change problems began to appear regularly. TIME and Newsweek ran multiple cover stories asserting that oil companies and America’s capitalist life style were causing catastrophic damage to Earth’s climate. They claimed scientists were almost unanimous in their opinion that manmade climate change would reduce agricultural productivity for the rest of the century.
The April 28, 1975 Newsweek proposed solutions that even included outlawing internal combustion engines.
This sounds very similar to today’s climate change debate – except, in the 70s, the fear was manmade global cooling, not warming.
TIME magazine’s January 31, 1977 cover featured a story, “How to Survive The Coming Ice Age.” It included “facts” such as scientists predicting that Earth’s so-called average temperature could drop by 20 degrees Fahrenheit due to manmade global cooling. Dr. Murray Mitchell of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration warned readers that “the drop in temperature between 1945 and 1968 had taken us one sixth of the way to the next Ice Age temperature.”
Global cooling gained considerable traction with the general public. But then, instead of cooling as long predicted by manmade climate change advocates, the planet started warming again. Something had to be done to rescue the climate change agenda from utter disaster. Enter Al Gore.
Al Gore Sr., a powerful Senator from Tennessee, saw to it that his son was elected to the House of Representatives, serving from 1977 to 1985, then going on to the Senate from 1985 to 1993. Gore Junior’s primary issue was his conviction that the Earth would perish if we did not eliminate fossil fuels.
Gore advanced to Vice President under President Bill Clinton, where he was able to enact policies and direct funding to ensure that the climate change agenda became a top priority of the United States Government. Gore’s mission was boosted when Clinton gave him authority over the newly created President’s Council on Sustainable Development.
It will come as no surprise then that, when the Council’s Charter was revised on April 25, 1997, the “Scope of Activities” included the following direction to the Council:
Advise the President on domestic implementation of policy options to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The Council should not debate the science of global warming [emphasis added], but should instead focus on the implementation of national and local greenhouse gas reduction policies and activities, and adaptations in the U.S. economy and society that maximize environmental and social benefits, minimize economic impacts, and are consistent with U.S. international agreements. The Council should, at a minimum, identify and encourage potentially replicable examples of reductions in greenhouse gas emissions across diverse sectors and levels of society.
Considering that the Council was tasked with advising the President “on matters involving sustainable development,” and alternative points of view on the science of climate change were effectively excluded, it was a foregone conclusion that the Clinton administration would go in the direction Gore wanted. Indeed, in their cover letter to the President accompanying their 1999 report, Advancing Prosperity, Opportunity and a Healthy Environment for the 21st Century, the Council stated: “Our report presents consensus recommendations on how America can reduce greenhouse gas emissions and take other steps to protect the climate.”
A cornerstone of Gore’s strategy was to ensure that all high-ranking government officials who had any involvement with funding policies relating to climate change were in line with his vision. These agencies included the Department of Energy, Environmental Protection Agency, National Science Foundation, Department of Education, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
An example of his power was shown when physicist Dr. William Happer, then Director of Energy Research at the Department of Energy, testified before Congress in 1993 that scientific data did not support the hypothesis of manmade global warming. Gore saw to it that Happer was immediately fired. Fifteen years later, Happer quipped, “I had the privilege of being fired by Al Gore, since I refused to go along with his alarmism. I did not need the job that badly.”
Al Gore was also able to leverage his high visibility, his movie awards, his Nobel Prize, and his involvement in various carbon trading and other schemes into a personal fortune. When he ended his tenure as Vice President in 2001, his net worth was $2 million. By 2013, it exceeded $300 million.
Gore’s movie, An Inconvenient Truth, provided a series of graphic images showing the apocalyptic consequences that some had predicted if fossil fuels were allowed to continue warming the planet. Images included melting glaciers, dying polar bears, spreading diseases, coastal cities inundated by massive floods, cities wiped out by hurricanes and tornadoes, and food supplies exterminated by droughts.
This compelling propaganda played a major role in frightening an entire generation about the future, causing young people and many parents to feel guilty about the role that they and their country were supposedly having in destroying our beautiful planet.
Since then, Americans have been told constantly that they should feel irresponsible if they drive cars or use fossil fuel energy to heat their homes or power their businesses. A rapid, massive conversion away from coal, oil and natural gas to renewable energy sources such and wind and solar, we are told, is the only hope for saving the planet.
Now children are increasingly depressed about their future, thanks to the constant barrage of global warming propaganda that they receive at school. Indeed, they have become so brainwashed and cowed by their peers that they no longer dare to question any statement made about catastrophic climate change.
Yet, essentially everything in Gore’s climate change agenda is either wrong or highly misrepresented.
Now that he is President Donald Trump’s Senior Scientist for the National Security Council, Dr. Happer needs to show there is no “scientific consensus” on these issues, rekindle informed debate on climate and energy issues, and help bring hope, common sense and real science back into the discourse – to help end the dangerous mythology of dangerous manmade global warming.
By Jay Lehr, Tom Harris
October 19, 2018
Although his science is often seriously wrong, no one can deny that Al Gore has a flare for the dramatic. Speaking about climate change in an October 12 PBS interview, the former vice-president proclaimed, “We have a global emergency.” Referring to the most recent UN climate report, Gore claimed it showed that current global warming “could actually extend to an existential threat to human civilization on this planet as we know it.”
Al Gore’s overblown rhetoric makes no sense, of course. Yet his hyperbolic claims beg the question: How did this all start?
Back in the 1970s, media articles warning of imminent climate change problems began to appear regularly. TIME and Newsweek ran multiple cover stories asserting that oil companies and America’s capitalist life style were causing catastrophic damage to Earth’s climate. They claimed scientists were almost unanimous in their opinion that manmade climate change would reduce agricultural productivity for the rest of the century.
The April 28, 1975 Newsweek proposed solutions that even included outlawing internal combustion engines.
This sounds very similar to today’s climate change debate – except, in the 70s, the fear was manmade global cooling, not warming.
TIME magazine’s January 31, 1977 cover featured a story, “How to Survive The Coming Ice Age.” It included “facts” such as scientists predicting that Earth’s so-called average temperature could drop by 20 degrees Fahrenheit due to manmade global cooling. Dr. Murray Mitchell of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration warned readers that “the drop in temperature between 1945 and 1968 had taken us one sixth of the way to the next Ice Age temperature.”
Global cooling gained considerable traction with the general public. But then, instead of cooling as long predicted by manmade climate change advocates, the planet started warming again. Something had to be done to rescue the climate change agenda from utter disaster. Enter Al Gore.
Al Gore Sr., a powerful Senator from Tennessee, saw to it that his son was elected to the House of Representatives, serving from 1977 to 1985, then going on to the Senate from 1985 to 1993. Gore Junior’s primary issue was his conviction that the Earth would perish if we did not eliminate fossil fuels.
Gore advanced to Vice President under President Bill Clinton, where he was able to enact policies and direct funding to ensure that the climate change agenda became a top priority of the United States Government. Gore’s mission was boosted when Clinton gave him authority over the newly created President’s Council on Sustainable Development.
It will come as no surprise then that, when the Council’s Charter was revised on April 25, 1997, the “Scope of Activities” included the following direction to the Council:
Advise the President on domestic implementation of policy options to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The Council should not debate the science of global warming [emphasis added], but should instead focus on the implementation of national and local greenhouse gas reduction policies and activities, and adaptations in the U.S. economy and society that maximize environmental and social benefits, minimize economic impacts, and are consistent with U.S. international agreements. The Council should, at a minimum, identify and encourage potentially replicable examples of reductions in greenhouse gas emissions across diverse sectors and levels of society.
Considering that the Council was tasked with advising the President “on matters involving sustainable development,” and alternative points of view on the science of climate change were effectively excluded, it was a foregone conclusion that the Clinton administration would go in the direction Gore wanted. Indeed, in their cover letter to the President accompanying their 1999 report, Advancing Prosperity, Opportunity and a Healthy Environment for the 21st Century, the Council stated: “Our report presents consensus recommendations on how America can reduce greenhouse gas emissions and take other steps to protect the climate.”
A cornerstone of Gore’s strategy was to ensure that all high-ranking government officials who had any involvement with funding policies relating to climate change were in line with his vision. These agencies included the Department of Energy, Environmental Protection Agency, National Science Foundation, Department of Education, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
An example of his power was shown when physicist Dr. William Happer, then Director of Energy Research at the Department of Energy, testified before Congress in 1993 that scientific data did not support the hypothesis of manmade global warming. Gore saw to it that Happer was immediately fired. Fifteen years later, Happer quipped, “I had the privilege of being fired by Al Gore, since I refused to go along with his alarmism. I did not need the job that badly.”
Al Gore was also able to leverage his high visibility, his movie awards, his Nobel Prize, and his involvement in various carbon trading and other schemes into a personal fortune. When he ended his tenure as Vice President in 2001, his net worth was $2 million. By 2013, it exceeded $300 million.
Gore’s movie, An Inconvenient Truth, provided a series of graphic images showing the apocalyptic consequences that some had predicted if fossil fuels were allowed to continue warming the planet. Images included melting glaciers, dying polar bears, spreading diseases, coastal cities inundated by massive floods, cities wiped out by hurricanes and tornadoes, and food supplies exterminated by droughts.
This compelling propaganda played a major role in frightening an entire generation about the future, causing young people and many parents to feel guilty about the role that they and their country were supposedly having in destroying our beautiful planet.
Since then, Americans have been told constantly that they should feel irresponsible if they drive cars or use fossil fuel energy to heat their homes or power their businesses. A rapid, massive conversion away from coal, oil and natural gas to renewable energy sources such and wind and solar, we are told, is the only hope for saving the planet.
Now children are increasingly depressed about their future, thanks to the constant barrage of global warming propaganda that they receive at school. Indeed, they have become so brainwashed and cowed by their peers that they no longer dare to question any statement made about catastrophic climate change.
Yet, essentially everything in Gore’s climate change agenda is either wrong or highly misrepresented.
Now that he is President Donald Trump’s Senior Scientist for the National Security Council, Dr. Happer needs to show there is no “scientific consensus” on these issues, rekindle informed debate on climate and energy issues, and help bring hope, common sense and real science back into the discourse – to help end the dangerous mythology of dangerous manmade global warming.
How Al Gore Built the Global Warming Fraud - The Heartland Institute
And changed the alarmism from global cooling to global warming, and now climate change.
heartland.org
I have trouble finding the climate model capable of simulation of
and prediction of global climate changes caused by global warming in
the event carbon emission level is above current level by 2030. If you
can point to me a study that reports such a model I'd be grateful. So
far I've only been able to dig out reports of predictions based on
simulation of regional as opposed to global climate change.
Wang L, Liu X, Brown H. Prediction of the impacts of climate change on energy consumption for a medium-size office building with two climate models. Energy and Buildings. 2017 Dec 15;157:218-26.
Logan JA, Régnière J, Powell JA. Assessing the impacts of global warming on forest pest dynamics. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment. 2003 Apr;1(3):130-7.
Gebrewahid Y, Abrehe S, Meresa E, Eyasu G, Abay K, Gebreab G, Kidanemariam K, Adissu G, Abreha G, Darcha G. Current and future predicting potential areas of Oxytenanthera abyssinica (A. Richard) using MaxEnt model under climate change in Northern Ethiopia. Ecological Processes. 2020 Dec;9(1):1-5.
Li Y, Li M, Li C, Liu Z. Optimized maxent model predictions of climate change impacts on the suitable distribution of cunninghamia lanceolata in China. Forests. 2020 Mar 9;11(3):302.
The Heartland Institute is a fossil fuel funded disinformation site.How Al Gore Built the Global Warming Fraud
How Al Gore Built the Global Warming Fraud - The Heartland Institute
And changed the alarmism from global cooling to global warming, and now climate change.heartland.org
They are evil, they take money to lie about what the oil&gas industry is doing to the planet.
The part where Greenland or the poles are supposed to melt.
I'm still waiting for my palm trees in Toronto to sprout up
On ignore: Reality
‘Not a good sign’: Study shows Greenland temperatures at 1,000-year high
Collecting core samples from the Greenland ice sheet is no easy task. During a recent expedition, scientists and drilling experts boarded a ski-equipped aircraft and flew to a site at an elevation of about 3,000 meters (9,800 feet) above sea level in central-north Greenland. Then they drilled...
news.mongabay.com
Do not worry they can easily rebuild elsewhere. Most cannot.
The day there is palm trees in TO be prepared to welcome the millions of migrants who won’t be able to live down south..
I have been smoking for about 2 weeks. Haven't got cancer yest so I guess all the science is wrong.
The Greenland Ice sheet is melting at a horrific pace.
Yes, The Rideau Canal was let down because the temperatures were "TOOO COOOOOLD"!!2023 is yet another regular, cold winter here in Toronto.
Every year I keep hoping the Libtards are right and we have a warmer winter, and every year they let me down
Rideau Canal Skateway won't open for 1st time in 53-year history
The Rideau Canal Skateway will not open for skating this winter, the first time the world's largest skateway will not open for skaters.
This is all very simple: If people like me are wrong, okay, no problem. If people like you are wrong, we're fucking dead. I would rather not gamble on it.
My part in this discussion is over.
