The new official climate change thread

[Moviefan-2]

Oh, look -- here's NASA's graph of the changes in the Earth's temperature from 1880 to 2015.

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/Fig.A2.gif

For some reason, NASA is using annual temperature anomalies, rather than 30-year rolling averages.

I guess someone forgot to tell the big shots at NASA that what they're doing is "hilariously, totally wrong." :biggrin-new:

 

[JohnLarue]

We don't need to replace it all, its been explained to you multiple times before.
Don't blame me if you can't follow the arguments.

I can blame you if you are a back tracking POS liar

Post #83
I asked

Can you explain how you expect to replace a growing 100 MM bbl/day of crude oil consumption?

You replied in post # 85

Never said it was going to be easy.
But it still has to be done.

And now you say something completely different

Your words are worthless

No, that was a 10 year long study on the effects of CO2 increases in the atmosphere, it wasn't a study that needed any more time.
You really can't follow anything technical can you?
You can't tell the difference between a study on CO2 increases and research on historical temperatures, can you?

I can tell a bullshit lair when I see one

Are you still trying to defend the work of the shyster who pulled one over on you?
The idiot who tried to switch between surface temperature and stratosphere temperatures as a way of hiding surface temperature increases?
Are you really so daft that you couldn't confirm this yourself?
You provided a link and you really are totally unable to look into whether you were played for a fool by deniers or are backing a credible source?
If you can't even look into such an incredibly simple question, how the fuck do you think you are smart enough to judge the real science?

Are so stupid you can not make sense of
"He asked some questions that need to be answered"

BTW I have a degree in Science you moron

 

[JohnLarue]

John can you also look into the 3 cents per kwhr story and tell me if you think the deal is legit. I still have a hard time accepting that figure and would like a 2nd opinion.

With regards to sucking cock for gasoline, please consider that a econobox car can get maybe 600 km per tank of gas, which right now costs maybe 50 bucks to fill up. Imagine you had to walk 600 km, you might be able to do that in 2 weeks time if you put alot of effort into walking. Imagine you had to walk 600km while pushing 2000 lbs, that might take you the better part of a year. The energy density in gasoline is incredible, if energy becomes expensive or barriers are put into place to stop the explotation of energy, it will end our civilization.

I do not do research on request

If global warming is true it may very well be the end of civilization
If it is down to the activities of man that will be our ultimate sin
If it is down to the natural cycle of the planet, then our time here was always meant to be finite

 

[bishop]

But that is exactly what the UN wants to happen, DE-industrialize the advanced countries of the world is what that slime have proposed.

And your point about the energy density of gasoline, will make other forms of energy storage for individuals transportation a very long way off.

But if and when it is replaced, it will be because, as you have already stated, but ignored by our resident anarchist, by something developed by the the free enterprise system, NOT some death wish by some self appointed experts at the UN.

FAST

The problem of AGW be it real or not, is transformed into a technological problem when solar reached 3 cents per kwhr. At this price, solar will take care of itself because the financial incentive is there now and the existing industry that now churns out iphones and samsung galaxy phones every 12 months will bring it's guns to bear into solar. Solar panels will be a commodity, like RAM or flash is right now, I mean a really liquid market.

Energy storage is the other half of the equation, but the part that I thought was the hardest the coversion of solar energy into electricty at affordable prices seems to have materialize. Energy storage is a huge problem, but most tech is limited by energy storage, by that I mean Apple, samsung, Intel, etc... probably fund or do battery R&D research themselves, if you add in massive money from the solar industry ontop of the already massive money from existing tech companies, the scales of economies behind battery tech and research is enormous.

I am not saying that we will make breakthroughs into new battery tech tommorow that will be magical, but what I am saying is that right now or very soon is the perfect storm for new magical battery tech to happen because all the inventives and objectives of so many people are aligned or will be aligned. We will never reach 100% efficientcy in solar panels or energy storage, but if it is a technological problem (not talking about super crazy shit like time travel and faster than light travel) then we will be a cock hair from 100% efficientcy in due time (maybe 50-100 years)

3 cent per kwhr solar creates a postive feedback system, everything good about humanity will be better with 3 cent solar and everything bad about humanity will be made less bad. The repurcussions of this new solar price is unfathomable.

 

[fuji]

Oh, look -- here's NASA's graph of the changes in the Earth's temperature from 1880 to 2015.

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/Fig.A2.gif

For some reason, NASA is using annual temperature anomalies, rather than 30-year rolling averages.

I guess someone forgot to tell the big shots at NASA that what they're doing is "hilariously, totally wrong." :biggrin-new:

What the fuck are you even still trying to debate?

1980 -0.9
1981 0.8
1982 1.3
1983 2.0
1984 2.9
1985 3.7
1986 4.8
1987 5.9
1988 6.8
1989 7.8
1990 9.1
1991 10.3
1992 11.5
1993 12.3
1994 12.9
1995 14.9
1996 16.5
1997 17.8
1998 19.8
1999 21.8
2000 22.9
2001 24.5
2002 26.8
2003 28.3
2004 30.3
2005 32.2
2006 34.6
2007 37.0
2008 38.3
2009 40.1
2010 41.7
2011 42.8
2012 44.1
2013 45.5
2014 47.0
2015 49.2
2016 51.9

Do you see something other than indisputable warming in that data?

Your claim: no warming

Reality: significant uninterrupted warming

You are done.

 

[bishop]

I do not do research on request

If global warming is true it may very well be the end of civilization
If it is down to the activities of man that will be our ultimate sin
If it is down to the natural cycle of the planet, then our time here was always meant to be finite

John, I am not asking you to do a dissertation on that story, I am not even asking you to invest the 30 minutes that I spent into googling it and following the links. I am asking that you take that 5 minutes that you used to post your 2nd guessing if 3 cents per kwhr is true or not and use that 5 minutes to google the story and tell me what you think.

John if I thought you were not well educated; I would not ask you for your opinioin.

 

[Frankfooter]

OK, the 1.5ºC was the average of the anomalies for three El Nino months: http://www.climatecentral.org/news/world-flirts-with-1.5C-threshold-20260

Thank you for confirming that we are at 1.5ºC, not 1ºC as you claimed.
That, my trollish friend is what you like to refer to as 'spectacularly wrong'.

The Earth's overall temperature has increased about 1ºC

 

[Frankfooter]

But that is exactly what the UN wants to happen, DE-industrialize the advanced countries of the world is what that slime have proposed.
FAST

Talk about your crazy, fucking nutso, conspiracy theories!
Thanks for clarifying that you really do represent the fringe, crazy, nutso, right wing side of the denier spectrum.

 

[Frankfooter]

I can blame you if you are a back tracking POS liar
Post #83
I asked
You replied in post # 85
And now you say something completely different

May I remind you of your own words?

If it is driven by man-kind then doing nothing would be the biggest sin man-kind ever committed

I can tell a bullshit lair when I see one

Is the bullshit lair the place where you keep all your ideas?

Are so stupid you can not make sense of
"He asked some questions that need to be answered"

BTW I have a degree in Science you moron

Did you order off the back of a pack of matches?
Really, you are incredibly incompetent on the issues of research and comprehension.
How many times have I asked you to go back and look at the link and 'research' you provided, after showing you how you were totally suckered by shoddy work.
And here you still are, and you've totally failed to be able to understand the link you gave us, understand the points I made and understand where you went wrong.
If you got a degree in science then we really need to look at our education system.

 

[Frankfooter]

The problem of AGW be it real or not, is transformed into a technological problem when solar reached 3 cents per kwhr. At this price, solar will take care of itself because the financial incentive is there now and the existing industry that now churns out iphones and samsung galaxy phones every 12 months will bring it's guns to bear into solar. Solar panels will be a commodity, like RAM or flash is right now, I mean a really liquid market.

Energy storage is the other half of the equation, but the part that I thought was the hardest the coversion of solar energy into electricty at affordable prices seems to have materialize. Energy storage is a huge problem, but most tech is limited by energy storage, by that I mean Apple, samsung, Intel, etc... probably fund or do battery R&D research themselves, if you add in massive money from the solar industry ontop of the already massive money from existing tech companies, the scales of economies behind battery tech and research is enormous.

I am not saying that we will make breakthroughs into new battery tech tommorow that will be magical, but what I am saying is that right now or very soon is the perfect storm for new magical battery tech to happen because all the inventives and objectives of so many people are aligned or will be aligned. We will never reach 100% efficientcy in solar panels or energy storage, but if it is a technological problem (not talking about super crazy shit like time travel and faster than light travel) then we will be a cock hair from 100% efficientcy in due time (maybe 50-100 years)

3 cent per kwhr solar creates a postive feedback system, everything good about humanity will be better with 3 cent solar and everything bad about humanity will be made less bad. The repurcussions of this new solar price is unfathomable.

Hey bishop, I totally appreciate that you are here on this thread, asking questions and really evaluating the information that comes out.
It does show you have an open mind and a willingness to accept change that is commendable.

Now, I do have to ask you if you looked at the train car/batter research that I showed you.
Most battery systems we use are chemical based, the advantage of the train car idea is that its mechanical, cheap and doesn't require much tech to achieve storage in the 50 MW range, scalable up to 2-3 GW.
Did you look into this research?
Do you see problems with it?

 

[Frankfooter]

If global warming is true it may very well be the end of civilization
If it is down to the activities of man that will be our ultimate sin

97% of the research says its true and due to the activities of man.
What percentage would it take to change your mind?

 

[Moviefan-2]

Thank you for confirming that we are at 1.5ºC, not 1ºC as you claimed.

Say what?

There are more than three months in a calendar year. Surely, even you know that.

You can't compare a three-month average with annual averages. Comparing annual averages with annual averages, the increase over 135 years has been about 1ºC.

 

[Moviefan-2]

Oh, look -- here's the HadCRUT4 data released monthly by the Met Office in the U.K.

https://crudata.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/HadCRUT4.pdf

For some reason, the Met Office is using annual temperature anomalies, rather than 30-year rolling averages.

I guess someone forgot to tell the big shots at the Met Office that what they're doing is "hilariously, totally wrong." :biggrin-new:

 

[Moviefan-2]

I am not saying that we will make breakthroughs into new battery tech tommorow that will be magical, but what I am saying is that right now or very soon is the perfect storm for new magical battery tech to happen because all the inventives and objectives of so many people are aligned or will be aligned. We will never reach 100% efficientcy in solar panels or energy storage, but if it is a technological problem (not talking about super crazy shit like time travel and faster than light travel) then we will be a cock hair from 100% efficientcy in due time (maybe 50-100 years).

I don't think you guys understand -- the entire premise behind the AGW hypothesis is that there will be no change whatsoever over the next 100 years.

That's a sound premise -- isn't it?

 

[Frankfooter]

Say what?

There are more than three months in a calendar year. Surely, even you know that.

You can't compare a three-month average with annual averages. Comparing annual averages with annual averages, the increase over 135 years has been about 1ºC.

The last twelve months were record breaking warm months. This isn't a 'three month' trend, this is a continuation of the warming we have been seeing for a long time.
At present 2016's anomaly is about 1.5ºC, the temperature at which the permafrost may melt, releasing more sequestered CO2 that will act as a further feedback mechanism.

Real Global Temperature Trend, p21 – Science is ruthless. We have ‘about zero’ years of emissions to stay below 1.5 degrees

http://www.bitsofscience.org/real-global-temperature-trend-science-emissions-1-5-degrees-7129/

While you sit here pretending nothing unusual is happening, the world is changing.

Furthermore, even if February 2016 was 2ºC warmer than the average February temperature from 200 years ago, so what? That doesn't prove that something unusual or unprecedented has occurred.

Do you just keep denying regardless of what happens?
How hot does the planet have to get before you admit you are wrong?

 

[Frankfooter]

Oh, look -- here's the HadCRUT4 data released monthly by the Met Office in the U.K.

The Met Office says 2016 will hit yet another global temperature record.

The Met also released a projection for the next five years temperatures.

1 February 2016 - The latest Met Office decadal forecast predicts global temperatures for the five-year period from 2016 to 2020

The forecast will be between 0.28 °C and 0.77 °C above the long-term (1981-2010) average. For comparison, 2015 - currently the warmest year on record in the Met Office series dating back to 1850 - was 0.44 °C (±0.1 °C) above the 1981-2010 long-term average.

This forecast also suggests global temperatures over the next five years are likely to be well within, or even in the upper half, of the range of warming expected by the CMIP5 models, as used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/mobile/news/article/news/releases/archive/2016/decadal-forecast

Are you still backing the work of the Met Office?
Even as they project that the world will warm at or at the high end of IPCC projections for the next five years?

 

[Frankfooter]

One more post before I'm off to enjoy the lovely weather.

Nature: climate change leads to 67-84 percent intraspecific biodiversity loss by 2080 – Holocene Mass Extinction within this century

http://www.bitsofscience.org/climate-biodiversity-loss-holocene-mass-extinction-2800/

That's just one study, and it points a more depressing result then others, one of which say it might take 300 years for this mass extinction event to take place.
But still, 64 years until a global mass extinction if we do nothing.

As larue noted:

If it is driven by man-kind then doing nothing would be the biggest sin man-kind ever committed

 

[fuji]

I don't think you guys understand -- the entire premise behind the AGW hypothesis is that there will be no change whatsoever over the next 100 years.

That's a sound premise -- isn't it?

Only climate deniers talk about "the AGW hypothesis". The only thing you could call "the AGW hypothesis" is that humans have caused warming, and that's proven.

Beyond that there are numerous hypotheses but nobody other than loons on anti scientific climate denier website tries to talk about it as a single hypothesis.

Now let's talk about who has been more wrong. Your hypothesis was that there has been no warming, but:

1980 -0.9
1981 0.8
1982 1.3
1983 2.0
1984 2.9
1985 3.7
1986 4.8
1987 5.9
1988 6.8
1989 7.8
1990 9.1
1991 10.3
1992 11.5
1993 12.3
1994 12.9
1995 14.9
1996 16.5
1997 17.8
1998 19.8
1999 21.8
2000 22.9
2001 24.5
2002 26.8
2003 28.3
2004 30.3
2005 32.2
2006 34.6
2007 37.0
2008 38.3
2009 40.1
2010 41.7
2011 42.8
2012 44.1
2013 45.5
2014 47.0
2015 49.2
2016 51.9

I note that you are absolutely running from this data which utterly proves you wrong and shows you whole worldview to be a sad joke.

 

[Moviefan-2]

At present 2016's anomaly is about 1.5ºC, the temperature at which the permafrost may melt, releasing more sequestered CO2 that will act as a further feedback mechanism.

According to NASA, the April anomaly dropped by 0.18ºC to 1.1ºC. And the first satellite results for May show the temperature is continuing to drop at a significant rate.

The El Nino weather phenomenon is over. Time to find something new to whip up phony alarmism.

 

[Frankfooter]

According to NASA, the April anomaly dropped by 0.18ºC to 1.1ºC.

It was also the 12th recording breaking monthly temperature in a row.
But as you say:

There are more than three months in a calendar year. Surely, even you know that.

And there you go trying to claim that one month makes a trend.

Mann calculates that El Nino may have added 0.1ºC to 2015's temperature, that it would still have been a record warm year without El Nino.

And as NOAA noted:

The combined average temperature over global land and ocean surfaces for April 2016 was 1.10°C (1.98°F) above the 20th century average of 13.7°C (56.7°F)—the highest temperature departure for April since global records began in 1880. This value surpassed the previous record set in 2010 by 0.28°C (0.50°F). This was also the fourth highest monthly temperature departure among all 1,636 months on record, behind March 2016 (1.23°C/2.21°F), February 2016 (1.19°C/2.14°F), and December 2015 (1.12°C/2.02°F). Overall, 13 out of the 15 highest monthly temperature departures in the record have all occurred since February 2015, with February 1998 and January 2007 among the 15 highest monthly temperature departures. April 2016 also marks the fifth consecutive month (since December 2015) that the global monthly temperature departure from average has surpassed 1.0°C (1.8°F) and it is the 12th consecutive month a monthly global temperature record has been broken, the longest such streak in NOAA's 137 years of record keeping.

https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/201604

2016's anomaly is around 1.5ºC.
How high does it have to get before you stop claiming its not anything unusual?