Announcement

Collapse

Natural Science 301 Guidelines

This is an open forum area for all members for discussions on all issues of science and origins. This area will and does get volatile at times, but we ask that it be kept to a dull roar, and moderators will intervene to keep the peace if necessary. This means obvious trolling and flaming that becomes a problem will be dealt with, and you might find yourself in the doghouse.

As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

‘Alarming’ Study Claiming Global Warming Heating Up Oceans Based on Math Error

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
    Laughing heads are not coherent answers.
    Neither are bald assertions.
    That's what
    - She

    Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
    - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

    I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
    - Stephen R. Donaldson

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
      And those records show many cycles of warming and cooling that were happening long before men came along or could have any influence over the climate.
      The thing is the there is no other source for the current warming. The sun is moribund, we're not in any odd cycle astronomically, etc. The only thing we can point to is atmospheric CO2 increasing from 320ppm to 405ppm due to human activity.

      Originally posted by Sparko View Post
      They have been going on about this since the 1980s and we should all be underwater or baked to death by now.
      Ah yes, the unnamed "they" who say so many things. I'm not aware of any climate scientist or geophysicist saying that "we should all be underwater or baked to death by now". Have you got a citation?

      Originally posted by Sparko View Post
      I can't tell that the climate around here has changed much at all in the last 40 years. I remember having winters when I was a kid where I could run around in shorts. I can remember summers that were so hot we couldn't go outside. I have experienced the same and the opposite many times in the intervening decades.
      The weather where Sparko is =/= global climate. I can tell you that winters in north Texas have become like extensions of fall, which itself is more like an extension of summer. Twenty years ago it would start cooling at least by State Fair time, but now it's warm right up until December. But these anecdotes don't matter. The long term global data are what matter and they point to the earth warming.

      Originally posted by Sparko View Post
      But I have noticed that the newspapers, the politicians, and many scientists trying to promote AGW will indeed selectively choose to claim a particularly hot summer or unusual event like more hurricanes in a year or more wildfires, and claim it is evidence of AGW, and even when questioned about unusually cold winters, still claim that it is evidence of AGW.
      Hold the phone! You mean global and regional weather patterns are complex and are effected by climate change? I don't know why the whole winter weather being effected by global warming thing is so confusing. No one is claiming that winters should have ceased to exist by 2005 or that it will never snow again and more water vapor in the air due to warming will cause greater snowfall. Additionally the warming has caused the Polar Vortex to slide off it's normal position and bring a lot of cold weather down into the northeastern part of the U.S. while the rest of the world has warmer temperatures.

      Originally posted by Sparko View Post
      But I have also noticed that they have subtlety changed the terminology to "Climate Change" over the last decade or so in order to cover all bases.
      The phrases have been used interchangeably since the 1970s. And the first use of global warming was in a 1975 paper, the title of which used both phrases:
      https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17781884
      Climatic change: are we on the brink of a pronounced global warming?

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
        Because I don't see any STRONG evidence. I just see weak correlations and chicken little claims of doom that never materialize.
        Well they do materialise. The planet's average surface temperature has risen about 1.62 degrees Fahrenheit since the late 19th century, i.e. solid correlation of global warming. The five warmest years on record have occurred since 2010.

        But, even if the evidence was not so strong you still haven’t explained your remarkable indifference to the possible catastrophic changes to the planet which will affect us all. Still waiting!

        Again, that is merely an assertion that the wildfires are caused by global warming. Exactly what I said. They use such things as "proof" of global warming and then when we have a very bad winter or a series of them, that is called "weather, not climate" or they have the audacity to claim that is further proof of AGW.
        The record wildfires are an indirect result of global warming in that forest conditions are excessively dry and exacerbate the fires...just as the seas have warmed to the extent that the corals of the Great Barrier Reef are dying and the glaciers are melting at the Poles.

        And, who is “they” making these claims...I’ve never heard these claims except from climate-change deniers in mocking mode.
        Last edited by Tassman; 12-14-2018, 03:59 AM.
        “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Bret View Post
          The thing is the there is no other source for the current warming. The sun is moribund, we're not in any odd cycle astronomically, etc. The only thing we can point to is atmospheric CO2 increasing from 320ppm to 405ppm due to human activity.



          Ah yes, the unnamed "they" who say so many things. I'm not aware of any climate scientist or geophysicist saying that "we should all be underwater or baked to death by now". Have you got a citation?
          the paper referred to in the OP for one. Al Gore and various other MSM sources that constantly popularize Global Warming.


          The weather where Sparko is =/= global climate. I can tell you that winters in north Texas have become like extensions of fall, which itself is more like an extension of summer. Twenty years ago it would start cooling at least by State Fair time, but now it's warm right up until December. But these anecdotes don't matter. The long term global data are what matter and they point to the earth warming.
          I have lived in Germany, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, Kentucky, Oklahoma, and several other places. How about you?

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
            Neither are bald assertions.
            No bald assertions just science without a personal or religious agenda.
            Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
            Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
            But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

            go with the flow the river knows . . .

            Frank

            I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
              No.
              Yes, your objections show selective bias. If he mirrored your concern he would have resolved your issues of confirmation bias.
              Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
              Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
              But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

              go with the flow the river knows . . .

              Frank

              I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                Yes, your objections show selective bias. If he mirrored your concern he would have resolved your issues of confirmation bias.
                Nope.
                The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                  the paper referred to in the OP for one. Al Gore and various other MSM sources that constantly popularize Global Warming.
                  So, what about the ninety-seven percent of climate scientists, who agree that climate-warming trends over the past century are very likely due to human activities, and most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide, which have issued public statements endorsing this position.

                  But, even if the evidence was not as strong as it clearly is, you still haven’t explained your remarkable indifference to the possible catastrophic changes to the planet which will affect us all. Why is this?
                  “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                  Comment


                  • Republicans, wake the frig up. What is wrong with your brains? How many studies do you need to see before you stop acting like ignorant fools?


                    http://www.cnn.com/2018/11/23/climat...-bn/index.html

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by JimL View Post
                      How many studies do you need to see before you stop acting like ignorant fools?
                      You've never needed any excuse.
                      The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                        So, what about the ninety-seven percent of climate scientists, who agree that climate-warming trends over the past century are very likely due to human activities, and most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide, which have issued public statements endorsing this position.

                        But, even if the evidence was not as strong as it clearly is, you still haven’t explained your remarkable indifference to the possible catastrophic changes to the planet which will affect us all. Why is this?
                        science by consensus. An oxymoron.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by JimL View Post
                          Republicans, wake the frig up. What is wrong with your brains? How many studies do you need to see before you stop acting like ignorant fools?


                          http://www.cnn.com/2018/11/23/climat...-bn/index.html
                          Jesus will save them.
                          “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                            science by consensus. An oxymoron.
                            Science by accepting the amassed scientific facts.
                            “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                              Jesus will save them.
                              Ah, back to that steaming pile of horsie poo.
                              The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                                Science by accepting the amassed scientific facts.
                                If something is true a lot of scientists will believe it is true, but a lot of scientists believing something is true doesn't make it true. Two different things. You keep arguing it is true because it is the scientific consensus. The scientific consensus has been wrong over and over in the past, that is how science advances. Like plate tectonics, or germ theory. At one point the new theory that destroys the consensus is a minority view that the consensus fights against.

                                you keep putting the cart before the horse and calling that science.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-18-2024, 12:15 PM
                                48 responses
                                136 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Sparko
                                by Sparko
                                 
                                Started by Sparko, 03-07-2024, 08:52 AM
                                16 responses
                                74 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Started by rogue06, 02-28-2024, 11:06 AM
                                6 responses
                                48 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Working...
                                X