Ideal earth temperature.
« prev   random   next »

5
4

Ideal earth temperature.

By Onvacation following x   2017 Sep 15, 10:01am 2,510 views   41 comments   watch   sfw   quote     share    


Everyone knows that without the greenhouse effect earth would be a lifeless frozen ball.

What is the ideal temp for human life on earth? Warmer? Cooler? By how many degrees?

Alarmists never answer.

#globalwarming
2   anonymous   ignore (null)   2017 Sep 15, 10:20am   ↑ like (4)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote        

You are being too easy on the alarmists. I mean, they can simply pull a number out of their orifices (and claim that the pull process was "peer reviewed and scientific").

How about more diffuclt questions? Such as....

1. Ever since 2000, alarmists have incessantly claimed multiple time that the rate of temperature increase we currently observe is 'greater than ever'. In order to claim that, you (alarmists) must have quantified and compared that statement. Please show your source (published before 2000), which answers the following questions -- what is the rate of change today, in degrees per decade, and what was the rate of change a hundred years ago, in degrees per decade? What is the rate of change today, in degrees per century, and what was the rate of change a thousand years ago, in degrees per century? What is the rate of change today, in degrees per millenia, and what was the rate of change ten thousand years ago, in degrees per millenia?

2. Over that past three decades, alarmists have made a number of dire predictions which never came true -- from melting Himalayan glaciers to sixty million climate refugees. When confronted, the excuse was that those predictions weren't really predictions -- either they were made by a journalist, or not published in a peer reivewed paper, or were surrounded with weasel words such as "may", "likely". Are there any predictions that are not made with weasel words? Is there anything that could possibly falsify the Catastrophic Global Warming caused by Antrhopoghenic CO2 emissions hypothesis? By the way, a hypothesis that can not be falsified is a textbook example of pseudoscience.

3. How does CAGW hypothesis fare as compared to the null hypothesis? Suppose someone in 2000 were to build a climate model which assumed no connection between CO2 and temperature, which would assume instead that things would go on as normal, things would go on as they did in 20th, 19th and 18th century. Today, we are comparing the predictions of that model with Hansen's three scenarios. Which model of the four is closer to what we observe today?

And, of course, don't forget to watch brilliant R. Feyinman.

Yours truly, a1232
3   Onvacation   ignore (1)   2017 Sep 15, 11:14am   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

Currently the average earth temperature is 61 degrees. How far from ideal are we?
4   Onvacation   ignore (1)   2017 Sep 15, 11:15am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

anonymous says
what is the rate of change today, in degrees per decade, and what was the rate of change a hundred years ago, in degrees per decade?


Great questions!
Alarmists have an answer?
5   Heraclitusstudent   ignore (1)   2017 Sep 15, 11:52am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote        

If temperatures are changing even a few degrees, it means hundreds of millions of people even billions of people will have to move out some areas. At the very least flooded areas like Florida.
Sure it will be great in Siberia.
Considering the havoc created by a couple of millions moving to Europe recently, it's left to the imagination to figure out what 100 millions, 500 millions, or 2 billions would look like.
6   FNWGMOBDVZXDNW   ignore (2)   2017 Sep 15, 12:15pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (4)   quote        

When a building is on fire, alarmists ring an alarm. Deniers just sit in the basement asking if there is proof that the fire department will not put out the fire before it gets to him. The alarmists runs out of the building to fresh air. The denier asks what the optimum amount of CO in the air is.

The trolls ask the same questions over and over and over again. Only the insane will answer forever.
7   anonymous   ignore (null)   2017 Sep 15, 7:59pm   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

Heraclitusstudent says
If temperatures are changing even a few degrees, it means


You sound very certain. Are you certain because it is predicted by the climate computer models -- the same models that have overestimated warning in 21st century by somewhere between two and six fold?
8   Onvacation   ignore (1)   2017 Sep 16, 7:58am   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

YesYNot says
When a building is on fire, alarmists ring an alarm.

When the boy calls wolf too many times, no one believes him any more.

Wasn't the ice supposed to be gone and Manhattan flooded to the second floor by now?

If the science is settled why are scientists still debating?
9   HEY YOU   ignore (7)   2017 Sep 16, 8:37am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (3)   quote        

Man can live in extreme conditions.
The important temperature is what's the maximum temp at which plants can maintain their nutritious value,
for man & all the animals he eats.

No one will read this long work & it's links.
"I don't have time to read this."
You just don't realize that you don't have much time left.

https://guymcpherson.com/climate-chaos/climate-change-summary-and-update/
10   Tenpoundbass   ignore (8)   2017 Sep 16, 8:48am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

I know the idea human body temperature is 97F.
So far I haven't had a problem keeping that.
11   Onvacation   ignore (1)   2017 Sep 16, 9:35am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

HEY YOU says
You just don't realize that you don't have much time left.

The article indicates that it is too late. How much time do you think we have before climate change starts mass killing of humans? A couple years? Decades?
If 2 more degrees means mass death what is the ideal temp? One degree less than now?

Can any of you alarmists commit to a number?
12   TwoScoopsPlissken   ignore (2)   2017 Sep 16, 2:10pm   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

No answer will be forthcoming since everybody knows there are shells and fossilized sea creatures at the top of the Appalachian Mountains, known since before Jefferson's time.

Must have been the SUVs and Radio Factories of the Pangean Continent, operated by the Elder Things before Cthulhu laid dreaming in R'lyeh.

Or that in the Stone Age, when Modern Humans were around, the English Channel was above water and you could walk from what is today Amsterdam to Manchester without getting your feet yet.

Maybe the Hotep shit is true and the Black Pharaohs from the time-before-time sucked a lot of carbon out of atmosphere, raising the lands. India also had a fatter coastline.
13   Booger   ignore (0)   2017 Sep 16, 7:45pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

Thunderdome?
14   TwoScoopsPlissken   ignore (2)   2017 Sep 16, 8:01pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

For the curious, meet Doggerland.



Widespread Stone and Bone Tools, Widespread Fishing, Postholes that may have held up relatively large 'longhouse' or even crannog type structures, Possible Dog Domestication. Sometime after 7000BC a series of megatsunamis, possibly set off by a huge landslide in Viking Island (Now Sunk, between the Faroes and Norway), and huge lake drains in North America submerged Doggerland permanently. When Doggerland disappeared, humans were just beginning to domesticate pigs and dogs, and the first stirrings of agriculture began in Turkey, Mesopotamia, China, and Mesoamerica.

Finding human-crafted antler barbs and stone spearheads from Oil Rigs in the North Sea or from Fishing Trawlers isn't unheard of; Anatomically Modern Humans in the Mid-Stone Age (Doggerland disappeared almost exactly in the cusp between the Early and Late Stone Age) inhabited this now-sunken land.

Again, this isn't ancient Geology, but less than 10,000 years ago in the Holocene (Modern) Era. Here's a map of the glacier coverage of Europe from a mere 20,000 years ago, just prior to the Holocene:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doggerland#/media/File:Doggerland3er_en.png
15   HEY YOU   ignore (7)   2017 Sep 16, 8:50pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (2)   quote        

Onvacation says
Can any of you alarmists commit to a number?


No one can give a definite number. We've not been in a situation where science has any experience with what man has done to the planet today.
It's new territory.
How can anyone give a number without evidence to back it up? Reminds me of those that vote for Democrats & Republicans.
Bet there is a temperature which man cannot survive & we might be closer than we think.
16   anonymous   ignore (null)   2017 Sep 16, 9:04pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

TwoScoopsMcGee says
No answer will be forthcoming since everybody knows there are shells and fossilized sea creatures at the top of the Appalachian Mountains, known since before Jefferson's time.

Shells in the mountains are usually there because mountains ranges rise over time, not because the ocean was so high as to flood mountains.

TwoScoopsMcGee says
Must have been the SUVs and Radio Factories of the Pangean Continent


There was a time when there was no oxygen on the planet. There just wasn't 7 billions people around.
17   anonymous   ignore (null)   2017 Sep 16, 9:04pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

anonymous says
Are you certain because it is predicted by the climate computer models -- the same models that have overestimated warning in 21st century by somewhere between two and six fold?


Most models essentially ballparked correctly the increase of temperature we already saw, and if anything underestimated it. (and we need is to ball park the effect because it doesn't really matter when we will reach + 20 feet of water if we do nothing).

And of course models are much more precise now than they were 20 years ago, and the message by and large has not changed.
18   lostand confused   ignore (0)   2017 Sep 16, 9:14pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

anonymous says
And of course models are much more precise now than they were 20 years ago, and the message by and large has not changed

hasn't-then why is it called climate change instead of global warming??
19   komputodo   ignore (0)   2017 Sep 16, 10:40pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

lostand confused says
anonymous says
And of course models are much more precise now than they were 20 years ago, and the message by and large has not changed

hasn't-then why is it called climate change instead of global warming??


Because you can't promote the global warming narrative in the winter.
20   Quigley   ignore (0)   2017 Sep 17, 2:10am   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

So you're saying that global warming season is almost over?
21   Onvacation   ignore (1)   2017 Sep 17, 7:33am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

anonymous says
it doesn't really matter when we will reach + 20 feet of water if we do nothing


How many feet has the water gone up so far?
22   anonymous   ignore (null)   2017 Sep 17, 8:27am   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

HEY YOU says
Bet there is a temperature which man cannot survive & we might be closer than we think


You do know people live year round in the arctic and live year round on the equator. That fact should show that mankind can adapt to a wide range of temps.

So, which one of those temps are ideal?
23   Onvacation   ignore (1)   2017 Sep 17, 9:23am   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

HEY YOU says
No one can give a definite number. We've not been in a situation where science has any experience with what man has done to the planet today.

So the science is not settled.
24   komputodo   ignore (0)   2017 Sep 17, 11:38am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

Quigley says
So you're saying that global warming season is almost over?


Well yeah. Talk to some people in Phoenix...They'll say " It's never been this hot in August, must be global warming". Then they'll get out of their air conditioned car and step into their 2200 sq ft home chilled to 68F.
25   TwoScoopsPlissken   ignore (2)   2017 Sep 17, 11:41am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote        

anonymous says
There was a time when there was no oxygen on the planet. There just wasn't 7 billions people around.


In the Carboniferous Era, the Oxygen content was substantially richer than today. Hence foot-long Dragonflies.

Sea levels have been much higher and much lower than today, also. Interglacial periods like ours are marked by temperature increases and rising sea levels. So please tell us what the ideal Earth Temperature is.
26   komputodo   ignore (0)   2017 Sep 17, 11:45am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

Onvacation says
HEY YOU says
No one can give a definite number. We've not been in a situation where science has any experience with what man has done to the planet today.

So the science is not settled


Not cool to put him on the spot like that...I think they call that "TROLLING".
27   TwoScoopsPlissken   ignore (2)   2017 Sep 17, 11:46am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

anonymous says
Most models essentially ballparked correctly the increase of temperature we already saw, and if anything underestimated it. (and we need is to ball park the effect because it doesn't really matter when we will reach + 20 feet of water if we do nothing).


Complex Models suck, even when trillions are at stake. I give you the Financial Crisis, the 1996 Asian Currency Crisis, etc.

Never take humans with models based on numerous unquantifiable (or worse, poorly qualified but believed to be well qualified) factors without a huge dollop of salt.

We only have 100 years of direct observation. On the Abyssal Plain, countless lifeforms crawling along most of the Earth's watery floor are poorly understood. So are sunspots, cloud cover, and a hundred other climatic factors that impact forcing and feedback to a huge degree.

I'm a 40-year old man and they've been telling me Manhattan was going to be under water in a decade since I saw Stripes and Ghostbusters in the Movie Theater, more than 30 years ago. There are grown adults who peddle Hydrogen Fuels as a solution, even though a Chemistry Moron like me, who barely understands Acid-Base reactions or Avogado's Number, can grasp why it's unrealistic to the point of stupidity. At some point you tune it out.

One way to get people serious about Climate Change is to stop predicting the apocalypse, and stop lying about the remedies (which will have to be severe, merely recycling paper and cardboard won't make the tiniest dent).
28   Onvacation   ignore (1)   2017 Sep 18, 7:23am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

TwoScoopsMcGee says
after 7000BC a series of megatsunamis, possibly set off by a huge landslide in Viking Island (Now Sunk, between the Faroes and Norway), and huge lake drains in North America submerged Doggerland permanently. When Doggerland disappeared,

Is that where doggerel came from?
29   anonymous   ignore (null)   2017 Sep 18, 11:04am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote        

anonymous says
anonymous says
Are you certain because it is predicted by the climate computer models -- the same models that have overestimated warning in 21st century by somewhere between two and six fold?


Most models essentially ballparked correctly the increase of temperature we already saw, and if anything underestimated it. (and we need is to ball park the effect because it doesn't really matter when we will reach + 20 feet of water if we do nothing).

And of course models are much more precise now than they were 20 years ago, and the message by and large has not changed.


Nothing could be further from the truth.

All Hansen's three scenarios -- including the one that assumed immedate and drastic action taken (which wasn't) -- ran too hot. Alarmists had to come up with multiple pages of explanations why they didn't run too hot, and how the modern models are better than ever.

Initial IPCC ECS estimate was at 5-6 degrees C for doubling of CO2. Today it is around 1.5 - 2.5 degrees C per doubling of CO2. But the science was settled back then, is settled now, and we should totally trust the models -- as well as the dire predictions, which are, if you actually read the IPCC reports, three sigmas away on the unlikely side.

There is a famous chart that shows the model's projections running well above observations. There is one example: https://static.skepticalscience.com/pics/Slide12.jpg. Alarmists' excuse? Same old "lets use adjusted HardCRUT data", "don't look at air temps, lookd at sea temps", "don't look at temps, look at ice coverage": https://skepticalscience.com/graphics.php?g=243
I could go into details at length, but Scott Adams has put it better than I ever could:

http://blog.dilbert.com/post/165227772726/when-to-trust-the-experts-climate-and-otherwise
Yours truly, a1232
30   Ceffer   ignore (1)   2017 Sep 18, 11:22am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

What does this have to do with the earth being flat. The heat falls off the edges, global warming is a farce. Everybody knows that.
31   Onvacation   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 12, 9:28am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote        

Onvacation says

Do any of you alarmists know what the ideal temperature for human habitation is?

@anon_98513
32   Onvacation   ignore (1)   2017 Nov 12, 12:52pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

anon_25c83 says
maybe you lie and he just got sick of you asking it after he answered it 5000 times

Please link to one of said 5000 times.
Or give your own answer
The only alarmist I ever saw answer this question is our dearly departed Dan.
anon_25c83 says
Keep in mind who the troll is.

The one making the personal attack instead of adding substance to the debate.
33   anonymous   ignore (null)   2017 Nov 12, 12:57pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote        

Onvacation says
The only alarmist I ever saw answer this question is our dearly departed Dan.


Just keep lying your ass off. It's what the site is for now.




The Housing Trap
You're being set up to spend your life paying off a debt you don't need to take on, for a house that costs far more than it should. The conspirators are all around you, smiling to lure you in, carefully choosing their words and watching your reactions as they push your buttons, anxiously waiting for the moment when you sign the papers that will trap you and guarantee their payoff. Don't be just another victim of the housing market. Use this book to defend your freedom and defeat their schemes. You can win the game, but first you have to learn how to play it.
115 pages, $12.50

Kindle version available


about   best comments   contact   one year ago   suggestions