« First « Previous Comments 343 - 382 of 401 Next » Last » Search these comments
Where would you rather live in a tropical rain forest or an arctic tundra?
The point is the globe is not warming catastrophically.
Non sequitur.
The point you seem to have missed is that rain forests, or any unfrozen land, is better than an icy desert.
Why are new shipping routes already planned?
We are not talking of scientists. These are business people. Are they lying too?
It has been largely as model predicted, 2015 appears on that interactive map, and you guys are fighting a rear guard battle.
You had your days in 2004.
Now every year that passes make you sound more and more like idiots refusing stodgily to bow to reality.
The point you seem to have missed is that rain forests, or any unfrozen land, is better than an icy desert.
Onvacation saysThe point you seem to have missed is that rain forests, or any unfrozen land, is better than an icy desert.
You have completely shifted your argument to "there is no climate change" to "there is climate change but who cares because hot is better than cold."
I'm glad you now admit that you believe climate change is real. It's a step in the right direction.
You have completely shifted your argument to "there is no climate change" to "there is climate change but who cares because hot is better than cold."
1. The side putting forward the theory has to defend it from skepticism. That is how science works. It is not a popularity contest.
2. Some of us are old enough to have heard this stuff every decade since our childhood. It didn't come true.
in no way did the alarmist models come true
If you use a model to make a prediction and it falls flat on its face, it is not illogical to be skeptical of the model
The Russians, the Chinese even, all invest massively in the arctic because they can see - everyone can see - where this is going.
How many freight ships transit the arctic?
Onvacation saysThe point you seem to have missed is that rain forests, or any unfrozen land, is better than an icy desert.
You have completely shifted your argument to "there is no climate change" to "there is climate change but who cares because hot is better than cold."
I'm glad you now admit that you believe climate change is real. It's a step in the right direction.
Malcolm says1. The side putting forward the theory has to defend it from skepticism. That is how science works. It is not a popularity contest.
Except all your arguments have been refuted and you are not doing science: you are reading some denialist blogs, and throwing the kitchen sink at the theory, for the sake of not refusing it.
Scientists that try to debunk a theory can't just point at 1 problem, they also need to provide alternative explanations for the facts that are explained by the theory.
Malcolm says2. Some of us are old enough to have heard this stuff every decade since our childhood. It didn't come true.
Oh yes it did. It's just not a big difference so far. But it will relentlessly move forward slowly over decades, over centuries. Keep in mind centuries are blinks in the history of ma...
1 - checkout https://www.skepticalscience.com/ and look at the most used climate myths from deniers on the Internet. All debunked.
2 - It's a projection range of what will happen based on what is known. I can also say where the earth will be 1 year from now based on known physics. This is not blind speculation.
3 - journalists are not scientists. Show me a scientific paper announcing alarmist scenario by 1990.
4 - The theory is the general fact that CO2 generated by humans changes the climate. There are many models that differ on how they represent different phenomenons and the assumptions made. They are matched against known historic reality and adjusted. Not sure what's confusing about that.
3 I can assure you that I am not confused.
theory is the way to prove science, this predictive theory has failed, therefore I reject your future predictions.
https://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/18888-embarrassing-predictions-haunt-the-global-warming-industry
I have heard multiple speakers claim adding CO2 to the atmosphere increases crop yields.
It's a projection range of what will happen based on what is known
Seriously? Have you looked at the temp/ice levels graphs posted above on this thread?
show me specific scientific papers making crazy predictions.
You do know that chaotic systemsWeather is chaotic. Climate is not necessarily. Equating the two is a basic misunderstanding of some of the deniers. When they make such claims, they betray massive ignorance.
2 degrees and a foot are NOT catastrophic
Weather is chaotic. Climate is not necessarily. Equating the two is a basic misunderstanding of some of the deniers. When they make such claims, they betray massive ignorance.
Catastrophic is a rhetorical term that you use either because you are too lazy to quantify things or you are purposefully making vague statements so that you can shift around according to the argument at hand.
Are You not aware of the butterfly in China theory?
That is why I wrote that climate models are not necessarily chaotic.
Chaos theory can be seen from only a few nonlinear equations, so I'm sure that some climate models are chaotic. However, a simple one does not have to be.
Even a decade is harder to predict for various reasons. This is all explained here: https://www.climate.gov/news-features/climate-qa/why-did-earth%E2%80%99s-surface-temperature-stop-rising-past-decade
Do you really think a chaotic non linear system like climate can really be predicted with a "simple" model?
So why did the temp stop rising even though the models predicted exponential rise?
Do you still insist that climate and weather are the same? If not, what do you think the difference is?
Onvacation saysSo why did the temp stop rising even though the models predicted exponential rise?
It's covered in the article.
that's an educated guess and not backed by experience or data.
Weather is what we have every day. Climate is the history of weather.
Climate is a statistical characterization of weather over time.
Are you saying that climate is the history of weather?
Over a very long period, you can predict what the average of a bunch of stocks will return. This allows for things like planning for retirement. Being able to plan for retirement does not mean that you can predict the daily returns on stocks over a 30 yr period. Similarly, any given year might return something far outside of that range. Do you understand that?
Deniers are typically conspiracy theorists. They believe that climate change due to CO2 is a government conspiracy.
« First « Previous Comments 343 - 382 of 401 Next » Last » Search these comments
How much has the temp and sea level risen in the last hundred years?
How much did the temp rise between 2015 (2nd hottest year) and 2016 ( hottest year EVER)?
How can they measure such a small increase over the entire globe?
If the earth is warming why is the hottest temp ever recorded over a century old?
What is the ideal temp for human habitation?
Still waiting for answers to these important questions.