Climate Change Skeptic; Change My Mind - Page 5 - Politics and Economics

Don't care to try and change some moron's mind. Obviously too far gone when the money outweighs all alse (also see: Awval). How stories like this don't terrify everyone I have no idea:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...rctic-glacier/

01-31-2019 , 08:53 PM

#103

amoeba

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 20,431

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trolly McTrollson

I love how people are like “technology will solve this” but when the STEM bros tell us that we drastically need reduce CO2 emissions they’re like “nah, I don’t trust all that science stuff.”

Right exactly. Its super frustrating. If you agree that technology will solve things then there should be some agreement on investment in to technology to solve this instead of propping up existing industries.

01-31-2019 , 10:01 PM

#104

Huehuecoyotl

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 29,257

Technology and innovation are just underpants gnome theory.

Have to put the money where your mouth is if that's what people believe and let the government incentivize people to develop the technology and innovation. Otherwise, where's the profit in carbon sequestration? Who's going to pay someone for not letting the world boil?

01-31-2019 , 10:20 PM

#105

d2_e4

certifiable moron

Join Date: Sep 2014 Posts: 12,011

I think OP might have left, having been piled on by the leftist echo chamber [Trolly(TM)].

What's wrong with you guys? Why can't we just put together a reality where carbon emissions don't kill the polar bears and the penguins and the unicorns? Clearly, we're just not trying hard enough to come up with a solution. F for effort, F for attainment.

Last edited by d2_e4; 01-31-2019 at 10:32 PM.

02-01-2019 , 12:25 AM

#106

markksman

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 20,921

https://mobile.twitter.com/gatewaypu...09215545184256

This particular fellow doesn’t understand how the sun works.

02-01-2019 , 12:35 AM

#107

d2_e4

certifiable moron

Join Date: Sep 2014 Posts: 12,011

If you've ever read "The Gulag Archipelago", you will be familiar with the fact that the reviled socialist Stalin is noted for having the prisoners whipped when they did not meet the 5-year quota of solar panel production.

02-01-2019 , 12:39 AM

#108

goofyballer

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 70,719

Quote:

Originally Posted by d2_e4

I think OP might have left, having been piled on by the leftist echo chamber [Trolly(TM)].

I believe OP when he said:

Quote:

Originally Posted by TJ Eckleburg12

I'm trying to think critically here and promote healthy discussion like what everyone wants this forum to be.

I think the talking points I've raised show the misgivings a lot of other lurkers may have about this issue.

I'm not scared of getting dunked on if I learn more and enrich myself.

I think he just didn't have the HEART to stick with it through extended discussion

02-01-2019 , 01:15 AM

#109

NewOldGuy

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 5,935

Quote:

Originally Posted by Effen

https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

Where do you think the water from the melt goes? Into Poland Spring and Deer Park bottles? c'mon bruh

Just to be factual here, Polar ice is much higher today than in your 2016 picture above (and to be fair, it's winter now). Also to the sea level point, most arctic polar ice is already floating in the sea. Only land ice can raise sea level by melting. Lastly, the sea level trend of rising a few mm per year began far before the industrial revolution, and hasn't accelerated much at all.

Last edited by NewOldGuy; 02-01-2019 at 01:45 AM.

02-01-2019 , 01:21 AM

#110

NewOldGuy

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 5,935

Quote:

Originally Posted by TrollyWantACracker

You must know there is voluminous research on this very topic. Why seek expertise on a gambling forum? your wording sounds like an angle shoot.

And virtually all of the serious research on extreme weather event frequency shows a decrease in the past two decades compared to the rest of the 20th century. Tornadoes way down, major hurricanes way down, droughts down, floods down, etc. We just have poor memories.

02-01-2019 , 01:35 AM

#111

Trolly McTrollson

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 36,688

Quote:

You must know there is voluminous research on this very topic. Why seek expertise on a gambling forum? your wording sounds like an angle shoot.

This is basically the best answer to every dumbass climate change JAQoff expert ever. Like, holy ****, you have a Google Scholar on your computer. Just go look **** up. Ask your google for scholarly articles on whether anthropomorphic climate change is real --the answer may surprise you!

02-01-2019 , 02:00 AM

#112

d2_e4

certifiable moron

Join Date: Sep 2014 Posts: 12,011

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trolly McTrollson

This is basically the best answer to every dumbass climate change JAQoff expert ever. Like, holy ****, you have a Google Scholar on your computer. Just go look **** up. Ask your google for scholarly articles on whether anthropomorphic climate change is real --the answer may surprise you!

Not disagreeing with the sentiment, but... anthropogenic.

02-01-2019 , 02:01 AM

#113

d2_e4

certifiable moron

Join Date: Sep 2014 Posts: 12,011

Quote:

Originally Posted by NewOldGuy

I call.

02-01-2019 , 02:04 AM

#114

microbet

Solar Powered

Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 56,442

Quote:

Originally Posted by d2_e4

Not disagreeing with the sentiment, but... anthropogenic.

Maybe climate change needs an anthropomorphic mascot.

02-01-2019 , 02:18 AM

#115

NewOldGuy

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 5,935

Quote:

Originally Posted by d2_e4

I call.

Ok. The rate of acceleration from one recent widely accepted study is 8 hundredths of a mm per year per year. Or about 8 mm faster per hundred years. That's about 1/3 of an inch per year faster rise than today. In 100 years.

Coastlines have been changing gradually throughout history. We'll adapt.

Last edited by NewOldGuy; 02-01-2019 at 02:23 AM.

02-01-2019 , 02:22 AM

#116

d2_e4

certifiable moron

Join Date: Sep 2014 Posts: 12,011

Quote:

Originally Posted by NewOldGuy

Could you please link to the study, or tell me where I could find it?

02-01-2019 , 02:26 AM

#117

NewOldGuy

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 5,935

Quote:

Originally Posted by d2_e4

Could you please link to the study, or tell me where I could find it?

https://www.pnas.org/content/115/9/2022

02-01-2019 , 02:31 AM

#118

d2_e4

certifiable moron

Join Date: Sep 2014 Posts: 12,011

Quote:

Originally Posted by NewOldGuy

https://www.pnas.org/content/115/9/2022

This is from the abstract of your link:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Study

Satellite altimetry has shown that global mean sea level has been rising at a rate of ∼3 ± 0.4 mm/y since 1993. Using the altimeter record coupled with careful consideration of interannual and decadal variability as well as potential instrument errors, we show that this rate is accelerating at 0.084 ± 0.025 mm/y2, which agrees well with climate model projections [snip]

I have no idea of the significance of these numbers. Is a 1mm rise a lot? Is a 1m rise a litte? I literally have no idea, I trust that the people who do this for a living probably know better than I, though.

How does this study relate to pre-1993 sea-level rises? Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but it looks like this is since 93?

ETA: When I said "I call", it was as to the specific claim that sea level rises have not accelerated since the industrial revolution. Do you have a study that demonstrates this? Is it this one and I've missed something?

ETA #2: For the avoidance of ambiguity, let's call "Industrial Revolution", 1850. Or, if you want 1950. But not 1993.

02-01-2019 , 02:46 AM

#119

microbet

Solar Powered

Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 56,442

Quote:

Originally Posted by d2_e4

This is from the abstract of your link:

I have no idea of the significance of these numbers. Is a 1mm rise a lot? Is a 1m rise a litte? I literally have no idea, I trust that the people who do this for a living probably know better than I, though.

How does this study relate to pre-1993 sea-level rises? Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but it looks like this is since 93?

ETA: When I said "I call", it was as to the specific claim that sea level rises have not accelerated since the industrial revolution. Do you have a study that demonstrates this? Is it this one and I've missed something?

ETA #2: For the avoidance of ambiguity, let's call "Industrial Revolution", 1850. Or, if you want 1950. But not 1993.

https://blog.ucsusa.org/guest-commen...sea-level-rise

Looks like this is based on those numbers

02-01-2019 , 02:58 AM

#120

d2_e4

certifiable moron

Join Date: Sep 2014 Posts: 12,011

Quote:

Originally Posted by d2_e4

I call.

Quote:

Originally Posted by microbet

https://blog.ucsusa.org/guest-commen...sea-level-rise

Looks like this is based on those numbers

It's an interesting article, but I was challenging NewOldGuy on a specific part of his statement:

Quote:

Originally Posted by NewOldGuy

Just to be factual here, Polar ice is much higher today than in your 2016 picture above (and to be fair, it's winter now). Also to the sea level point, most arctic polar ice is already floating in the sea. Only land ice can raise sea level by melting. Lastly, the sea level trend of rising a few mm per year began far before the industrial revolution, and hasn't accelerated much at all.

"Acceleration" has pretty clear definitions. For example, it is the first derivative of velocity with respect to time, or the second derivative of distance with respect to time. A more colloquial definition might be: an increase in rate. I believe NewOldGuy said that since 1850, there has been no increase in the rate of sea level rise. I would like to see a study supporting this, and I don't understand if the one he sent does support it.

For the record - from what I remember reading, I believe NewOldGuy is wrong in this regard, and the rate of rise of sea level has indeed been increasing since the industrial revolution, but I am more than prepared to be proved wrong on this point.

02-01-2019 , 03:27 AM

#121

dlk9s

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 22,502

Quote:

Originally Posted by NewOldGuy

https://www.pnas.org/content/115/9/2022

lol that site's URL is P-NAS

02-01-2019 , 03:28 AM

#122

microbet

Solar Powered

Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 56,442

The study he quoted, and he mentioned it, said an acceleration of .08mm per year squared.

And it's not just colloquial. Acceleration used as a rate of increase in any rate is perfectly well understood mathematically.

02-01-2019 , 03:33 AM

#123

Lawnmower Man

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Feb 2015 Posts: 4,455

Quote:

Since around the time of the Industrial Revolution (the late 18th and early 19th centuries), Earth's atmosphere has warmed by a little less than 1° C (1.8° F) (Figure 2). In turn, the ocean has also risen by about 15 centimeters (6 inches) over the past 100 years -- for two reasons. First, when water warms up, it expands, in much the same way as a solid does when it heats up. As the volume of seawater increases, it causes sea level to rise. Second, global warming causes glaciers and ice sheets to melt, which adds more water to the world's ocean, again causing sea level to rise 4,5.

"If you look at the ocean data, there has been a very clear acceleration in sea level rise," explains Willis. "At the beginning of the last century, sea level was rising by less than 1 millimeter (0.04 inches) per year; mid-century it was 2 millimeters (0.08 inches) per year and now it's 3 millimeters (0.12 inches) per year. This is directly caused by the increasing temperature of the planet."

https://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/fe...alWarming.html

02-01-2019 , 03:45 AM

#124

microbet

Solar Powered

Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 56,442

Those numbers are not much different. Newoldguy just says we'll adapt. The scientists say, yeah by hundreds of millions of people having to move or get flooded.