Official Global Warming thread (merged)

Shhhh .... He's on a roll.

Something more befitting your mentality.

us_post_causes_global_warming.jpg
 
Or did he mean El Nino? Both? Either way, that doesn't address climate change in anyway, as those are reoccurring oceanic oscillations.
 
The snow is officially making a mud hole now.

Spring can't get here soon enough. At least the mud is warmer.
 
I'd love to hear how El Nina (whatever the hell that is) is responsible for global climate change.

Where did you pick up the 'El Nina' from??

The British Met office is a notorious promoter of
AGW alarmism and predicted another very mild
winter of GB but they were wrong for the second
year in a row and the British are experiencing
their coldest winter in perhaps a thousand years.

How did the Met arrive at their conclusion??

They thought that CO2 levels would produce a
mild winter but other more knowledgeable, less
politicised entities said Britian would have a very
rough winter due to the ending of a El Nino cycle
and the beginning of a La Nina.

I posted that prediction last August.

BTW, wind power during the current crisis in GB is rated a 0 percent even though they have spent billions of taxpayer dollars on the green boondoggle.

Global Temperatures Have Dropped 0.5C In The Last 12 Months | Real Science

150 years of global warming (0.7C) going down the drain.
 
The Postmaster General is putting the Earth in peril.

It must have been an oversight that the Postal
Department hasn't been granted a few hundred
million to research AGW.





It's all about Y-scaling. You can make anything correlate to anything else, that way.

And that's how you get CO2 cause AGW.

Nice of you to point that out.






Or did he mean El Nino? Both? Either way, that doesn't address climate change in anyway, as those are reoccurring oceanic oscillations.

Right, now you are saying oceanic oscillations and
solar activity don't adress climate change??

Previously I only thought you were daft, now I
have no doubt.
 

It's certainly reaching deep into the pockets of the insurance industry:

Insurers Claim Global Warming Makes Some Regions Too Hot to Handle: Scientific American

Again, I find the penchant of VN posters to hold tightly to the teddy bears of their imagination endearing. It's rather brave - if naive and misguided - to hold out in the superminority.
 
It's certainly reaching deep into the pockets of the insurance industry:

Insurers Claim Global Warming Makes Some Regions Too Hot to Handle: Scientific American

Again, I find the penchant of VN posters to hold tightly to the teddy bears of their imagination endearing. It's rather brave - if naive and misguided - to hold out in the superminority.

From the (3 year old) article that you linked...

Private insurers also point fingers at a changing climate, citing a report issued by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) earlier this year that concluded global warming is to blame for a doubling over the past five years of natural disasters—and that the situation will worsen if nothing is done to stop it. (The often-touted link between climate change and increased hurricane strength, however, has yet to be firmly established.)

2ed5jwi.gif
 
From the (3 year old) article that you linked...

You shouldn't have stepped over if you didn't know what was coming.

How about a Jan 4, 2011 story from the world's largest reinsurance firm (who owns about 1/4th of the stock market)?

Munich Re warns of soaring climate change costs - 04 Jan 2011 - News from BusinessGreen

A link to the report itself:

Munich Re - Overall picture of natural catastrophes in 2010 ? Very severe earthquakes and many severe weather events

Around these parts, we call that Game, Set, and Match.
 
You shouldn't have stepped over if you didn't know what was coming.

How about a Jan 4, 2011 story from the world's largest reinsurance firm (who owns about 1/4th of the stock market)?

Munich Re warns of soaring climate change costs - 04 Jan 2011 - News from BusinessGreen

A link to the report itself:

Munich Re - Overall picture of natural catastrophes in 2010 ? Very severe earthquakes and many severe weather events

Around these parts, we call that Game, Set, and Match.

1. Is it "climate change" or is it "global warming"? I can't keep up with your rhetoric and slogans. :banghead2:

2. Really? Are you guys really accepting the new talking points that "climate change" is causing earthquakes and volcano eruptions?
 
1. Is it "climate change" or is it "global warming"? I can't keep up with your rhetoric and slogans. :banghead2:

2. Really? Are you guys really accepting the new talking points that "climate change" is causing earthquakes and volcano eruptions?

I understand why you didn't read the links. Believe me, I understand. I said something about holding tightly to the teddy bears of the imagination earlier.

I call it "Global Heating" myself - to drive home the point it's not warming naturally.
 
I understand why you didn't read the links. Believe me, I understand. I said something about holding tightly to the teddy bears of the imagination earlier.

I call it "Global Heating" myself - to drive home the point it's not warming naturally.

so glad you took the time to answer his questions
 
Now I guess we have to concern ourselves to increased earthquakes thanks to global warming/climate change/global heating/global cooling...

Several major catastrophes in 2010 resulted in substantial losses and an exceptionally high number of fatalities. The overall picture last year was dominated by an accumulation of severe earthquakes to an extent seldom experienced in recent decades. The high number of weather-related natural catastrophes and record temperatures both globally and in different regions of the world provide further indications of advancing climate change.

Although they didn't explicitly say earthquakes = global warming, the average US citizen would read this and think there is a correlation. Blame the school system...
 
1. Is it "climate change" or is it "global warming"? I can't keep up with your rhetoric and slogans. :banghead2:

2. Really? Are you guys really accepting the new talking points that "climate change" is causing earthquakes and volcano eruptions?

1) IMO, either is fine. I understand why climate change is used because it isn't just temperature and the effects vary by location and season...but global warming is well understood to be the same phenomenon; therefore, I don't have a problem. I use the two (climate change and AGW) fairly interchangeably. Others might frown on thsi...don't know.

2) No.

3) As for the highlight you made previously to the link between AGW and hurricanes - I think that is still fairly accurate. Kerry Emanuel (famously just before Hurricane Katrina) published a study suggesting that there could be a link between increased global temperatures associated with AGW and increased hurricane damage. The premise is that increasd ocean temperatures lead to stronger storms. However, Emanuel acknowledges that this is a very complicated process and has since published some results that suggest that the relationship isn't clear at all. This is understandable since ocean currents are variable, ocean temperatures lag air temperatures, surface and loft winds respond to changes in temperature too, etc. So, though I don't follow that aspect of the literature closely (and someone that does may be able to shed more light on it or correct me), I think the relationship is still fairly unclear. This is particularly true when it comes to the number of hurricanes (vs. the strength of the storms that do form).
 
3) As for the highlight you made previously to the link between AGW and hurricanes - I think that is still fairly accurate. Kerry Emanuel (famously just before Hurricane Katrina) published a study suggesting that there could be a link between increased global temperatures associated with AGW and increased hurricane damage. The premise is that increasd ocean temperatures lead to stronger storms. However, Emanuel acknowledges that this is a very complicated process and has since published some results that suggest that the relationship isn't clear at all. This is understandable since ocean currents are variable, ocean temperatures lag air temperatures, surface and loft winds respond to changes in temperature too, etc. So, though I don't follow that aspect of the literature closely (and someone that does may be able to shed more light on it or correct me), I think the relationship is still fairly unclear. This is particularly true when it comes to the number of hurricanes (vs. the strength of the storms that do form).

Essentially, warmer waters create more powerful and more frequent hurricanes. No one is arguing that.

The argument is based on what is causing the waters to warm. Is it human activity or just a natural cycle of warming and cooling.
 
so glad you took the time to answer his questions

I thought the answer was self-evident - he should read the article.

Plus, it doesn't take too much effort to work out why the world's largest reinsurer would be discussing earthquakes in 2010. It's part of their service, as well.

The high number of weather-related natural catastrophes and record temperatures both globally and in different regions of the world provide further indications of advancing climate change.

Munich Re listed the Russian heatwave and the Pakistan floods in their five "great natural catastrophes" of 2010. The other three were the major earthquakes.

But, it's obvious why Ras elected NOT to read the link. It would have shot him down by Paragraph 1.
 
Essentially, warmer waters create more powerful and more frequent hurricanes. No one is arguing that.

The argument is based on what is causing the waters to warm. Is it human activity or just a natural cycle of warming and cooling.

It's anthropogenic.

But for the sake of argument, what part of the natural cycle is creating the additional radiative forcing?
 
Advertisement





Back
Top