Official Global Warming thread (merged)

#6,582
#6,582
BigOrangeTrain said:
So Bart, how many climate scientists and general scientists have been polled about climate change? Have evry one of them been polled? If so, where is that study? If not, then how could an accurate assesment be made about the consensus be made? So basically 97% of the ones POLLED supposedly agree that humans play a significant role in climate change? Wow, thats just rock solid science right there.
Click to expand...
If you’d followed the link, you’d know the Cook et al. 97% figure was a survey of abstracts from ALL of the scientific literature on global warming and climate change. They then followed up by asking the authors to self-report their position on the issue.

And while you never get everyone to respond to a poll, I suspect the climate skeptics would be much more eager to take the time to publicize their views…
Biopsyman said:
I am still waiting on the left to tell me what is the correct daily temperature that all of the changes and regulations will create...
Click to expand...
You might be interested in these articles on a recent paper. Ideally we would maintain the pre-industrial climate which had been stable for the past 10,000 years or so. You know, that period that allowed the rise of agriculture and birth of human civilization.

Of course, the absolute change is not necessarily as important as the rate of change. Most life cannot evolve, adapt, or migrate as fast as we’re altering the biosphere. Humans are more fortunate than most in this respect, but even skeptics like the aforementioned Richard Tol recognize that our future ain’t too peachy either.
BigOrangeTrain said:
Well we need to cut CO2 levels drastically right? I mean plants and trees dont need it. Its not like the planet needs oxygen or anything. All CO2 is doing is ruining the planet :)
Click to expand...
Let me blow your mind with some chem 101; burning fossil fuels depletes atmospheric O2.

CO2_vs_oxygen.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#6,585
#6,585
Bering Sea ‘bomb’ cyclone ties record for strongest winter storm in North Pacific

Freak storm in North Atlantic to lash UK, may push temperatures over 50 degrees above normal at North Pole

imrs.php


VNSF, Fairbanks isn’t even on the right side of the pole. Maybe TIME can check in with Santa?

Here’s some more context…
As it departs North America this week, the storm will rapidly intensify over the northern reaches of the Gulf Stream and draw tremendous amounts of warm air northward from Spain and the Mediterranean Sea toward the Arctic. As the storm approaches Iceland, it will have strengthened to the equivalent of some of the strongest hurricanes ever recorded in terms of atmospheric pressure. Intensely high pressure over western Russia, perhaps boosted by melting sea ice, will aid in setting up the tropics-to-pole atmospheric superhighway.

Unlike other recent episodes of extreme weather around the planet, this storm is probably not related to El Niño, which has limited influence in Europe. The storm will be strengthening over the exact spot that North Atlantic temperatures have been cooling over recent years, an effect that scientists have linked to a slowdown of the basin’s circulation triggered in part by melting sea ice—the same scenario that was highly dramatized in the movie The Day After Tomorrow. This year, there’s been a notable increase in the sharp contrast between this cold patch and record warm ocean temperatures in the tropical Atlantic, an effect that leads to stronger ocean storms—like this one.

The remarkable storm will briefly boost temperatures in the Arctic basin to nearly 10 degrees Fahrenheit warmer than normal—and the North Pole itself will be pushed above the freezing point, with temperatures perhaps as warm as 40 degrees. That’s absolutely terrifying and incredibly rare. Keep in mind: It’s late December and dark 24 hours a day at the North Pole right now. The typical average high temperature this time of year at the North Pole is about minus 15 to minus 20 degrees. To create temperatures warm enough to melt ice to exist in the dead of winter—some 50 or 60 degrees warmer than normal—is unthinkable.

For some perspective, I contacted a team of climate scientists at the University of Washington who maintain a fleet of weather monitoring equipment near the North Pole. James Morison, the principal investigator of the North Pole Environmental Observatory, said he’s “never heard of” temperatures above freezing in the wintertime there. Looking closer at the weather data, it appears this event is in fact unprecedented during the time period from late December through late April.

On Wednesday, the North Pole will be warmer than Western Texas, Southern California, and parts of the Sahara.
Click to expand...
 
#6,586
#6,586
The link in the Times article takes you to North Pole Alaska. But the headline is "the North Pole". It's a fraud and multiple articles are pushing that bs

The temp in the North Pole is currently -15 and never got above 20
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#6,587
#6,587
VolsNSkinsFan said:
The link in the Times article takes you to North Pole Alaska. But the headline is "the North Pole". It's a fraud and multiple articles are pushing that bs

The temp in the North Pole is currently -15 and never got above 20
Click to expand...

Bart's going to use some of these in his dissertation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#6,589
#6,589
VolsNSkinsFan said:
The link in the Times article takes you to North Pole Alaska. But the headline is "the North Pole". It's a fraud and multiple articles are pushing that bs

The temp in the North Pole is currently -15 and never got above 20
Click to expand...
Your TIME article is the only one linking to North Pole, Alaska. It’s stupid. Like I said, that’s on the opposite side of the pole from the extreme heat event (see figure from last post). Incidentally, though, 42 degrees is still a record high for North Pole, AK.

Where did you get your daily high for the actual north pole? There are no permanent weather stations up there. +20 would still be around 40 degrees above average. And according to NOAA’s estimates, the north pole did hit the freezing point this morning.

CXfebkyUAAAa4lh.png


In any case, it’s the second major bomb cyclone in two weeks. Dropped 54 mb in 18 hours. Look out UK, more flooding's headin your way
 
#6,590
#6,590
BartW said:
Your TIME article is the only one linking to North Pole, Alaska. It’s stupid. Like I said, that’s on the opposite side of the pole from the extreme heat event (see figure from last post). Incidentally, though, 42 degrees is still a record high for North Pole, AK.

Where did you get your daily high for the actual north pole? There are no permanent weather stations up there. +20 would still be around 40 degrees above average. And according to NOAA’s estimates, the north pole did hit the freezing point this morning.

CXfebkyUAAAa4lh.png


In any case, it’s the second major bomb cyclone in two weeks. Dropped 54 mb in 18 hours. Look out UK, more flooding's headin your way
Click to expand...

How long do we have left to live? I've got things I want to get done before we all drown.
 
#6,594
#6,594
BartW said:
If you’d followed the link, you’d know the Cook et al. 97% figure was a survey of abstracts from ALL of the scientific literature on global warming and climate change. They then followed up by asking the authors to self-report their position on the issue.

And while you never get everyone to respond to a poll, I suspect the climate skeptics would be much more eager to take the time to publicize their views…

You might be interested in these articles on a recent paper. Ideally we would maintain the pre-industrial climate which had been stable for the past 10,000 years or so. You know, that period that allowed the rise of agriculture and birth of human civilization.

Of course, the absolute change is not necessarily as important as the rate of change. Most life cannot evolve, adapt, or migrate as fast as we’re altering the biosphere. Humans are more fortunate than most in this respect, but even skeptics like the aforementioned Richard Tol recognize that our future ain’t too peachy either.

Let me blow your mind with some chem 101; burning fossil fuels depletes atmospheric O2.

CO2_vs_oxygen.gif
Click to expand...

I will publicize my view because I am an admitted skeptic. FTR, I am not affiliated with the tobacco or coal industry. So here it goes. I believe the "climate" has been changing ever since the creation of our planet. It will always change and while human beings can have an effect on the climate, its nowhere near as much as some want to think. Nature will always be one step ahead.

Bart if you honestly believe that we can map what the climate was like back a couple of billion or even a hundred million years ago with any accuracy, then maybe you need a tin foil hat. Nobody knows precisely what the climate was like through every generation this planet has went through.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#6,595
#6,595
BartW said:
Your TIME article is the only one linking to North Pole, Alaska. It’s stupid. Like I said, that’s on the opposite side of the pole from the extreme heat event (see figure from last post). Incidentally, though, 42 degrees is still a record high for North Pole, AK.

Where did you get your daily high for the actual north pole? There are no permanent weather stations up there. +20 would still be around 40 degrees above average. And according to NOAA’s estimates, the north pole did hit the freezing point this morning.

CXfebkyUAAAa4lh.png


In any case, it’s the second major bomb cyclone in two weeks. Dropped 54 mb in 18 hours. Look out UK, more flooding's headin your way
Click to expand...

I trust the Norwegians. Not the NOAA.

Weather forecast for North Pole (North Pole) – yr.no
 
#6,600
#6,600
It's cold as frick here in TN this morning, does that mean global warming is over?
 
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top