Global Climate Disruption.

[HopAlongBunny]

As studies get better, the news...well:

http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...ed-coastlines/

[InsaneApache]

oh my aching sides!

[Fragony]

Painfull lol, do he should have taped it so he doesn't have to say 86% so many times, less CO2. They have absolutily nothing on serious scientists. Figure out another apocalypse believers, I suggest an alien-invasion, they probably found life on Mars.

[Hooahguy]

Yeah, one should never try to argue with Cruz, hes a master debater.

[Husar]

Completely silly talk.

Mister Mair (?) did apparently have no idea and resorted to one of the worst possible replies.
I saw no master debater in Cruz, I would have asked him which factors affect the temperatures measured by the satellites and how those factors developed in the same timeframe. Plus what region was he talking about? Just the US, global average, only Panama? And how is temperature stability good if the poles are melting anyway?

Not that I have any idea what they were talking about or what these numbers are, but everybody in that video just seemed silly to me.

If anyone cares, my opinion is that we are probably ruining the planet with or without global warming. Plastic bags are bad either way for example, and throwing them into the next bush hardly helps. Neither do VW cars that release too much poisonous gas that kills people(and not so much the climate).

And even if human contribution is smaller than natural contribution to greenhouse effects, why contribute to our demise at all? Does everybody have a death wish because it's convenient? Or is it just old people who think they'll be dead anyway by the time the effects hit, so why forgo the 5th luxury yacht to save the rainforest? Environmental destruction often seems like old peoples' YOLO to me.

[Papewaio]

To be fair if you understand global warming a couple of spare yachts is a good investment with rising sea levels... Much better then a seafront property.

[Hooahguy]

I saw no master debater in Cruz

Im actually in agreement with you, but I was going for a joke with that term...


But seriously, Cruz is a great debater. He won some national Ivy League debate competition or something, Ive seen some of his real debating skills, hes very good at confusing his opponent to make them seem stupid, like we saw in this case.

[Montmorency]

Do you hold there to be a difference between "debate" and "rhetoricism"?

If not, then "arguing" and "debating" really are the same thing.

[Ironside]

Yeah, one should never try to argue with Cruz, hes a master debater.

I couldn't see far because his opponent was ridiculously crappy. It's painful to watch.

For starters, 18 years ago is 1997 and Cruz entire argument is based on 1998 and utterly fails when talking with 1997 data (and currently all other data, since 2014 was the warmest year on record). That's not counting that peak temperatures are a poor measurement and that 2015 is currently by far the warmest year on record and looks to be that way the year out. So Cruz is a) wrong on the date, b) using selective data, c) using poor data, d) wrong in his argument (to be fair, he would been correct 2013 on this point).

Settled science is what you base policies on. You have to call something a fact strong enough for regulation at some point, otherwise we'll still end up insane from eating lead sweeteners. Paradigm shifts and new data can change this and that is what it means that science are never 100% certain.

It's not my field, and I could own Cruz 3 times over within 2 minutes.

[InsaneApache]

Settled science is what you base policies politics on

Fixed it for you.

Science is never settled. Anyone who tells you differently is ignorant of how science is conducted.

It's not my field, and I could own Cruz 3 times over within 2 minutes.

Go on then, explain why is not getting warmer then.

[Montmorency]

Science is never settled. Anyone who tells you differently is ignorant of how science is conducted.

So the moon landing really was staged?

[InsaneApache]

So the moon landing really was staged?

WTF are you going on about?

[Papewaio]

WTF are you going on about?

Well since science is never settled...never use an absolute ;).

Monty is using an absurd position to counter that statement.

Whilst science can always improve with new information, that isn't quite the same as saying that science never settles, and certainly isn't the same as facts. Science is the interpretation of facts. So whilst the moon landing has happened the arguments could (fail to do so) argue all the reflectors and equipment was mechanically deployed sans humans.

[Ironside]

Fixed it for you.

Science is never settled. Anyone who tells you differently is ignorant of how science is conducted.

So, are you approving of lead sweeteners? According to science, it gives you brain damage, but since the matter isn't settled... The aerodynamics behind a flying plane isn't settled, but evidently we know enough to fly planes.
Certainly, occasionally further research do change things, but at some point, you have to accept the science to be true enough to act upon.

It the same as probability, going to the kitchen has a very small risk of killing you. Yet at some point you have to accept that an action is most likely better than inaction.

Add that to describe reality, you only need to figure out how something works, rather than why. We don't know why there's friction. We know how it works, but not why.

Go on then, explain why is not getting warmer then.

I don't know the exact reasons (not my field), but it's not uncommon for the temperatures to be stagnant or even dropping for about a decade. That has happened twice after 1940. If you look at the more accurate averages, rather than peak temperatures, you'll see that the stagnation started around 2005 rather than 1998 (98 is the freak that has became the new normal).

Add that both 2014 and 2015 is having record temperatures, so by the looks of it, the average is moving up again.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Temperatures fluctuate across multiple timescales because of regression to the mean.

[InsaneApache]

An example of settled science for you, since you don't appear to know the difference.

The Sun orbits the Earth.

[Greyblades]

As much as I enjoy waiting for the annual pointless handwringing over climate change to end I'd like to share something I found amusing; apparantly after around 500 years of searching we now have a north west passage. And a north east passage.


http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/

[Gilrandir]

I don't know the exact reasons (not my field), but it's not uncommon for the temperatures to be stagnant or even dropping for about a decade. That has happened twice after 1940.

And if we go deeper into the history we might remember several ice ages and several meltdowns.

[CBR]

Go on then, explain why is not getting warmer then.

It is getting warmer. The current trend for the lower troposphere ( according to the satellite data) is 0.11 C per decade. The data has also seen a lot of revisions as they can't get each satellite to produce same numbers. http://www.drroyspencer.com/2015/04/...-0-11-cdecade/

Didn't someone call it fraud because scientists had revised data...can't remember who.

Geocentrists would say the science of the earth orbiting the sun is still up to debate. But we all know they are crazy, right?

[Beskar]

Climate Change is a natural phenomena being accelerated by humanity. In some areas, this could be for the better, but for a lot more, it is for the worst. This is so things which might usually take 10,000 years might occur within 1000. There is also the issue where human input at the current rate could hit a tipping point where equilibrium would fail to be reached naturally.

So whilst there have been Ice Ages in the past, whilst the world has been hotter in the past, what actually matters is the present and the future, as humanity would be forced to react to these changes and cause significant shifts within a far shorter time scale. This would be prove to be extremely expensive in the future on a scale almost unimaginable.

Unfortunately, some people can only think as far as their nosetip, so they wouldn't notice until it slaps them into the face and they end up losing their homes due to the floods, coast-line shifts, droughts, tsunamis, tornadoes and other natural disasters. Then maybe they will think "if I simply used an energy saving lightbulb.."

[Pannonian]

Climate Change is a natural phenomena being accelerated by humanity. In some areas, this could be for the better, but for a lot more, it is for the worst. This is so things which might usually take 10,000 years might occur within 1000. There is also the issue where human input at the current rate could hit a tipping point where equilibrium would fail to be reached naturally.

So whilst there have been Ice Ages in the past, whilst the world has been hotter in the past, what actually matters is the present and the future, as humanity would be forced to react to these changes and cause significant shifts within a far shorter time scale. This would be prove to be extremely expensive in the future on a scale almost unimaginable.

Unfortunately, some people can only think as far as their nosetip, so they wouldn't notice until it slaps them into the face and they end up losing their homes due to the floods, coast-line shifts, droughts, tsunamis, tornadoes and other natural disasters. Then maybe they will think "if I simply used an energy saving lightbulb.."

I prefer to see it as reducing our dependence on the slave-owning barbarians in the middle east. We fawn over people like the Sauds because their countries have oil. If we could pick and choose from our suppliers, due to a lessening demand for energy, then we won't need to rub our faces in the dirt.

[Beskar]

There are many benefits. Defense like that, Economy, more efficient products... if anything, there is a lot of pluses by investing into green technology.

[Papewaio]

That's one of those funny things.

Want to be independent, not as beholden to the corp and the government?

Simple go off grid using your own solar and wind energy generation into your own battery bank. Use LEDs and other power efficient tech and lessen your demand.

Go green and stop funding oil funded extremists.

So the real conservatives should be weaning themselves off Putins gas and the Saudi's oil. Just remember kids we went to war against two countries to rid the world of terrorists. However all the time oil money was funding extremists groups. Fun fact three quarters of 9/11 terrorists were from Saudi Arabia.

We go to war, oil price goes up. Saudi and Russia profit.

Go green and see how their economies handle it.

[Risasi]

I stopped worrying about global warming when I read an article about Goethe and a Frankfurt university discovering palm and baobao trees near the antarctic regions in their core samples.
Although I seriously don't know how people can blindly buy into the current equine feculence and think a trace gas in the atmosphere is somehow more effective in upping the thermostat than changes in radiant light and heat being emitted by Sol.


As for the moon landing...and whether or not Kubrick was the director that faked it. Or humans have actually been there. Again, I quit caring about that too. The 'muricans had a space race against the commie red army and had to beat them to the moon first!

[Papewaio]

What is the nearest planet to the sun: Mercury
What is the hottest planet in the solar system: Venus

Venus has a runaway greenhouse effect.

You would have to disprove that Venus exists to say that gases cannot keep a planet warm. Good luck.

[Risasi]

Red herring obfuscation. That's like comparing apples to bowling balls. Hey they are both round.
Mercury has no atmosphere. Venus, well...can we even call it an atmosphere? CO2 is hardly a trace element and what, 75 times the pressure of earth's? Are you trying to say that CO2 levels in the earth's atmosphere could reach that of Venus?
What's next, are you going to compare water to lighter fluid? After all, they are both liquid in nature. :rollseyes:

There, for all intents I have disproved that Venus exists (with an atmosphere anywhere close to comparing to earth).


There are also too many peculiarities regarding Venus. Why is the rotation so slow (and measurably slowing down)? And yet the wind speed is crazy fast. Why does it counter-rotate? Based upon surface impacts why does it appear so "young" compared to the other planets in the solar system? It's also largely covered with volcanic plains, I think roughly the surface area as our earth's oceans. Too many questions and no answers. Only conjecture. Quick, someone post a pic of that crazy guy from the History channel stating it was aliens.

[Papewaio]

The point is atmosphere acts as blanket.

CO2 isn't the only greenhouse gas, nor is it the strongest that is emitted by industry.

I do agree with one point being the red herring is the animal gases. That is a cycle of air to grass to animal to air. It is essentially on a millennium scale a closed cycle.

On the other hand digging up fossil fuels and burning them adds net to the atmosphere.

[CrossLOPER]

discovering palm and baobao trees near the antarctic regions in their core samples

Yeah, it's like this planet has been here a while and continents have shifted about.

I seriously don't know how people can blindly buy into the current equine feculence...

Probably the publicly available research articles and through the consensus reached by reputable resources, much like these:

http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/
http://solar-center.stanford.edu/sun...glob-warm.html'

Stop getting your information from conspiracy sites; it rots your brain.

[a completely inoffensive name]

An example of settled science for you, since you don't appear to know the difference.

The Sun orbits the Earth.

What?

This thread is as bad as 9/11. A while back I remember arguing with Myth about always discussing with those that hold ridiculous ideas, even if they infuriate you to your core. I wish I could apologize to her (him?). Holy fuck do I wish I could take it all back. Once you realize that there is a world outside of internet dickwaving, the masochistic pleasure just becomes pain.

[Gilrandir]

So whilst there have been Ice Ages in the past, whilst the world has been hotter in the past, what actually matters is the present and the future, as humanity would be forced to react to these changes and cause significant shifts within a far shorter time scale.

Studying the climate of the past is also important since if you can find some regularities in the changes it will help you predict the ones to come.