Politics

[Jebediah Springfield]

 

[Cackalacky]

Global Warming -- Research Issues

Typical greenhouse gas concentrations. Obvious trend.

Nuff Said. Again, pretty obvious.

Benthic Co2 is decreasing meaning less Co2 is being sequestered in the oceans. This is bad.

CO2 levels over last 400,000 years including ice ages. Note the fairly stable cycles for several periods. Note the not so typical peak at the far right.

Stabilization models show that due to CO2s long atmospheric lifetime, stabilization efforts will take a long time. I don't know whats wrong with this picture but its beautiful.

Recent Sea level rise. Get your boats ready if you live on the low-lying coasts.

Pretty sure a billion people live in these places as well as massive and important economic engines. Not great for 'Merica.
Sea Level Rise Maps Gallery - Global Warming Art

This is a hardiness map showing climate zones in the US since 1990. You will see a change to the north as the warming trend increases. Interesting. The impact to agriculture and other aspects of our economy would be significant and require a long term plan. Just push play.
Hardiness Zone Changes at arborday.org

Here is a skeptical science site that even allows you to stick with "basic" facts or trudge into the "intermediate" levels of data that has been collected (awesome info filled site and please share)
The Scientific Guide to Global Warming Skepticism

 

[Cackalacky]

Bluto, did you ever consider that the vast majority of climate scientists go into their field because they have certain pre-conceived notions and political leanings? That is to say, they already are firmly in the man made climate change camp and they go into a field filled with like-minded enablers? I doubt too many of these scientists enter the field with completely virgin brains. And it isn't too hard to find the supporting evidence for what you believe if you look in the right places. Maybe the climate change people are right, but there is enough credible evidence to suggest that it isn't as cut-and-dried as they make out. Speaking in absolutes about "the science is settled" isn't science; it's dogma.

The local weather report has been calling for Apocalypse Now for the past week straight, we just now started getting a tiny bit of rain… Conclusion: Science is infallible when it comes to predicting what will happen with the weather.

Know when CO2 was at its highest?

During the Ice Age. That's a fact, right from Bluto's "scientific community." Bluto could have stopped the Ice Age if only he were in control of of CO2 emmisions from the dawn of humanity... But we're the arrogant ones.

The IPCC Explains... Natural Causes of Ice Ages and Climate Change | Climate Changes | Cause and Effect

Cutting all CO2 emissions would not stop global warming | The Daily Caller

Meanwhile, on the Left:

Study: Global Warming Will Cause 180,000 More Rapes by 2099 | Mother Jones

Make it stop.

Apathy and Denial. Hallmarks of history.......

 

[wizards8507]

Make it stop.

Apathy and Denial. Hallmarks of history.......

Help me out. Science is awesome when it makes your political point, but when you come across an inconvenient truth*, science is all of a sudden "apathy and denial."

*See what I did there?

 

[Cackalacky]

Help me out. Science is awesome when it makes your political point, but when you come across an inconvenient truth*, science is all of a sudden "apathy and denial."

*See what I did there?

LOL yeah that was funny. Science is objective and allows for predictions. One of the images above shows the model predictions and the actual dataand they agree pretty well. This of course if one of many. Thousands of scientist are showing similar trends with different models and this is a strong indication there is a real and accelerating trend. Denial of this is ridiculous and petulant and dangerous. The only inconvenient truth is the fact that people refuse to accept the fact the the long term prognosis and effects of this don't concern them.

 

[wizards8507]

LOL science is objective and allows for predictions. One of the images above shows the model predictions and the actual predictions and they agree pretty well. THis of course if one of many. Thousands of scientist are showing similar trends with differnt models and this is a storng indication there is a real and accelerating trend. Denial of this is ridiculous and petulant and dangerous. The only inconvient truth is the fact that people refuse to accept the fact the the long term prognosis and effects of this don't concern them.

1. Science 101 says "correlation does not imply causation". To say it does is a logical fallacy of the most elementary nature.

2. None of your projections indicate that global climate change is "man-made."

3. You still haven't explained the Ice Age. Give me a satisfactory answer to the Ice Age, including what humanity could have done to prevent it and I'll drop the issue entirely.

 

[Cackalacky]

1. Science 101 says "correlation does not imply causation". To say it does is a logical fallacy of the most elementary nature.

2. None of your projections indicate that global climate change is "man-made."

3. You still haven't explained the Ice Age. Give me a satisfactory answer to the Ice Age, including what humanity could have done to prevent it and I'll drop the issue entirely.

1. Of course. But models based on empirical data do show correlation and are implying a causation that man is significantly impacting the climate.To what extent is not clear but it is clear there are significant impacts headed our way and to thumb our nose at it is disastrous. We need to start planning ahead. But you don't have to worry about it so fuck it.
2. I am not claiming it is man-made (others might but I am not). What I do claim is we are significantly contributing to it. That much is clear by all of the things I provided. I take this very seriously BTW
3. This is a ridiculous item to debate on lol. There are Ice Ages and interglacial periods and warming periods, etc. but the historical data I provided shows a very bad trend within a very short time period. I gave you 400,000 years of CO2 data. That includes several ice ages and NEVER has the CO2 been higher. I showed what elevated CO2 does to the atmosphere as a positive feedback loop in y earlier post. You can go back and check that one out.

I also gave you 5,000,000 years of sediment core data indicating the oceans ability to retain CO2 and act as a sink is failing. This is VERY significant as much as 80%+ of all genetic diversity on Earth lives in the Ocean and relies on the buffering capacity of bicarbonate to exist.

The other image I provided shows as far as the current trend greenhouse gases are by far the leading candidate in the elevated source of warming. Where do greenhouse gases come from????? I am having a hard time on this one........

I provided a shit-ton of information in that post. The fact you commented so quick leads me to believe you neither took the time to seek to understand it nor maybe even read it. Not surprised

I am not even saying we can stop what is already done. We as humans will have a hard time adapting based on our current culture, economic system and uniformed opinions that abound but we can at least try to facilitate net positive or net neutral strategies. One can wish.....

 

[wizards8507]

...

If you're not claiming that climate change is man-made, then I'm not "denying" anything. I fully accept that climate change might be happening but refuse to accept that it's caused by SUVs and air conditioning.

Regarding your graphs and whatnot, the vast majority are blocked from my work machine so no, I haven't evaluated them in-depth.

 

[connor_in]

Make it stop.

Apathy and Denial. Hallmarks of history.......

This is another problem entirely. The incorrect use of words.

If people such as myself and others were apathetic, we would not care,show enthusiasm, or concern...yes? However, our ongoing participation in this discussion thus disproves we are apathetic.

...and denial...really? Anything you say on any subject, if I disagree with it I am technically a "denier".

You: The unemployment situation in this nation is improving, look at the U3
Me: The unemployment in this nation is worsening look at the U6
You: Connor_in, you are in denial


see...it all depends on what your definition of "is" is...

 

[Cackalacky]

If you're not claiming that climate change is man-made, then I'm not "denying" anything. I fully accept that climate change might be happening but refuse to accept that it's caused by SUVs and air conditioning.

Regarding your graphs and whatnot, the vast majority are blocked from my work machine so no, I haven't evaluated them in-depth.

 

[Cackalacky]

This is another problem entirely. The incorrect use of words.

If people such as myself and others were apathetic, we would not care,show enthusiasm, or concern...yes? However, our ongoing participation in this discussion thus disproves we are apathetic.

...and denial...really? Anything you say on any subject, if I disagree with it I am technically a "denier".

You: The unemployment situation in this nation is improving, look at the U3
Me: The unemployment in this nation is worsening look at the U6
You: Connor_in, you are in denial


see...it all depends on what your definition of "is" is...

No you are a denier through and through. ACamp is apathetic. wizards DGAF

 

[wizards8507]

No you are a denier through and through. ACamp is apathetic. wizards DGAF

YUP!

 

[Cackalacky]

1. Science 101 says ....

I also forgot about this gem.

Climate change is not science 101. Its more like a doctorate in physics wrapped in a doctorate of geology wrapped in a doctorate of differential equations supported by doctorates in environmental science, chemistry, biology, geochemistry, geophysics, vulcanology climatology,and oceanography all the while being denied by people who don't have a fucking clue what any of this even means.

 

[Cackalacky]

Sources of carbon dioxide

Natural sources of atmospheric carbon dioxide include volcanic outgassing, the combustion of organic matter, wildfires and the respiration processes of living aerobic organisms. Man-made sources of carbon dioxide include the burning of fossil fuels for heating, power generation and transport, as well as some industrial processes such as cement making. It is also produced by various microorganisms from fermentation and cellular respiration. Plants, algae and cyanobacteria convert carbon dioxide to carbohydrates by a process called photosynthesis. They gain the energy needed for this reaction from absorption of sunlight by chlorophyll and other pigments. Oxygen, produced as a by-product of photosynthesis, is released into the atmosphere and subsequently used for respiration by heterotrophic organisms and other plants, forming a cycle.
Most sources of CO2 emissions are natural, and are balanced to various degrees by natural CO2 sinks. For example, the natural decay of organic material in forests and grasslands and the action of forest fires results in the release of about 439 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide every year, while new growth entirely counteracts this effect, absorbing 450 gigatonnes per year.[19] Although the initial carbon dioxide in the atmosphere of the young Earth was produced by volcanic activity, modern volcanic activity releases only 130 to 230 megatonnes of carbon dioxide each year,[20] which is less than 1% of the amount released by human activities (at approximately 29 gigatonnes).[21]

These natural sources are nearly balanced by natural sinks, physical and biological processes which remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. For example, some is directly removed from the atmosphere by land plants for photosynthesis and it is soluble in water forming carbonic acid. There is a large natural flux of CO2 into and out of the biosphere and oceans.[22] In the pre-industrial era these fluxes were largely in balance. Currently about 57% of human-emitted CO2 is removed by the biosphere and oceans.[23] The ratio of the increase in atmospheric CO2 to emitted CO2 is known as the airborne fraction (Keeling et al., 1995); this varies for short-term averages and is typically about 45% over longer (5 year) periods. Estimated carbon in global terrestrial vegetation increased from approximately 740 billion tons in 1910 to 780 billion tons in 1990.[24]

Anthropogenic CO2 increase
While CO2 absorption and release is always happening as a result of natural processes, the recent rise in CO2 levels in the atmosphere is known to be mainly due to human activity.[25] Researchers know this both by calculating the amount released based on various national statistics, and by examining the ratio of various carbon isotopes in the atmosphere,[25] as the burning of long-buried fossil fuels releases CO2 containing carbon of different isotopic ratios to those of living plants, enabling them to distinguish between natural and human-caused contributions to CO2 concentration.
Burning fossil fuels such as coal and petroleum is the leading cause of increased anthropogenic CO2; deforestation is the second major cause. In 2010, 9.14 gigatonnes of carbon (33.5 gigatonnes of CO2) were released from fossil fuels and cement production worldwide, compared to 6.15 gigatonnes in 1990.[26] In addition, land use change contributed 0.87 gigatonnes in 2010, compared to 1.45 gigatonnes in 1990.[26] In 1997, human-caused Indonesian peat fires were estimated to have released between 13% and 40% of the average carbon emissions caused by the burning of fossil fuels around the world in a single year.[27][28][29] In the period 1751 to 1900, about 12 gigatonnes of carbon were released as carbon dioxide to the atmosphere from burning of fossil fuels, whereas from 1901 to 2008 the figure was about 334 gigatonnes.[30]
This addition, about 3% of annual natural emissions, as of 1997, is sufficient to exceed the balancing effect of sinks.[31] As a result, carbon dioxide has gradually accumulated in the atmosphere, and as of 2013, its concentration is almost 43% above pre-industrial levels.[32][33] Various techniques have been proposed for removing excess carbon dioxide from the atmosphere in carbon dioxide sinks.

Carbon dioxide in Earth's atmosphere - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Also please see the section on the relationship with the ocean. Very important.

 

[wizards8507]

Carbon dioxide in Earth's atmosphere - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Also please see the section on the relationship with the ocean. Very important.

See now this is the problem I have. I would be much more likely to buy into all that crap if we were at the highest CO2 levels the earth has ever seen (or anywhere close), but we're not. Sure, there has been a small spike in the last 150 years or so, but within the scope of geological history, it's miniscule. The levels in the atmosphere today are so far below where they were hundreds of millions of years ago that blaming recent rises on humans is ludicrous.

What you're doing is the equivalent of using this graph to show that the stock market is a horrible investment:

In reality, the crash of 1929 was a small blip on the radar and this becomes clear when you include the full population of data in your graphic, which you conveniently fail to do.

There are periods in there where it looks like the sky is falling or where the roof is being blown off, but you don't see the general, long-range trend until you look at the entire data set. 150 years is NOTHING when considered in the population of all climate model data available.

 

[stonebreakerwasgod]

So rumor has it Hillary may not run due to illness. If that's the case...what disaster will the left put up for election?

 

[ACamp1900]

So rumor has it Hillary may not run due to illness. If that's the case...what disaster will the left put up for election?

Hillary.

 

[stonebreakerwasgod]

Bill would make an excellent First Lesbian Lady.

 

[Cackalacky]

Hahahaha. Land plants did not even exist until 475 mya. Co2 decreased because they started uptaking it. This led to an atmosphere with more oxygen present which is when more oxygen breathing organisms appeared. Then a healthy balance was achieved. What you just did is the exact thing you claimed I did. Just stop bro. No animals were even on land at that time you point to. Irrelevant.

The spike a 200 mya was an massive extinction event. 75% of land organisms went extinct including plants. All that matters is what's occurred after 65 mya since the last extinction event.

 

[ACamp1900]

Hillary existed back then, telling the freakin Dinosaurs they arent paying their fair share, and telling hem they can't drink Slurpies...

 

[stonebreakerwasgod]

Under Obamacare, dinosaurs would get discounted healthcare.

 

[irishog77]

Bill would make an excellent First Lesbian Lady.

Bill, Hillary...and Janet Reno = hottest threesome in history

 

[stonebreakerwasgod]

I guess Shalala was busy that night?

 

[irishog77]

Bill, Hillary...and Janet Reno = hottest threesome in history

I guess Shalala was busy that night?

She was busy at Da U.

Between Bill, Hillary, and Janet, I count AT LEAST 2 1/4- 2 1/2 dongs.

 

[stonebreakerwasgod]

That's a picture reserved for LMI at the strip club...spending all our stolen Vbucks.

 

[Bluto]

See now this is the problem I have. I would be much more likely to buy into all that crap if we were at the highest CO2 levels the earth has ever seen (or anywhere close), but we're not. Sure, there has been a small spike in the last 150 years or so, but within the scope of geological history, it's miniscule. The levels in the atmosphere today are so far below where they were hundreds of millions of years ago that blaming recent rises on humans is ludicrous.

What you're doing is the equivalent of using this graph to show that the stock market is a horrible investment:

In reality, the crash of 1929 was a small blip on the radar and this becomes clear when you include the full population of data in your graphic, which you conveniently fail to do.

There are periods in there where it looks like the sky is falling or where the roof is being blown off, but you don't see the general, long-range trend until you look at the entire data set. 150 years is NOTHING when considered in the population of all climate model data available.

This is pretty stupid. The earth was covered completely in ice at one point. Would you be comfortable with that same condition repeating itself? So who gives a rats ass if there were higher levels of CO2 at one point in the earths couple billion year history before mankind existed. The point is we are at the highest levels since mankind originated, i.e. the climate and atmosphere that mankind is adapted to and our entire global economy is tied to and we are rapidly changing said climate and effecting all of the associated flora and fauna. If you're comfortable with that then good for you. Maybe you should invest in land in Kiribati.

 

[TheRealLynch51]

So rumor has it Hillary may not run due to illness. If that's the case...what disaster will the left put up for election?

Most probably Biden. It would actually make it a tight race though if Hillary doesn't run. Personally, I would vote for Clinton if she ran, but if she isn't running, I would be completely open to see who the right puts up for election. Honestly, I would be open for anyone from the right, as long as it is not Ted Cruz.

 

[ACamp1900]

Most probably Biden. It would actually make it a tight race though if Hillary doesn't run. Personally, I would vote for Clinton if she ran, but if she isn't running, I would be completely open to see who the right puts up for election. Honestly, I would be open for anyone from the right, as long as it is not Ted Cruz.

Question... Why?? What does the average person see from that woman that makes them think she is any way qualified at all... Never understood that.

 

[GoIrish41]

Question... Why?? What does the average person see from that woman that makes them think she is any way qualified at all... Never understood that.

Served as a key advisor to one of the most effective presidencies in American history.

Strong senator from New York, noted for her ability to reach across the isle

Extremely successful as the Secretary of State in Obama's first administration.

She may have the best political resume for a presidential run since Bush Senior.

 

[ACamp1900]

Sorry... No