[Global] Climate Change Debate - 33andrain Spotlight - 33andrain Jump to content
NJwxguy78

[Global] Climate Change Debate

Recommended Posts

So what’s the verdict on climate change? We have all of the best scientists here in one place. Let’s talk.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The climate is changing anomalously, and "anomalously" is the key word there. I don't think that can even be debated at this point. I think the role and degree of human contribution to these changes is up for debate. My view is...it doesn't really matter what is humanity's role or if this is all part of some grand planetary cycle. These are all interesting scientific questions to ponder, but separate from the issue at hand. Humans are the most intelligent life to ever exist on this planet. If the atmosphere is being altered in a way which is deemed to be detrimental to those living in it, whether triggered by us or not, we have a responsibility to address the issue. A responsibility not just to the planet, but to ourselves. Seems common sense to me. All throughout history, when we have determined that a material we use or process we follow is damaging or otherwise suboptimal, we work to adapt. I see this as no different.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, 33andrain said:

The climate is changing anomalously, and "anomalously" is the key word there. I don't think that can even be debated at this point. I think the role and degree of human contribution to these changes is up for debate. My view is...it doesn't really matter what is humanity's role or if this is all part of some grand planetary cycle. These are all interesting scientific questions to ponder, but separate from the issue at hand. Humans are the most intelligent life to ever exist on this planet. If the atmosphere is being altered in a way which is deemed to be detrimental to those living in it, whether triggered by us or not, we have a responsibility to address the issue. A responsibility not just to the planet, but to ourselves. Seems common sense to me. All throughout history, when we have determined that a material we use or process we follow is damaging or otherwise suboptimal, we work to adapt. I see this as no different.

 

I think it’s a bunch of malarkey. The climate is old; the data is young.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, NJwxguy78 said:

 

I think it’s a bunch of malarkey. The climate is old; the data is young.

What is malarkey though? The data which says the changes are not good for humanity? My point is...I don't really care whether humans are behind it or not, or this has happened before...even many times. All that matters is that it is happening now, during our time and whether it is harmful to us. If it is harmful to us, then to not try to do something about it is negligent at best and criminal at worst.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, 33andrain said:

What is malarkey though? The data which says the changes are not good for humanity? My point is...I don't really care whether humans are behind it or not. All that matters is whether it is not good for us. If it is bad for us, then not trying to do something about it is negligent at best and criminal at worst.

 

 

I don't know whether it's good or bad for us.  It might be great for some people and horrible for others - much like the Industrial Revolution, or a wildfire in California.  A wildfire is terrible for humans, great for Lodgepole Pine trees (the cones only open during high heat).

 

Basically people crying about "humanity being affected" and "humanity not caring about the globe" are the most human-centric people on earth.  The globe warming up would actually be beneficial to a ton of other critters, regardless of human impact.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, NJwxguy78 said:

So what’s the verdict on climate change? We have all of the best scientists here in one place. Let’s talk.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to be clear- I firmly believe in keeping the planet salubrious; I’m just not certain we need a GW agenda to do it.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, NJwxguy78 said:

Just to be clear- I firmly believe in keeping the planet salubrious; I’m just not certain we need a GW agenda to do it.

:roll: Love it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Isotherm said:

Relevant to the thread topic; I don't believe I posted this here (I may have):

 

http://www.lightinthestorm.com/page/2

 

This is my encapsulation on climate change at this juncture and relative attribution / significance. 

 

The conclusion:

 

"To disambiguate: in totality, my argument – simplified and elucidated – is as follows: anthropogenic climate change exists and Co2 radiative forcing is legitimate; however, the solar forcing component is significantly underestimated given there is a myopic proclivity to concentrate on TSI variations, while concurrently failing to recognize the other, integral modulatory mechanisms of the Sun. Further, the effects of thermal inertia are largely ignored, which plays an exceptionally influential role in determining the atmospheric response time. The rate of warming/cooling will alter as a function of forcing alterations, but cooling will not initiate until forcing is sufficiently low to fall below the current, established equilibrium. If my and innumerable other scientists’ hypotheses are correct, sfc T response is still ahead of us. I think the rate of warming will continue to decrease over the coming two years with the onset of cooling (versus 1998-present levels) likely to occur within the next several years. The magnitude of the cooling (speculation) over the course of the next two decades could be 0.3 or 0.4c, bringing us down near global temperatures of the 1980s. Again, the key question here is relative attribution of Co2 RF vs solar RF; we shall see what we shall see."

 

Beautifully said. So much premature bridge jumping when we are just learning which variables matter...and which to include.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, 33andrain said:

It’s real. 

 

Spectacular NASA timelapse video that was shot over 20 years shows the planet 'breathing' and the shocking effects of climate change on Earth

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5116293/Spectacular-NASA-timelapse-captures-Eart-breathing.html

 

 

20 years? Call me when we can see 2,000.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, NJwxguy78 said:

 

 

20 years? Call me when we can see 2,000.

tenor.gif?itemid=8042464

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Need a 20 foot sea level rise so Colts Neck becomes beach front and property values increase 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PB GFI said:

Need a 20 foot sea level so Colts Neck becomes beach front and property values increase 

 

Your taxes will go over 1 mil.

 

Not that it would affect you:)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×