Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Last month was the hottest January in 141 years of recorded climate history
Author Message
BobcatEngineer Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,090
Joined: Oct 2013
Reputation: 173
I Root For: OHIO
Location: Maryland
Post: #21
RE: Last month was the hottest January in 141 years of recorded climate history
(02-13-2020 07:26 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  and fishin'....

I already have my yard lookin' "envious"....

I'm still waiting for some ding-dong to explain why warming is a bad thingy.....




Warming isn't necessarily a bad thing per se. Rapid change is the real danger. Plants and animals can adapt, but it's more difficult if change happens too quickly.

Here are some negative impacts of temperature increases of 1.5 and 2.0 degrees Celsius:

Quote:Heat-Related Illness and Mortality

The risk of heat-related illness and death will be lower at 1.5 degrees Celsius warming than at 2 degrees, finds the report. Cities will experience the worst impacts of heatwaves due to the urban heat island effect, which keeps them warmer than surrounding rural areas.

Impacts will vary by region due to many factors such as the ability of populations to adjust to changes in their environment, vulnerability of populations, their human-made surroundings and access to air conditioning.

The elderly, children, women, those with chronic diseases and people taking certain medications will be at highest risk.

Vector-Borne Diseases

More people will die from vector-borne diseases like malaria and dengue fever, with risks increasing more at 2 degrees warming, according to the report.

Food Security

Food security is expected to be reduced at 2 degrees Celsius warming compared to 1.5 degrees, say the report authors, with the largest risks emerging in the African Sahel, the Mediterranean, Central Europe, the Amazon, and Western and Southern Africa.

Yields for such crops as maize, rice, wheat and other cereal crops will be smaller at 2 degrees warming than at 1.5 degrees, especially in sub-Saharan Africa, Southeast Asia and Central and South America. For example, global maize crop yields will be about 5 percent lower at 2 degrees warming.

Rice and wheat will become less nutritious. Projected food availability will be less at 2 degrees Celsius warming than at 1.5 degrees in Southern Africa, the Mediterranean, the Sahel, Central Europe and the Amazon. Seven to 10 percent of rangeland livestock will be lost at about 2 degrees Celsius warming.

Economic Impacts

Risks to global economic growth from climate change impacts will be lower at 1.5 degrees Celsius than at 2 degrees by 2100, with the biggest impacts expected in the tropics and Southern Hemisphere subtropics, according to the report. In the United States, economic damages from climate change are projected to be large, with one 2017 study concluding the United States could lose 2.3 percent of its Gross Domestic Product for each degree Celsius increase in global warming. To put that into perspective, that would amount to more than $446 billion based on U.S. Gross Domestic Product of $19.39 trillion in 2017.

Small Island and Coastal and Low-lying Areas

The report says these areas will see multiple climate-related risks at 1.5 degrees Celsius warming, with these risks increasing further at 2 degrees warming.

These risks include sea level rise, leading to coastal flooding and erosion; changes to the salinity of coastal groundwater supplies, resulting in freshwater stress; risks to marine ecosystems, such as mass coral bleaching and die-offs; and more intense tropical cyclones. Limiting warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius will mean 40,000 less people will see their land inundated by 2150.

Loss of Species and Extinction

The report studied 105,000 species of insects, plants and vertebrates. At 1.5 degrees Celsius warming, 6 percent of the insects, 8 percent of the plants and 4 percent of the vertebrates will see their climatically determined geographic range reduced by more than half.

At 2 degrees Celsius warming, those numbers jump to 18 percent, 16 percent and 8 percent, respectively. The consequences of such range changes could be considerable. Take insects, for example. Pollinating insects, such as bees, hoverflies and blowflies that support and maintain terrestrial productivity, including agriculture for human food consumption, have significantly greater geographic ranges at 1.5 degrees Celsius warming than at warming of 2 degrees.

The list goes on....

https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2865/a-deg...es-matter/
02-13-2020 07:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BobcatEngineer Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,090
Joined: Oct 2013
Reputation: 173
I Root For: OHIO
Location: Maryland
Post: #22
RE: Last month was the hottest January in 141 years of recorded climate history
(02-13-2020 07:38 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 06:32 PM)BobcatEngineer Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 06:17 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Any of those CO2 sensors scanning the area around an active volcano?

Yes, one CO2 monitoring station is on Manua Loa, but precautions were taken to ensure that CO2 outgassing did not influence the readings.

But for the sake of argument, let's just throw out the readings from that one station.

Here's another set of readings from antarctic. Far from any volcano or human influence that could distort measurements.

[Image: spo_ccg_full.png]

https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/obop/spo/

And here are 8 more:

https://cdiac.ess-dive.lbl.gov/trends/co2/sio-keel.html

It's a very similar trajectory, don't you agree?

Anytime I see someone trying to show a marked increase by adjusting the graph to a non-zero base, it usually means they need the graph to look as horrific as they can because their point needs it.

Your base graph showing 180ppm of CO2 is actually the lowest amount recorded in earths history. In other words, it could be a good thing that CO2 is rising because it was at a dangerously low level.

Plant life requires CO2. CO2 is not a bad thing.

In the past, CO2 levels have DOUBLED due to volcanic activity. When a volcano erupts and sends ash and CO2 into the atmosphere, its not a localized event. It sends it everywhere. Even to the poles.

CO2 is not a bad thing. Too much CO2 is a bad thing. See Venus. It's not pleasant there.





For hundreds of thousands of years up until the industrial revolution, CO2 concentrations oscillated between 180 ppm to 300 ppm. It's 416 ppm now and rising.
02-13-2020 07:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
UofMstateU Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 26,300
Joined: Dec 2009
Reputation: 2011
I Root For: Memphis
Location:
Post: #23
RE: Last month was the hottest January in 141 years of recorded climate history
(02-13-2020 07:47 PM)BobcatEngineer Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 07:38 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 06:32 PM)BobcatEngineer Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 06:17 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Any of those CO2 sensors scanning the area around an active volcano?

Yes, one CO2 monitoring station is on Manua Loa, but precautions were taken to ensure that CO2 outgassing did not influence the readings.

But for the sake of argument, let's just throw out the readings from that one station.

Here's another set of readings from antarctic. Far from any volcano or human influence that could distort measurements.

[Image: spo_ccg_full.png]

https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/obop/spo/

And here are 8 more:

https://cdiac.ess-dive.lbl.gov/trends/co2/sio-keel.html

It's a very similar trajectory, don't you agree?

Anytime I see someone trying to show a marked increase by adjusting the graph to a non-zero base, it usually means they need the graph to look as horrific as they can because their point needs it.

Your base graph showing 180ppm of CO2 is actually the lowest amount recorded in earths history. In other words, it could be a good thing that CO2 is rising because it was at a dangerously low level.

Plant life requires CO2. CO2 is not a bad thing.

In the past, CO2 levels have DOUBLED due to volcanic activity. When a volcano erupts and sends ash and CO2 into the atmosphere, its not a localized event. It sends it everywhere. Even to the poles.

CO2 is not a bad thing. Too much CO2 is a bad thing. See Venus. It's not pleasant there.





For hundreds of thousands of years up until the industrial revolution, CO2 concentrations oscillated between 180 ppm to 300 ppm. It's 416 ppm now and rising.


See Mars', where the atmosphere is over 90% CO2. How hot is it there?
02-13-2020 07:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
shere khan Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 40,416
Joined: Mar 2004
Reputation: 3313
I Root For: Memphis
Location: Reverie, Tenn
Post: #24
RE: Last month was the hottest January in 141 years of recorded climate history
Do not care
02-13-2020 08:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Claw Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 19,227
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 522
I Root For: Memphis
Location: Orangeville HELP!
Post: #25
RE: Last month was the hottest January in 141 years of recorded climate history
I'm not sure average temperature is even a valid way to measure anything. What does that mean? The average of all the high temperatures of the days? If you calculate that way you will always be pre-supposed to increase the average.
02-13-2020 09:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
SoMs Eagle Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,617
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 562
I Root For: Mighty Mustard
Location:
Post: #26
RE: Last month was the hottest January in 141 years of recorded climate history
(02-13-2020 06:12 PM)BobcatEngineer Wrote:  1. Burning fossil fuels causes an increase in the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere.

[Image: co2_variations.png]

Over the last 400,000 years, the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere oscillated between 180 and 300 ppm. We're at 416 ppm as of today.

2. When atmospheric CO2 and methane concentrations rise, so do temperatures.

[Image: temp-graph-600x298.png]

Visible light from the sun travels through the atmosphere and refracts off the surface as infrared light (heat). Thanks to the atmosphere, a lot of this heat is retained before it can escape back out into space. Which is good. We'd freeze otherwise. The problem arises when there's too much greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere, as too much heat is retained, raising the average global temperature.

Our current average temperature has risen by about 1 degree Celsius compared to the pre-industrial average.

3. The global temperature doesn't have to change by that much to make everything go to hell.

[Image: temp-spectrum.png]

A 5 degree Celsius decrease puts large portions of North America and Europe under a half a mile thick sheet of ice. A 6-10 degree increase turns the whole world into a giant tropical forest with sea levels 200 meters higher than present day. Also, it would make areas near the equator virtually uninhabitable.

Just a 2 degree increase is enough to make things very bad for us living on this pale blue dot of ours.

Quote:Most land regions will see more hot days, especially in the tropics. At 1.5 degrees Celsius warming, about 14 percent of Earth’s population will be exposed to severe heatwaves at least once every five years, while at 2 degrees warming that number jumps to 37 percent. Extreme heatwaves will become widespread at 1.5 degrees Celsius warming.

Limiting warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius would reduce the number of people frequently exposed to extreme heatwaves by about 420 million, with about 65 million fewer people exposed to exceptional heatwaves.

At Earth’s mid-latitudes, the hottest days will be up to 3 degrees Celsius (5.4 degrees Fahrenheit) hotter at 1.5 degrees Celsius warming and up to 4 degrees Celsius (7.2 degrees Fahrenheit) warmer at 2 degrees Celsius warming. The warmest extreme temperatures will be in Central and Eastern North America, Central and Southern Europe, the Mediterranean (including Southern Europe, Northern Africa and the near-East), Western and Central Asia and Southern Africa. Longer warm spells will affect many densely populated regions. At warming above 1.5 degrees Celsius, twice as many megacities as today are likely to become heat stressed, potentially exposing 350 million more people by 2050.

At 2 degrees Celsius warming, the deadly heatwaves India and Pakistan saw in 2015 may occur annually.

NASA

Here are three other threads where this was previously discussed:

https://csnbbs.com/thread-876161.html
https://csnbbs.com/thread-827554.html
https://csnbbs.com/thread-867866.html

So do you ride a bike, wear animal skins in the winter and eat your food cold and raw? Yeah, I thought not...
02-13-2020 09:40 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
TripleA Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 48,213
Joined: Jun 2008
Reputation: 1615
I Root For: Memphis Tigers
Location:

Memphis Hall of Fame
Post: #27
RE: Last month was the hottest January in 141 years of recorded climate history
The original issue in this thread (see thread title) was that January was the hottest in 141 years.

That's a BS "scientific" argument, yet people concerned about climate change use it, and dismiss people who object as "science deniers."

They also use hurricanes and other weather phenomena as proof. Again, BS.

I think they have a few valid arguments in there, as well. Unfortunately, I don't think anybody has a single clue as to whether any of this matters in the long run. And my concern is, why bankrupt the U.S. economy, when China, Russia, India, etc. do nothing?
02-13-2020 10:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl 69/70/75 Offline
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 63,987
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 1605
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #28
RE: Last month was the hottest January in 141 years of recorded climate history
What I don't understand is that whenever we have the hottest day or week or month, that is proof of climate change, but whenever we have a cold snap, weather is not climate.
02-14-2020 12:16 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
banker Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,096
Joined: Oct 2009
Reputation: 607
I Root For: Marshall
Location:
Post: #29
RE: Last month was the hottest January in 141 years of recorded climate history
You know, the planet flourished with Co2 levels somewhere between 1,200 and 1,800 ppm, don't you climate guys?

What happens when Co2 gets really high? Well, trees and plants grow really big, which means herbivores grow really big as do carnivores because they have big things to eat.
02-14-2020 12:50 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
stinkfist Offline
laughing at MSM meltdown
*

Posts: 47,100
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 2616
I Root For: StL Blues
Location: who knows?
Post: #30
RE: Last month was the hottest January in 141 years of recorded climate history
(02-14-2020 12:16 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  What I don't understand is that whenever we have the hottest day or week or month, that is proof of climate change, but whenever we have a cold snap, weather is not climate.

'they' will tell you it is a cause/effect consequence....

what amazes me is 'they' only toss in the 'supposed' consequential negatives vs. representing ANY residual positive that would occur during the same time frame....

regardless, the data set it too small to weigh the assumption man has ANY ability to control such...

it's like a baseball/football/etc scout/coach trying to tell a HS senior he's a can't miss prospect that turns out to become a bust down the road....

#theyDontKnow

IMO, the best mankind can do is adapt and survive using historical data and best method as we continually evolve....
02-14-2020 07:10 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
SoMs Eagle Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,617
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 562
I Root For: Mighty Mustard
Location:
Post: #31
RE: Last month was the hottest January in 141 years of recorded climate history
(02-14-2020 07:10 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  
(02-14-2020 12:16 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  What I don't understand is that whenever we have the hottest day or week or month, that is proof of climate change, but whenever we have a cold snap, weather is not climate.

'they' will tell you it is a cause/effect consequence....

what amazes me is 'they' only toss in the 'supposed' consequential negatives vs. representing ANY residual positive that would occur during the same time frame....

regardless, the data set it too small to weigh the assumption man has ANY ability to control such...

it's like a baseball/football/etc scout/coach trying to tell a HS senior he's a can't miss prospect that turns out to become a bust down the road....

#theyDontKnow

IMO, the best mankind can do is adapt and survive using historical data and best method as we continually evolve....

What amazes me is they are ignorant of the fact that the climate has been changing, sometimes wildly so, for as long as this speck of dirt has circled the sun. And some of the change has happened while humans were here. North America was covered by an ice sheet a couple of miles thick 10 thousand years ago. And that’s a blink of an eye geologically speaking. Those cavemen must have kept a big fire going....
This stuff is all bullchit to make some idiots feel important and thus demand we pay them to study it. Then the communists come in and declare they are the only ones who can fix it.
Anyone who falls for this crap will fall for anything.
02-14-2020 07:46 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GrayBeard Offline
Whiny Troll
*

Posts: 30,802
Joined: Nov 2003
Reputation: 709
I Root For: My Kids & ECU
Location: 402 Miles From ECU

Crappies
Post: #32
RE: Last month was the hottest January in 141 years of recorded climate history
(02-13-2020 06:12 PM)BobcatEngineer Wrote:  1. Burning fossil fuels causes an increase in the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere.

[Image: co2_variations.png]

Over the last 400,000 years, the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere oscillated between 180 and 300 ppm. We're at 416 ppm as of today.

2. When atmospheric CO2 and methane concentrations rise, so do temperatures.

[Image: temp-graph-600x298.png]

Visible light from the sun travels through the atmosphere and refracts off the surface as infrared light (heat). Thanks to the atmosphere, a lot of this heat is retained before it can escape back out into space. Which is good. We'd freeze otherwise. The problem arises when there's too much greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere, as too much heat is retained, raising the average global temperature.

Our current average temperature has risen by about 1 degree Celsius compared to the pre-industrial average.

3. The global temperature doesn't have to change by that much to make everything go to hell.

[Image: temp-spectrum.png]

A 5 degree Celsius decrease puts large portions of North America and Europe under a half a mile thick sheet of ice. A 6-10 degree increase turns the whole world into a giant tropical forest with sea levels 200 meters higher than present day. Also, it would make areas near the equator virtually uninhabitable.

Just a 2 degree increase is enough to make things very bad for us living on this pale blue dot of ours.

Quote:Most land regions will see more hot days, especially in the tropics. At 1.5 degrees Celsius warming, about 14 percent of Earth’s population will be exposed to severe heatwaves at least once every five years, while at 2 degrees warming that number jumps to 37 percent. Extreme heatwaves will become widespread at 1.5 degrees Celsius warming.

Limiting warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius would reduce the number of people frequently exposed to extreme heatwaves by about 420 million, with about 65 million fewer people exposed to exceptional heatwaves.

At Earth’s mid-latitudes, the hottest days will be up to 3 degrees Celsius (5.4 degrees Fahrenheit) hotter at 1.5 degrees Celsius warming and up to 4 degrees Celsius (7.2 degrees Fahrenheit) warmer at 2 degrees Celsius warming. The warmest extreme temperatures will be in Central and Eastern North America, Central and Southern Europe, the Mediterranean (including Southern Europe, Northern Africa and the near-East), Western and Central Asia and Southern Africa. Longer warm spells will affect many densely populated regions. At warming above 1.5 degrees Celsius, twice as many megacities as today are likely to become heat stressed, potentially exposing 350 million more people by 2050.

At 2 degrees Celsius warming, the deadly heatwaves India and Pakistan saw in 2015 may occur annually.

NASA

Here are three other threads where this was previously discussed:

https://csnbbs.com/thread-876161.html
https://csnbbs.com/thread-827554.html
https://csnbbs.com/thread-867866.html

Your first 2 charts seem to give slightly conflicting information in regards to current levels of CO2 in the atmosphere. Of course, I could be misunderstanding, which is entirely possible.

The first chart shows a tremendous amount and spike of CO2 in the air, while the second shows a more normal cyclical amount.

Also the chart that shows how much water/ice NYC will be under just makes me laugh. It seems overly dramatic...either NYC is perfect as it is today or buried by either almost a kilometer of ice (really...a kilometer?) or 150 meters (what like 900+ feet) or water. Come on....that really doesn't pass the sniff test and seems rather dramatic.
02-14-2020 09:25 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fo Shizzle Offline
Domestic Terrorist and Iconoclast
*

Posts: 36,505
Joined: Dec 2006
Reputation: 797
I Root For: ECU PIRATES
Location: North Carolina

Balance of Power Contest
Post: #33
RE: Last month was the hottest January in 141 years of recorded climate history
(02-13-2020 08:53 PM)shere khan Wrote:  Do not care

This pretty much sums it up for most people. This is the giant hurdle that the environmentalists face.

I care and I believe human activity increases warming during natural cyclical events. However I think the cyclical events have more impact and there is zero we can do about that. Should we prudently reduce our carbon footprint where we can? Sure..Simply because we like clean air to breathe. Ive said for years the environmentalists should just concentrate on clean air instead of global warming. None of us have a problem with cleaner air.
02-14-2020 09:44 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BobcatEngineer Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,090
Joined: Oct 2013
Reputation: 173
I Root For: OHIO
Location: Maryland
Post: #34
RE: Last month was the hottest January in 141 years of recorded climate history
(02-14-2020 09:25 AM)GrayBeard Wrote:  Your first 2 charts seem to give slightly conflicting information in regards to current levels of CO2 in the atmosphere. Of course, I could be misunderstanding, which is entirely possible.

The first chart shows a tremendous amount and spike of CO2 in the air, while the second shows a more normal cyclical amount.

Also the chart that shows how much water/ice NYC will be under just makes me laugh. It seems overly dramatic...either NYC is perfect as it is today or buried by either almost a kilometer of ice (really...a kilometer?) or 150 meters (what like 900+ feet) or water. Come on....that really doesn't pass the sniff test and seems rather dramatic.

So the first chart with the dramatic spike is trying to illustrate that over the course of thousands of years, the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere ranged between roughly 180 and 300 ppm. Since the scale of the graph is in 1000's of years, the dramatic spike on the right side of the graph is highlighted to show how much it increased in the last 150-200 years or so. We're at 416 ppm now. The second graph is simply meant to illustrate that temperature and CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere correlate. Again, since the x-axis scale is in 1000's of years, it's tough to show the recent increase due to the scale.

And the ice sheet over NYC is totally true. Even today, there are parts of Greenland covered in over 3 km thick of ice. During the last ice age, the Wisconsin and the Laurentide Ice Sheet covered most of Canada, the northeast USA, and a great deal of the midwest.

Quote:The Wisconsin Ice Sheet, the last of many glacial advances that grew after the start of the Pleistocene Era about 1.5 million years ago and which stretched down from eastern Canada (Labrador), advanced as far south as New York City. The Wisconsin Ice Sheet left its marks on the city, depositing rock and debris and accounting for the hilly areas that run straight through the middle of the five boroughs. Geologists believe that the Wisconsin Ice Sheet began its southward journey from Labrador about 90,000 years ago and reached its maximum about 70,000 years ago, forming the Ronkonkoma Moraine on Long Island. During a period of warmth and retreat, it advanced again starting about 45,000 years ago, reaching New York City about 20,500 ago, forming the Harbor Hill Moraine and beginning its retreat about 18,000 years ago.

In New York City, the Wisconsin Ice Sheet was 1,000 feet thick (in the Adirondacks it was over 5,000 feet thick and perhaps as much as 10,000 feet thick in Labrador). The Wisconsin Ice Sheet had an impact not only on New York City but also farther north, deepening the bed of the Hudson River Valley (the Hudson River is the southernmost glacial fjord in the Northern Hemisphere), carving out the Great Lakes and the Finger Lakes basins, and leaving its mark on the Adirondack mountains. The glacier also deepened valleys beneath Webster Avenue in the Bronx, and the Harlem and East Rivers. It smoothed the bedrock and left glacial grooves and striations as the advancing glacier dragged rocks over the surface.

https://www.nycgovparks.org/about/history/geology

[Image: Pleistocene_north_ice_map.jpg]
02-14-2020 09:50 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Claw Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 19,227
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 522
I Root For: Memphis
Location: Orangeville HELP!
Post: #35
RE: Last month was the hottest January in 141 years of recorded climate history
(02-14-2020 09:44 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  
(02-13-2020 08:53 PM)shere khan Wrote:  Do not care

This pretty much sums it up for most people. This is the giant hurdle that the environmentalists face.

I care and I believe human activity increases warming during natural cyclical events. However I think the cyclical events have more impact and there is zero we can do about that. Should we prudently reduce our carbon footprint where we can? Sure..Simply because we like clean air to breathe. Ive said for years the environmentalists should just concentrate on clean air instead of global warming. None of us have a problem with cleaner air.

Sigh. CO2 is not a pollutant. We don't need to clean it out of our air. You exhale it. Your lawn inhales it. It is just a normal thing in our ecosystem.

I don't buy the CO2 global warming for two reasons. First, the predictions of their models have been wrong for the last 20 years.

Second, carbon dioxide is not the main issue for the greenhouse effect.

Compound / Contribution to Greenhouse Effect

Water vapor and clouds / 36–72%
Carbon dioxide / 9–26%
Methane / 4–9%
Ozone / 3–7%

Water vapor is a bigger deal, and there isn't a thing we can do about it. Messing with carbon dioxide is just a fairy tale. It's not going to control the issue.
02-14-2020 10:01 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
VA49er Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 22,802
Joined: Dec 2004
Reputation: 454
I Root For: Charlotte
Location:
Post: #36
RE: Last month was the hottest January in 141 years of recorded climate history
(02-13-2020 04:48 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  so let me get this straight...lefty's always talk about how they believe in science, not superstition. And the earth has been around how many years (A: The age of the Earth is estimated to be 4.54 ± 0.05 billion years (4.54 × 109 years ± 1%)...and these records have been kept for how many comparative seconds? Not even the blink of an eye...and news flash, earth has been a LOT hotter in the past than it will ever get again. Drivin' my gasoline-powered classic without no more emissions exams or cad converter, and luvin' it.

Well, considering how the earth is gonna end, I wouldn't go that far........
02-14-2020 10:16 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
UofMstateU Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 26,300
Joined: Dec 2009
Reputation: 2011
I Root For: Memphis
Location:
Post: #37
RE: Last month was the hottest January in 141 years of recorded climate history
(02-14-2020 09:50 AM)BobcatEngineer Wrote:  
(02-14-2020 09:25 AM)GrayBeard Wrote:  Your first 2 charts seem to give slightly conflicting information in regards to current levels of CO2 in the atmosphere. Of course, I could be misunderstanding, which is entirely possible.

The first chart shows a tremendous amount and spike of CO2 in the air, while the second shows a more normal cyclical amount.

Also the chart that shows how much water/ice NYC will be under just makes me laugh. It seems overly dramatic...either NYC is perfect as it is today or buried by either almost a kilometer of ice (really...a kilometer?) or 150 meters (what like 900+ feet) or water. Come on....that really doesn't pass the sniff test and seems rather dramatic.

So the first chart with the dramatic spike is trying to illustrate that over the course of thousands of years, the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere ranged between roughly 180 and 300 ppm. Since the scale of the graph is in 1000's of years, the dramatic spike on the right side of the graph is highlighted to show how much it increased in the last 150-200 years or so. We're at 416 ppm now. The second graph is simply meant to illustrate that temperature and CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere correlate. Again, since the x-axis scale is in 1000's of years, it's tough to show the recent increase due to the scale.

And the ice sheet over NYC is totally true. Even today, there are parts of Greenland covered in over 3 km thick of ice. During the last ice age, the Wisconsin and the Laurentide Ice Sheet covered most of Canada, the northeast USA, and a great deal of the midwest.

Quote:The Wisconsin Ice Sheet, the last of many glacial advances that grew after the start of the Pleistocene Era about 1.5 million years ago and which stretched down from eastern Canada (Labrador), advanced as far south as New York City. The Wisconsin Ice Sheet left its marks on the city, depositing rock and debris and accounting for the hilly areas that run straight through the middle of the five boroughs. Geologists believe that the Wisconsin Ice Sheet began its southward journey from Labrador about 90,000 years ago and reached its maximum about 70,000 years ago, forming the Ronkonkoma Moraine on Long Island. During a period of warmth and retreat, it advanced again starting about 45,000 years ago, reaching New York City about 20,500 ago, forming the Harbor Hill Moraine and beginning its retreat about 18,000 years ago.

In New York City, the Wisconsin Ice Sheet was 1,000 feet thick (in the Adirondacks it was over 5,000 feet thick and perhaps as much as 10,000 feet thick in Labrador). The Wisconsin Ice Sheet had an impact not only on New York City but also farther north, deepening the bed of the Hudson River Valley (the Hudson River is the southernmost glacial fjord in the Northern Hemisphere), carving out the Great Lakes and the Finger Lakes basins, and leaving its mark on the Adirondack mountains. The glacier also deepened valleys beneath Webster Avenue in the Bronx, and the Harlem and East Rivers. It smoothed the bedrock and left glacial grooves and striations as the advancing glacier dragged rocks over the surface.

https://www.nycgovparks.org/about/history/geology

[Image: Pleistocene_north_ice_map.jpg]

Can you tell me what your cute little climate model says that the temperature of Mars should be with its 95% CO2 atmosphere? Probably a couple of hundred degress farenheit, right?
02-14-2020 10:50 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BobcatEngineer Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,090
Joined: Oct 2013
Reputation: 173
I Root For: OHIO
Location: Maryland
Post: #38
RE: Last month was the hottest January in 141 years of recorded climate history
(02-14-2020 10:50 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Can you tell me what your cute little climate model says that the temperature of Mars should be with its 95% CO2 atmosphere? Probably a couple of hundred degress farenheit, right?

Mars has an atmosphere 100 times thinner than Earth's.

What's a degress farenheit?
02-14-2020 10:54 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ericsrevenge76 Away
Lion and the Lamb
*

Posts: 14,640
Joined: Mar 2011
Reputation: 1169
I Root For: The Kingdom
Location: The Body of Christ
Post: #39
RE: Last month was the hottest January in 141 years of recorded climate history
(02-14-2020 09:50 AM)BobcatEngineer Wrote:  
(02-14-2020 09:25 AM)GrayBeard Wrote:  Your first 2 charts seem to give slightly conflicting information in regards to current levels of CO2 in the atmosphere. Of course, I could be misunderstanding, which is entirely possible.

The first chart shows a tremendous amount and spike of CO2 in the air, while the second shows a more normal cyclical amount.

Also the chart that shows how much water/ice NYC will be under just makes me laugh. It seems overly dramatic...either NYC is perfect as it is today or buried by either almost a kilometer of ice (really...a kilometer?) or 150 meters (what like 900+ feet) or water. Come on....that really doesn't pass the sniff test and seems rather dramatic.

So the first chart with the dramatic spike is trying to illustrate that over the course of thousands of years, the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere ranged between roughly 180 and 300 ppm. Since the scale of the graph is in 1000's of years, the dramatic spike on the right side of the graph is highlighted to show how much it increased in the last 150-200 years or so. We're at 416 ppm now. The second graph is simply meant to illustrate that temperature and CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere correlate. Again, since the x-axis scale is in 1000's of years, it's tough to show the recent increase due to the scale.

And the ice sheet over NYC is totally true. Even today, there are parts of Greenland covered in over 3 km thick of ice. During the last ice age, the Wisconsin and the Laurentide Ice Sheet covered most of Canada, the northeast USA, and a great deal of the midwest.

Quote:The Wisconsin Ice Sheet, the last of many glacial advances that grew after the start of the Pleistocene Era about 1.5 million years ago and which stretched down from eastern Canada (Labrador), advanced as far south as New York City. The Wisconsin Ice Sheet left its marks on the city, depositing rock and debris and accounting for the hilly areas that run straight through the middle of the five boroughs. Geologists believe that the Wisconsin Ice Sheet began its southward journey from Labrador about 90,000 years ago and reached its maximum about 70,000 years ago, forming the Ronkonkoma Moraine on Long Island. During a period of warmth and retreat, it advanced again starting about 45,000 years ago, reaching New York City about 20,500 ago, forming the Harbor Hill Moraine and beginning its retreat about 18,000 years ago.

In New York City, the Wisconsin Ice Sheet was 1,000 feet thick (in the Adirondacks it was over 5,000 feet thick and perhaps as much as 10,000 feet thick in Labrador). The Wisconsin Ice Sheet had an impact not only on New York City but also farther north, deepening the bed of the Hudson River Valley (the Hudson River is the southernmost glacial fjord in the Northern Hemisphere), carving out the Great Lakes and the Finger Lakes basins, and leaving its mark on the Adirondack mountains. The glacier also deepened valleys beneath Webster Avenue in the Bronx, and the Harlem and East Rivers. It smoothed the bedrock and left glacial grooves and striations as the advancing glacier dragged rocks over the surface.

https://www.nycgovparks.org/about/history/geology

[Image: Pleistocene_north_ice_map.jpg]



Jesus saves.

He created the earth BTW, will destroy it one day soon and create a brand new heavens and earth.

The smartest move you can make is to repent and believe in Him with all your heart, clean up after yourself in the meantime. He will take care of the rest.
02-14-2020 11:01 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
UofMstateU Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 26,300
Joined: Dec 2009
Reputation: 2011
I Root For: Memphis
Location:
Post: #40
RE: Last month was the hottest January in 141 years of recorded climate history
(02-14-2020 10:54 AM)BobcatEngineer Wrote:  
(02-14-2020 10:50 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  Can you tell me what your cute little climate model says that the temperature of Mars should be with its 95% CO2 atmosphere? Probably a couple of hundred degress farenheit, right?

Mars has an atmosphere 100 times thinner than Earth's.

Isnt that cute.


Earth - CO2 = .04%
Mars - CO2 = 95%

See an issue there, climate boy? Whats the temperature of mars again?


Also, you didnt seem to care about atmospheric "thickness" when you mentioned Venus. How much more thick is Venus' atmosphere than the earth's?
(This post was last modified: 02-14-2020 11:02 AM by UofMstateU.)
02-14-2020 11:01 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2020 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2020 MyBB Group.