Machine Nation

Irish Politics Forum - Politics Technology Economics in Ireland - A Look Under The Nation's Bonnet


Devilish machinations come to naught --Milton
 
PortalPortal  HomeHome  FAQFAQ  SearchSearch  MemberlistMemberlist  UsergroupsUsergroups  RegisterRegister  Log in  GalleryGallery  MACHINENATION.org  

Share | 
 

 Arguments about climate change

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
Go to page : Previous  1 ... 8 ... 13, 14, 15 ... 19 ... 25  Next
AuthorMessage
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Arguments about climate change   Tue Dec 23, 2008 10:56 pm

This is even simpler logic.

The tsunami was just a bigger movement than happens every single day with the movements of plates all over the Earth.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19225780.041-continental-drift-the-final-proof.html

This New Scientist aticle points out that the continents are moving from one another at up to 7cm per year. That is about 2 feet in the last hundred years.

This can not happen without changes in the ocean floor unless you want to convince us that there is a 2 foot wide crack in the Earth.

I am not surprised that the others would parrot about the sealevel but you as a geologist knows quite well that the oceon floor changes elevation all the time just as you know that the elevation of Mount Everest is rising 1 cm each year.

So I suggest that Pax, Cactus, AT and Papal Knight all camp out at the summit of Everest. In the unlikely event that they are still worried about global warming they can at least know that relative to their perch that sealevel is actually falling by 0.3 inchs a year.

Happy days and bundle up well lads.
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Arguments about climate change   Tue Dec 23, 2008 11:01 pm

youngdan wrote:
This is even simpler logic.

[...]

This New Scientist aticle points out that the continents are moving from one another at up to 7cm per year. That is about 2 feet in the last hundred years.

[...]

1 foot = 30.48 cm
30.48 cm x 2 = 60.96 cm
60.96 cm = 2 feet

60.96 / 7 = 8.7086 years.

Even according to your figure of 7cm per year the plates have moved the 2 feet in 8.7086 years, not 100 years.
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Arguments about climate change   Tue Dec 23, 2008 11:20 pm

youngdan wrote:
This is even simpler logic.

The tsunami was just a bigger movement than happens every single day with the movements of plates all over the Earth.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19225780.041-continental-drift-the-final-proof.html

This New Scientist aticle points out that the continents are moving from one another at up to 7cm per year. That is about 2 feet in the last hundred years.

This can not happen without changes in the ocean floor unless you want to convince us that there is a 2 foot wide crack in the Earth.

It's called a mid-oceanic ridge, and it's generally a good deal wider than 2 feet. It's where the basaltic magma that makes ocean floor wells up to the surface.

youngdan wrote:
I am not surprised that the others would parrot about the sealevel but you as a geologist knows quite well that the oceon floor changes elevation all the time just as you know that the elevation of Mount Everest is rising 1 cm each year.

Indeed, and those movements are monitored across most of the world's oceans. Which is how we know that there is no global rise in the seafloor. Bits of the seafloor go up, bits of the seafloor go down - on average it cancels out. It doesn't lead to a smooth rising trend in sea-level - indeed, there's no known mechanism by which the seafloors would consistently rise on average across a century.

I've a feeling you've something about isostatic rebound lodged in your head. Ulster, for example, is actually rising higher above sea level, due to post-glacial isostatic rebound.
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Arguments about climate change   Tue Dec 23, 2008 11:26 pm

Ard-Taoiseach wrote:
ibis wrote:
youngdan wrote:
I expect the entire global warming thing to fade away. Nothing like record cold temps to set people thinking.

The bigger reason is that it is no longer needed as the economy is collapsing without it.

The impoverishing of the masses is well under way even though I was told it couldn't happened 18 months ago.

Just wait to see the changes the next 3 months bring.

People are going on about how this is the coolest year "since 2000" - as if that proved something other than their own stupidity. Trends don't go along straight lines - they fluctuate around a changing mean. If the world warms by 10 degrees, there will still be youngdans pointing out that some summer or other is the coolest for a decade, and still thinking it's something other than a slightly fancy way of saying "hey, I don't understand the science at all".

But then, we know people don't understand these things, because otherwise we wouldn't be in the mess we're in, eh? Both economies and science are so much more complex than most people can grasp, that they revert to dealing with it in the time honoured primitive way - ascribe it to a conscious agent. The modern version is a conspiracy, but the doors marked "creationism" and "god did it" are right next door.

Indeed. Just because graphs show a short to medium-term downward trajectory doesn't mean that the long-term trend is as well. As we well know from the stock exchange, just because the ISEQ takes a 6-month long rally towards 5000 from now doesn't change the underlying negative direction driving it that will take it back down to the mid 2000s. Look at this graph:



youngdan's argument could have and probably was made in the period after 1900 and 1940 to argue that the world was back on a trend of reducing global temperatures. These views were wrong since rises in greenhouse emissions and the cumulative feedback effect of previous emissions alongside natural variables like the intensity of the sun drove the long-term trend of temperatures up. Since emissions in general continue to rise;





there is nothing to suggest that this decade of cooling is anything but a temporary aberration which will be swiftly be corrected by the fundamental logic of rising greenhouse emissions. Temperatures are going to continue to increase, climate change is a reality and emissions must be sharply reduced.

It was 12 degrees here today, and we are all sitting around in t-shirts with no heating on all day. The Christmas tree lights are enough to warm the whole house.

Youngdan, if we were talking only about the future, there might be a point to this, but climate change has been going on proportionately to use of carbon energy for some time now. They have blue tongue disease in the UK and you have Nile disease in NY. You may not want to acknowledge it is going on, but the birds and the bugs know it is and are acting accordingly.
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Arguments about climate change   Tue Dec 23, 2008 11:28 pm

johnfás wrote:
youngdan wrote:
This is even simpler logic.

[...]

This New Scientist aticle points out that the continents are moving from one another at up to 7cm per year. That is about 2 feet in the last hundred years.

[...]

1 foot = 30.48 cm
30.48 cm x 2 = 60.96 cm
60.96 cm = 2 feet

60.96 / 7 = 8.7086 years.

Even according to your figure of 7cm per year the plates have moved the 2 feet in 8.7086 years, not 100 years.

Thanks JohnFas for pointing that out. The drift is more than 10 times what I had thought when changed into feet.

The 5 sweltering Amigos will not be happy with you pointing this out as it makes them look 10 times as foolish when they rant about 0.2 inchs
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Arguments about climate change   Tue Dec 23, 2008 11:46 pm

Time for Mumbo Jumbo Ibis to try and confuse the readers I see.

I knew you would be right back talking about the ridge when I quipped about the crack. We know about the ridge and it is gigantic. You say

"It's where the basaltic magna that makes ocean floors wells up to the surface"

Even Papal can figure out that this would raise the sea level. Have you really a geology degree.

You say that a rise in the floor in one oceon is averaged by a drop in the floor in another ocean. If my son made such an elementary mistake I would scould him.
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Arguments about climate change   Tue Dec 23, 2008 11:50 pm

"the birds and the bugs know it"



Cactus. my suspicians were correct. You are talking to the birds
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Arguments about climate change   Wed Dec 24, 2008 12:03 am

youngdan wrote:
"the birds and the bugs know it"



Cactus. my suspicians were correct. You are talking to the birds

Indeed I am youngdan, and some of them are not happy with the way you are ignoring their predicament. Expect a visit soon:



This is what is happening -
Quote :
Unprecedented breeding failure of seabirds in
the North Sea
In 004, tens of thousands of long-lived, slow-breeding seabirds nesting in Britain’s North Sea coastal breeding colonies failed to raise any young; in some cases starving adult birds ate those chicks that did hatch. This breeding crash has been attributed to food
shortages and large-scale changes in North Sea marine ecosystems linked to ocean warming and climate change.
http://www.panda.org/about_wwf/what_we_do/climate_change/problems/impacts/species/cc_and_birds/index.cfm
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Arguments about climate change   Wed Dec 24, 2008 12:26 am

youngdan wrote:
Time for Mumbo Jumbo Ibis to try and confuse the readers I see.

I knew you would be right back talking about the ridge when I quipped about the crack. We know about the ridge and it is gigantic. You say

"It's where the basaltic magna that makes ocean floors wells up to the surface"

Even Papal can figure out that this would raise the sea level. Have you really a geology degree.

It subsides as it travels away from the ridge. That's why there's a ridge.

youngdan wrote:
You say that a rise in the floor in one oceon is averaged by a drop in the floor in another ocean. If my son made such an elementary mistake I would scould him.

Would you now...I pity the poor lad his position in the ongoing clash between reality and you.
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Arguments about climate change   Wed Dec 24, 2008 1:09 am

The only real-world thing to worry about wrt climate change and the sea floor is the frozen methane hydrate deposits, sitting, hundreds of metres below it.

And how frozen and stable they remain as the temperature rises from anthropogenic or human activities.



Last edited by Pax on Wed Dec 24, 2008 9:24 pm; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : re-added image)
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Arguments about climate change   Wed Dec 24, 2008 2:05 am

Ibis Now you are beginning to sound like Cactus. You have not a clue what you are talking about. That is why it is called a ridge.

You can't even figure out why your statement about the averaging of sea bed elevations is overlooking the obvious. Or maybe recognising it would make your argument even more silly.

Pax. If tempertures rise as you fear and if the methane frozen in the permafrost is released then there would be a cause of concern. So send them a thermometer and have a report sent back
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Arguments about climate change   Wed Dec 24, 2008 2:10 am

Has Scandinavia not went through a post glacial rise and is ongoing?
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Arguments about climate change   Wed Dec 24, 2008 2:23 am

Give up on this one youngdan. I am not overimpressed with our efforts in establishing the climate change case but I even less overwhelmed by your response. One-liners are very amusing and I thank you very much for the high entertainment value which has been top class, but the permafrost methane is already on the go, and can be lit with a box of swan vestas.

Are you going to produce any data that shows the IPCC reports to be wrong?
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Arguments about climate change   Wed Dec 24, 2008 2:46 am

SeathrúnCeitinn wrote:
Has Scandinavia not went through a post glacial rise and is ongoing?

Yup. Same for Canada et al.

cactus flower wrote:
I am not overimpressed with our efforts in establishing the climate change case but I even less overwhelmed by your response.

That's a bit harsh - I don't know about anybody else, but I'm only here to treat youngdan's straw men as Aunt Sallys, not to establish the case for climate change to his satisfaction. It's been established by a massive scientific effort, which I've read the literature from for nigh on twenty years - let youngdan (and me) have some fun with his terribly interesting suggestions.

I doubt it's possible to establish the case for climate change to youngdan's satisfaction, if it comes to it. I'm content with knowing that people like him are now firmly in a minority, so the rest of us can get on with actually doing something - albeit twenty years after we should have got going.
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Arguments about climate change   Wed Dec 24, 2008 3:13 am

My view is not in the minority back here so fire ahead.

The climate has changed since the Earth was formed but you insist it is because of CO 2.
The climate on the planets is changing.

Grown men here are worried about the sealevel rising 0.2 inchs when we all agree that it was once hundreds of feet different.

Finally Cactus comes along talking about methane. Do you even read the posts as I just said that I was concerned about the methane.

As regards being convinced. Well I was lucky not to be convinced that an ice age was coming in the 70s like the experts were ranting about.

The global average temperture for 2008 will be released shortly. My bet is that it will be below normal but none of the sweltering Amigos have the gumption to bet the other way.

Maybe Pax actually believes what he says and would like a wager
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Arguments about climate change   Wed Dec 24, 2008 3:23 am

youngdan wrote:
My view is not in the minority back here so fire ahead.

The climate has changed since the Earth was formed but you insist it is because of CO 2.
The climate on the planets is changing.

Grown men here are worried about the sealevel rising 0.2 inchs when we all agree that it was once hundreds of feet different.

Finally Cactus comes along talking about methane. Do you even read the posts as I just said that I was concerned about the methane.

As regards being convinced. Well I was lucky not to be convinced that an ice age was coming in the 70s like the experts were ranting about.

The global average temperture for 2008 will be released shortly. My bet is that it will be below normal but none of the sweltering Amigos have the gumption to bet the other way.

Maybe Pax actually believes what he says and would like a wager

Meteorologists who agree with the IPCC have forecast ten coolish years. Have you read the reports?
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Arguments about climate change   Wed Dec 24, 2008 3:51 am

What excuse do they give for these years being coolish. Is it a miracle. I suppose after the 10 cold years then global warming will kick in with a vengence. I did not read the reports of the people who think the end is nigh and neither did I read reports from the 30000 scientists who reckon it is bunk.
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Arguments about climate change   Wed Dec 24, 2008 3:53 am

youngdan wrote:
What excuse do they give for these years being coolish. Is it a miracle. I suppose after the 10 cold years then global warming will kick in with a vengence. I did not read the reports of the people who think the end is nigh and neither did I read reports from the 30000 scientists who reckon it is bunk.

The majority seem to think that it is not bunk - so many scientists, so little time.
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Arguments about climate change   Wed Dec 24, 2008 3:58 am

youngdan wrote:
What excuse do they give for these years being coolish. Is it a miracle. I suppose after the 10 cold years then global warming will kick in with a vengence. I did not read the reports of the people who think the end is nigh and neither did I read reports from the 30000 scientists who reckon it is bunk.

Well, at least it's well-rounded ignorance!

You still haven't grasped a basic point here, youngdan - it's a trend. It's overlaid on lots of other cycles, epicycles, and non-cyclic climate events. It's like watching someone who's falling off a bike - there are wobbles either way, but you can see that eventually they will fall over.

To some extent, even the US government(s) are beginning to cop on, so perhaps there aren't quite so many youngdans as there were, although an asteroid is too much to hope for.
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Arguments about climate change   Wed Dec 24, 2008 4:17 am

The trend at the moment is toward cooling is it not.

You may never have heard the investment advice, "The trend is your friend"

When do you expect this 10 year trend to reverse higher.

I am happy to stick with the present trend of cooling.

Do you agree that the upcoming figures will point to the lowering trend to continue.
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Arguments about climate change   Wed Dec 24, 2008 5:20 am

youngdan wrote:
The trend at the moment is toward cooling is it not.

You may never have heard the investment advice, "The trend is your friend"

When do you expect this 10 year trend to reverse higher.

I am happy to stick with the present trend of cooling.

Do you agree that the upcoming figures will point to the lowering trend to continue.

It's a decadal trend superimposed on the longer term rising trend - that's what's predicted anyway, based on a slight weakening of the Gulf Stream. Quote from the German scientists who are making this prediction:

Quote :
"Just to make things clear: we are not stating that anthropogenic climate change won't be as bad as previously thought," Mojib Latif of the Leibniz Institute said in a statement. "What we are saying is that on top of the warming trend there is a long-periodic oscillation that will probably lead to a lower temperature increase than we would expect from the current trend during the next years."
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Arguments about climate change   Wed Dec 24, 2008 7:01 am

A slight weakening of the Gulf Stream. Now we are talking about real problems.

If I were to convert tomorrow and decide to argue a case for global warming I would not dwell on the sea level. Anyone saying that the statue of liberty is going to be submerged is coming accross as a fruitloop. It is more likely that a big earthquake will cause California to dissappear in the minds of most. If the water level rose a foot over a hundred years it would not matter a rats ass to anyone here.

I would dwell on things like the Gulf Stream, the methane in the thermafrost and most of all the likes of mosquitos in Ireland. The birds dying may be dying from eating oil soaked sardines but unless the mosquitos are wearing jumpers they are out of place.

To my mind tying the warming to man made activities is a tougher job. It is hard not to believe that the chief determinant is not the energy output of the Sun. The Sun is less active going by sunspot activity of late anyway so maybe these past few years are cooling.

What nails the case for me is the money aspect. You say it is revenue neutral. Well every fine or tax is revenue neutral. One lad pays the money and another lad gets the money. No fancy words changes that. Pay enough money and you can pollute all you want. If the planet was being destroyed do you really think that a bit of payola to Don Gorelioni would make it OK.

I think we have all seen enough thievery at this stage to know the answer to that.

There is to be a slight easing of temps here tomorrow so maybe the 10 degrees is heading my way. Merry Christmas.
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Arguments about climate change   Wed Dec 24, 2008 7:14 am

[quote="youngdan"]A slight weakening of the Gulf Stream. Now we are talking about real problems.

If I were to convert tomorrow and decide to argue a case for global warming I would not dwell on the sea level. Anyone saying that the statue of liberty is going to be submerged is coming accross as a fruitloop. It is more likely that a big earthquake will cause California to dissappear in the minds of most. If the water level rose a foot over a hundred years it would not matter a rats ass to anyone here.

I would dwell on things like the Gulf Stream, the methane in the thermafrost and most of all the likes of mosquitos in Ireland. The birds dying may be dying from eating oil soaked sardines but unless the mosquitos are wearing jumpers they are out of place.

To my mind tying the warming to man made activities is a tougher job. It is hard not to believe that the chief determinant is not the energy output of the Sun. The Sun is less active going by sunspot activity of late anyway so maybe these past few years are cooling.

What nails the case for me is the money aspect. You say it is revenue neutral. Well every fine or tax is revenue neutral. One lad pays the money and another lad gets the money. No fancy words changes that. Pay enough money and you can pollute all you want. If the planet was being destroyed do you really think that a bit of payola to Don Gorelioni would make it OK.

lol! lol!

ho ho

lol!
quote]
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest



PostSubject: Re: Arguments about climate change   Fri Dec 26, 2008 11:40 am

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science/12/16/melting.ice/index.html

More news from NASA on the melting of ice
  • About 2 trillion tons of ice have melted in Greenland, Antarctica, Alaska since 2003

  • Lost amount of water could fill up Chesapeake Bay 21 times, NASA scientist says

  • Most came from Greenland, where losses raised global sea levels .5 mm annually

  • Scientist says sea levels rising 50 percent faster than 15 years ago


  • Pine beetle infestation is killing forests in Colorado and Western Canada because the weather isn't getting cold enough to kill the beetles in the winter.



    We lost half our cold hestnut trees here this year because of climate related disease - they went down to disease because it was too warm and too damp for them.
    Back to top Go down
    Guest
    Guest



    PostSubject: Re: Arguments about climate change   Fri Dec 26, 2008 10:46 pm

    http://www.newsmax.com/brennan/global_warming_Gore/2008/12/24/165048.html

    CNN is just Ted Turner and his UN foolishness. Most media is talking about a new ice age.

    The likes of CNN and the NY Times on the left are going bankrupt because fewer believe their rubbish every day.

    Fox News and THE NY Post and their likes on the right are going bankrupt because even fewer believe their rubbish every day.

    If those beetles in Colorado survived the freeze of the moment then they are SUPERBEETLES
    Back to top Go down
    Sponsored content




    PostSubject: Re: Arguments about climate change   

    Back to top Go down
     
    Arguments about climate change
    View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
    Page 14 of 25Go to page : Previous  1 ... 8 ... 13, 14, 15 ... 19 ... 25  Next
     Similar topics
    -
    » Migraine triggers..
    » Snow on the Sahara Desert 20 Jan. 2017 - Absolute Proof of Climate Change!
    » Season of change; need clarity and clear direction.
    » Can you change the icon?
    » How to change DHW Temperature?

    Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
    Machine Nation  :: Machine Nation :: The Natural World / The Environment-
    Jump to: