Climate

On a certain level, it doesn't matter whether climate change is man-made or not (although it pretty much is); fact is that it is happening, it is affecting lives right now and will affect millions if not billions of lives in the not too distant future, and the strict denial that it is a problem we need to deal with coming from US conservatives is not helping matters in the slightest. Neither is cutting climate research funds.

As to cow farts, feeding them certain seaweeds might be the answer, if the research is valid.

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/world/how-one-researcher-is-fighting-cow-farts-and-climate-change-by-feeding-the-gassy-beasts-seaweed

The E wrote:On a certain level, it doesn't matter whether climate change is man-made or not (although it pretty much is); fact is that it is happening, it is affecting lives right now and will affect millions if not billions of lives in the not too distant future, and the strict denial that it is a problem we need to deal with coming from US conservatives is not helping matters in the slightest. Neither is cutting climate research funds.

Well, dude, we have this thing called science. We have a historical record with much colder and warmer periods not very long ago. We can't match science to the historical record. In short we cannot model our climate on earth yet you shout with 100% certainty it is human caused when we know with 100% certainty that humans had nothing to do with giant Temperature swings in the past...

Two thumbs up for deductive reasoning.

The Q is not weather climate is changing. It is always changing and effecting Billions of lives. It is weather what we humans are doing has any statistical impact compared to what the earth naturally does which oh by the way we cannot model, so we have no bloody idea, other than screaming in fear and trepidation...

Playing make-believe we can keep the climate from changing is the ultimate hubris.

Well, dude, we have this thing called science. We have a historical record with much colder and warmer periods not very long ago. We can't match science to the historical record. In short we cannot model our climate on earth yet you shout with 100% certainty it is human caused when we know with 100% certainty that humans had nothing to do with giant Temperature swings in the past...

Science also has quite a fair amount of understanding of what happened during other temperature changes.

As i´ve noted before, and you COULD have read on your own, by what science knows, we SHOULD by natural and known NON-human causes currently be having a cooldown, not a warming.

Two thumbs up for deductive reasoning.

I don´t have enough thumbs to show down to equalise your disregard for science while claiming to spout it.

It is weather what we humans are doing has any statistical impact compared to what the earth naturally does which oh by the way we cannot model, so we have no bloody idea, other than screaming in fear and trepidation...

Yes, because climate anomalies coinciding so neatly with human events have never been noticed... Oh wait, they have, repeatedly.
Bummer for you i guess.

There is so much research that all hangs together on how human activity affects climate, that I'm amazed to see anyone disagreeing. Many strong skeptics have now moved from saying it doesn't happen to argueing about just how significant it is.
I too like to see real world indicators to support theories and cold statistics. Some for me include long haul night flights at night across Asia and Europe where it is a sea of light from Earth's dominant species'population bloom. Another is the changing climate where I live, with each year hotter than the last.
Continental sized examples from history include how during the Troy wars and such, people in the Mediterranean cut down trees in the north of Africa to build trimeres. Result deserts across the region. Australia had a temperate rain forest centre until the first people arrived 50,000 years ago. They used fire to facilitate hunting, result desert.

Daryl wrote:There is so much research that all hangs together on how human activity affects climate, that I'm amazed to see anyone disagreeing. Many strong skeptics have now moved from saying it doesn't happen to argueing about just how significant it is.
I too like to see real world indicators to support theories and cold statistics. Some for me include long haul night flights at night across Asia and Europe where it is a sea of light from Earth's dominant species'population bloom. Another is the changing climate where I live, with each year hotter than the last.
Continental sized examples from history include how during the Troy wars and such, people in the Mediterranean cut down trees in the north of Africa to build trimeres. Result deserts across the region. Australia had a temperate rain forest centre until the first people arrived 50,000 years ago. They used fire to facilitate hunting, result desert.

My last Historical Geology class (GEO 1003) was back in 1967. But I do seem to remember something about glacial and inter glacial periods lasting 10s of thousands of years. For the Earth's climate to change in mere hundreds of years seemsto suggest that some thing other than naturally occurring climate change is going on.

Cow farts not withstanding. But then again the explosive growth of cow populations over the centuries as a response to the increased wealth and ensuing demand for beef is also part of the man-made problem.

WeirdlyWired wrote:
My last Historical Geology class (GEO 1003) was back in 1967. But I do seem to remember something about glacial and inter glacial periods lasting 10s of thousands of years. For the Earth's climate to change in mere hundreds of years seemsto suggest that some thing other than naturally occurring climate change is going on.
...

That´s one of the things usually considered an absurdly blatant hint yes.
Most of Earth´s climate cycles happen over thousands of years at minimum, yet human civilisation happens and suddenly we see in decades or even years, the kind of changes that are usually, forgive the pun, glacially slow.

Tenshinai wrote:

WeirdlyWired wrote:
My last Historical Geology class (GEO 1003) was back in 1967. But I do seem to remember something about glacial and inter glacial periods lasting 10s of thousands of years. For the Earth's climate to change in mere hundreds of years seemsto suggest that some thing other than naturally occurring climate change is going on.
...

That´s one of the things usually considered an absurdly blatant hint yes.
Most of Earth´s climate cycles happen over thousands of years at minimum, yet human civilisation happens and suddenly we see in decades or even years, the kind of changes that are usually, forgive the pun, glacially slow.

Other than that not being true, as the T rise isn't what is claimed to begin with due to their blatant T manipulation. It was so blatant, the IPCC got caught manipulating it and emailing about it... THey were busy schemeing ways to get around WHY the T's weren't rising like they predicted and how to manipulate the data to show otherwise.

Other than those blatant lies, you would be correct.

What we also know to be true historically is a complete collapse of the ice sheet over Canada in a few Centuries time due to the enormous thousand km long drumlins, eskers, etc across Canada where we can calculate flow rate for their creation. Several thousand meters of ice, KABOOM, Gone. That is not a gradual change in T.

The temperature swings were not gradual. By not gradual we are talking centuries for 10C swings, not millennia.

The temperature swings were not gradual. By not gradual we are talking centuries for 10C swings, not millennia.

You need to realise the difference between local and global.

Other than that not being true, as the T rise isn't what is claimed to begin with due to their blatant T manipulation. It was so blatant, the IPCC got caught manipulating it and emailing about it... THey were busy schemeing ways to get around WHY the T's weren't rising like they predicted and how to manipulate the data to show otherwise.

Seriously, when are you going to figure out that what the conspiracy morons claimed happened, didn´t?

That story is no more true now that it has been repeated endlessly by idiots than it was when it was first cooked up based on ridiculous exaggerations about what TWO people out of thousands wrote.

What we also know to be true historically is a complete collapse of the ice sheet over Canada in a few Centuries time due to the enormous thousand km long drumlins, eskers, etc across Canada where we can calculate flow rate for their creation. Several thousand meters of ice, KABOOM, Gone. That is not a gradual change in T.

Ugh... Can´t you at least ONCE try to be well informed about something when you make claims about it?

And FYI, there´s still a huge difference between centuries and decades, just in case you didn´t realise that little fact.

Tenshinai wrote:

The temperature swings were not gradual. By not gradual we are talking centuries for 10C swings, not millennia.

You need to realise the difference between local and global.

Other than that not being true, as the T rise isn't what is claimed to begin with due to their blatant T manipulation. It was so blatant, the IPCC got caught manipulating it and emailing about it... THey were busy schemeing ways to get around WHY the T's weren't rising like they predicted and how to manipulate the data to show otherwise.

Seriously, when are you going to figure out that what the conspiracy morons claimed happened, didn´t?

That story is no more true now that it has been repeated endlessly by idiots than it was when it was first cooked up based on ridiculous exaggerations about what TWO people out of thousands wrote.

What we also know to be true historically is a complete collapse of the ice sheet over Canada in a few Centuries time due to the enormous thousand km long drumlins, eskers, etc across Canada where we can calculate flow rate for their creation. Several thousand meters of ice, KABOOM, Gone. That is not a gradual change in T.

Ugh... Can´t you at least ONCE try to be well informed about something when you make claims about it?

And FYI, there´s still a huge difference between centuries and decades, just in case you didn´t realise that little fact.

And, again we are hung upon "TERMS" some Scientist was talking to a reporter and used the term GLOBAL WARMING as a quick quote for what is actually GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE. And yes it is being driven by a slight change in average global temperature.

And yes, there was a span where global temperatures did not go up, and yes there was some mention of recording anomalies or some other data causes and howto fit that into modeling algorythms. And YES it did get distorted into some grand conspiracy theory which has been debunked several times. But who pays attention to the debunking of fake news when it is so much easier to just keep repeating the fake story that fits one's world view. Not attacking, just wondering.

So today there is a blizzard here in northern Oregon, I guess that should once and for all put a nail in the coffin of global warming.