15,000 scientists in 184 countries warn about negative global environmental trends

Heated discussions on a hot topic.
User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Has No Life
Posts: 19710
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

15,000 scientists in 184 countries warn about negative global environmental trends

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Mon Nov 13, 2017 11:44 pm

15,000 scientists in 184 countries warn about negative global environmental trends
Date: November 13, 2017
Source: Oregon State University
Summary: Human well-being will be severely jeopardized by negative trends in some types of environmental harm, such as a changing climate, deforestation, loss of access to fresh water, species extinctions and human population growth, scientists warn.

Human well-being will be severely jeopardized by negative trends in some types of environmental harm, such as a changing climate, deforestation, loss of access to fresh water, species extinctions and human population growth, scientists warn in today's issue of BioScience, an international journal.

The viewpoint article -- "World Scientists' Warning to Humanity: A Second Notice" -- was signed by more than 15,000 scientists in 184 countries.

The warning came with steps that can be taken to reverse negative trends, but the authors suggested that it may take a groundswell of public pressure to convince political leaders to take the right corrective actions. Such activities could include establishing more terrestrial and marine reserves, strengthening enforcement of anti-poaching laws and restraints on wildlife trade, expanding family planning and educational programs for women, promoting a dietary shift toward plant-based foods and massively adopting renewable energy and other "green" technologies.

Global trends have worsened since 1992, the authors wrote, when more than 1,700 scientists -- including a majority of the living Nobel laureates at the time -- signed a "World Scientists' Warning to Humanity" published by the Union of Concerned Scientists. In the last 25 years, trends in nine environmental issues suggest that humanity is continuing to risk its future. However, the article also reports that progress has been made in addressing some trends during this time.

The article was written by an international team led by William Ripple, distinguished professor in the College of Forestry at Oregon State University. The authors used data maintained by government agencies, nonprofit organizations and individual researchers to warn of "substantial and irreversible harm" to the Earth.


Continues...
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

User avatar
Jim Steele
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2254
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 1:42 am
Custom Title: Consensus is not evidence
Contact:

Re: 15,000 scientists in 184 countries warn about negative global environmental trends

Postby Jim Steele » Tue Nov 14, 2017 1:22 am

Nothing more than political theater typical for the UCS
“In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." Galileo

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Has No Life
Posts: 19710
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: 15,000 scientists in 184 countries warn about negative global environmental trends

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Tue Nov 14, 2017 1:43 am

Do you pay taxes on that money?
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10700
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: 15,000 scientists in 184 countries warn about negative global environmental trends

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Nov 14, 2017 4:41 am

Jim Steele wrote:Nothing more than political theater typical for the UCS

Nothing more? Its all a lie?? Groundless??? Baseless???? The truth being just the opposite?????

Stupid Scientists and Nobel Laureates speaking from their own expertise.

Fools. "I got your science right here :tease: "
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10077
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: 15,000 scientists in 184 countries warn about negative global environmental trends

Postby Lance Kennedy » Wed Nov 15, 2017 3:42 am

This is kinda pointless. Every rational person knows that global warming is real and caused by people. Since this is a skeptic forum, no one here should be in denial.

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29288
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: 15,000 scientists in 184 countries warn about negative global environmental trends

Postby Gord » Wed Nov 15, 2017 3:57 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:This is kinda pointless. Every rational person knows that global warming is real and caused by people. Since this is a skeptic forum, no one here should be in denial.

You say that, and yet we have a holocaust denial forum.
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10077
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: 15,000 scientists in 184 countries warn about negative global environmental trends

Postby Lance Kennedy » Wed Nov 15, 2017 4:46 am

Gord

I used the word 'should '. We all are aware of the less than rational people who insist on posting on this forum.

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29288
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: 15,000 scientists in 184 countries warn about negative global environmental trends

Postby Gord » Wed Nov 15, 2017 5:15 am

Myself, I'm only vaguely aware.
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10486
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: 15,000 scientists in 184 countries warn about negative global environmental trends

Postby xouper » Wed Nov 15, 2017 5:33 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:This is kinda pointless. Every rational person knows that global warming is real and caused by people. Since this is a skeptic forum, no one here should be in denial.


I agree, denial is not skepticism.

However, it is entirely legitimate and rational to express skepticism about claims of fact, including claims about global warming.

To do so is not the same as being in denial.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10700
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: 15,000 scientists in 184 countries warn about negative global environmental trends

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Wed Nov 15, 2017 6:47 am

I agree. Denial is not skepticism. HOWEVER: turtles cannot fly.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10486
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: 15,000 scientists in 184 countries warn about negative global environmental trends

Postby xouper » Wed Nov 15, 2017 7:18 am

Image

;)

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10700
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: 15,000 scientists in 184 countries warn about negative global environmental trends

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Wed Nov 15, 2017 7:58 am

X==excellent. I was going to add "...not on a parabola from a launched position...." but I forgot your predilection for graphics.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Has No Life
Posts: 19710
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: 15,000 scientists in 184 countries warn about negative global environmental trends

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Wed Nov 15, 2017 12:46 pm

Gord wrote:
Lance Kennedy wrote:This is kinda pointless. Every rational person knows that global warming is real and caused by people. Since this is a skeptic forum, no one here should be in denial.

You say that, and yet we have a holocaust denial forum.

Should be under the Reality Denial Forum.
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

User avatar
Abdul Alhazred
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2700
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 9:08 pm
Custom Title: Yes that one.
Location: Chicago

Re: 15,000 scientists in 184 countries warn about negative global environmental trends

Postby Abdul Alhazred » Wed Nov 15, 2017 3:23 pm

15,000 scientists in 184 countries know who sign their respective paychecks.

Meanwhile, we are definitely doomed because ...

Global climate action must be gender equal
Teh Gruniad

Because it will never be gender equal. ;)
Scientists don't know everything, therefore my favorite flavor of stoopidz is true.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10700
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: 15,000 scientists in 184 countries warn about negative global environmental trends

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Wed Nov 15, 2017 9:20 pm

Gender Equality==>failure to stay focused on Rank Priority. Just another sin of conflation.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Jim Steele
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2254
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 1:42 am
Custom Title: Consensus is not evidence
Contact:

Re: 15,000 scientists in 184 countries warn about negative global environmental trends

Postby Jim Steele » Thu Nov 16, 2017 12:33 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Nothing more? Its all a lie?? Groundless??? Baseless???? The truth being just the opposite?????

Stupid Scientists and Nobel Laureates speaking from their own expertise.

Fools. "I got your science right here :tease: "


Typical dooms day alarmist retort that fabricates a multitude of false equivalencies to counter the fact that the paper is still political theater.

The issues in their paper need to be addressed case by case. Then we can discuss their veracity.
“In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." Galileo

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10077
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: 15,000 scientists in 184 countries warn about negative global environmental trends

Postby Lance Kennedy » Thu Nov 16, 2017 12:38 am

Jim

There is no doubt that global warming is real, that it is caused by human activity, and that it is important for humanity to take mitigating action.

You can quibble all you like about the fiddly detail, but those three points are essential.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10486
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: 15,000 scientists in 184 countries warn about negative global environmental trends

Postby xouper » Thu Nov 16, 2017 12:43 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:There is no doubt that global warming is real, that it is caused by human activity, and that it is important for humanity to take mitigating action.


That depends on which experts you choose to believe.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10077
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: 15,000 scientists in 184 countries warn about negative global environmental trends

Postby Lance Kennedy » Thu Nov 16, 2017 1:50 am

In this case, Xouper, it is 100% of all climate experts and 95% of all other scientists.

User avatar
Jim Steele
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2254
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2014 1:42 am
Custom Title: Consensus is not evidence
Contact:

Re: 15,000 scientists in 184 countries warn about negative global environmental trends

Postby Jim Steele » Thu Nov 16, 2017 3:13 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:There is no doubt that global warming is real, that it is caused by human activity, and that it is important for humanity to take mitigating action.



Indeed climate change is real! Indeed temperatures rose since the Little Ice Age. However that the end of the Little Ice was caused by CO2 is very, very debatable and highly unlikely. However if Co2 did end the Little Ice Age that would be a good thing.

It is also clear CO2 is a greenhouse gas, but it is not clear that CO2 has caused any climate change. On a local level, it is indisputable that changes in landscapes can dry out the land and raise temperatures. It is indisputable that natural cycles cause climate oscillations, but it is not clear that CO2 changes anything.

So what is your evidence that CO2 has caused any of the observed changes in climate?

To say there is no doubt is unscientific, and a matter of dubious belief. To quote Ghandi "It is not wise to be too sure of your own wisdom!"


And to Pyrrho the "moderator": When a poster like Gawdzilla continues to slander my views as the result of being a paid shill by some nefarious outfit, not only is it a stupid conspiracy theory, but it is a personal attack. To be consistent, such personal attacks should be moderated. However Pyrrho has allowed others to slander me before so I doubt there will be any reasonable action. I had warned that when such personal attacks are allowed, it only encourages the attacked person to return in kind, as I am wont to do. I suggest if we want a respectful forum, Pyrrho needs to truly moderate, and at the very least delete such personal attacks before things get out of hand.
“In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual." Galileo

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10077
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: 15,000 scientists in 184 countries warn about negative global environmental trends

Postby Lance Kennedy » Thu Nov 16, 2017 3:50 am

Jim

The impact of CO2 is measured and quantified. The original experiments were done by Arrhenius passing infra red down tubes full of various gases and measuring temperature increase. His work has been repeated many times with far greater precision, and we now know EXACTLY how much the atmosphere warms for incremental increases in CO2 levels. The temperature increase since the industrial revolution is EXACTLY what was expected for the measured increase in CO2, and matches experiment with high accuracy.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10700
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: 15,000 scientists in 184 countries warn about negative global environmental trends

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Nov 16, 2017 4:44 am

Steeles position that he denies when questioned directly upon it is as he just stated above:

1. co2 is a green house gas but it doesn't warm the air. (((aka: "It is also clear CO2 is a greenhouse gas, but it is not clear that CO2 has caused any climate change.")))

2. The red herring so effectively used by JS: "However that the end of the Little Ice was caused by CO2 is very, very debatable and highly unlikely." ///// Its NOT debateable at all because no climate scientist makes this claim. Its a false claim made by Jim Steele so he can show it is false and urge the conclusion that AGW is therefore False.

3. Asked and Answered 126 times: "So what is your evidence that CO2 has caused any of the observed changes in climate? " //// Its the only known variable that has changed enough to raise the temps we have ON RECORD.

4. "When a poster like Gawdzilla continues to slander my views as the result of being a paid shill by some nefarious outfit, not only is it a stupid conspiracy theory, but it is a personal attack." /// So.....are you alleging you aren't paid??? All your efforts are of your own science denying advocacy? OK. I accept that. Still....being paid for your advocacy would make more sense.........and we only have your word for it otherwise.

"Some" positions deserve a sidetrack now and then to what motivates individual posters. A tougher line for Moderators to tangle with. Prohibit the motivations to be gone into when science denial continues year after year and said position gains credibility. I see a clear line between attacking a person vs attacking their unsupported/falsified motivations (aka their unidentified BIAS) for continuing to post in science denial mode. I support the latter, and oppose the former......a line not so bright to those of a different view.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10486
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: 15,000 scientists in 184 countries warn about negative global environmental trends

Postby xouper » Thu Nov 16, 2017 4:45 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:There is no doubt that global warming is real, that it is caused by human activity, and that it is important for humanity to take mitigating action.
xouper wrote:That depends on which experts you choose to believe.
Lance Kennedy wrote:In this case, Xouper, it is 100% of all climate experts and 95% of all other scientists.


That is factually incorrect.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10486
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: 15,000 scientists in 184 countries warn about negative global environmental trends

Postby xouper » Thu Nov 16, 2017 4:48 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:The impact of CO2 is measured and quantified. The original experiments were done by Arrhenius passing infra red down tubes full of various gases and measuring temperature increase. His work has been repeated many times with far greater precision, and we now know EXACTLY how much the atmosphere warms for incremental increases in CO2 levels. The temperature increase since the industrial revolution is EXACTLY what was expected for the measured increase in CO2, and matches experiment with high accuracy.


That is factually incorrect.

You are claiming to know the Climate Sensitivity due to CO2. What is it?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10700
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: 15,000 scientists in 184 countries warn about negative global environmental trends

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Nov 16, 2017 4:57 am

Thats not what the highlighted language says. Atmospheric warming is only PART of a very long complicated NOT FULLY KNOWN climate equation. How much air will heat due to cosmic and solar rays is very specific and known....but once that air molecule is stimulated...all sorts of other things happen to the heat generated. THE BIG LIE: there has been a cooling trend with no heat gains for the past 10-20-30 years. It was a mystery. I believe the heat generated was actually found to have transferred to ocean waters deeper than 10K feet....but I may have that detail wrong, or it was THAT plus other factors.

co2 is a green house gas. Only magical science denying not thinking can conclude increased co2 will not warm the Earth with the climate eventually changing AS WE CAN SEE RIGHT NOW WITH OUR OWN EYES.

So simple: just look. ((sea levels constantly rising..................if you can't see with your eyes.............. go for a swim.))
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10486
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: 15,000 scientists in 184 countries warn about negative global environmental trends

Postby xouper » Thu Nov 16, 2017 5:17 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Thats not what the highlighted language says. Atmospheric warming is only PART of a very long complicated NOT FULLY KNOWN climate equation. How much air will heat due to cosmic and solar rays is very specific and known....but once that air molecule is stimulated...all sorts of other things happen to the heat generated. THE BIG LIE: there has been a cooling trend with no heat gains for the past 10-20-30 years. It was a mystery. I believe the heat generated was actually found to have transferred to ocean waters deeper than 10K feet....but I may have that detail wrong, or it was THAT plus other factors.

co2 is a green house gas. Only magical science denying not thinking can conclude increased co2 will not warm the Earth with the climate eventually changing AS WE CAN SEE RIGHT NOW WITH OUR OWN EYES.

So simple: just look. ((sea levels constantly rising..................if you can't see with your eyes.............. go for a swim.))


What is the Climate Sensitivity number due to CO2?

If you can't answer that question, then you are talking out your ass.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10700
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: 15,000 scientists in 184 countries warn about negative global environmental trends

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Nov 16, 2017 5:31 am

What is the Climate Sensitivity number due to CO2?/// No one knows. The formula may be too complex to ever have the desired accuracy we would desire....maybe with quantum computing it can be nailed down closer? But the IPCC has published several different graphs with associated probabilities of different levels of sensitivity. Its what the time frames to avoid a 2C rise is based on.

Your question should never have been asked to begin with.................ass speaking wise.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10486
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: 15,000 scientists in 184 countries warn about negative global environmental trends

Postby xouper » Thu Nov 16, 2017 5:47 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:What is the Climate Sensitivity number due to CO2?/// No one knows.


Bingo.

You just discredited all the climate models with that admission.

You just admitted that a major piece of the science is not settled.


bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Its what the time frames to avoid a 2C rise is based on.


The predicted time frames for a 2C rise has not happened. Not even close. The climate has not behaved as predicted and it is not on track for any of the predicted catastrophes.

Clearly, the science is not settled.

Here's another question you can't answer:

What percentage of Arctic warming is due to:

1. Atmospheric CO2
2. Carbon soot settling on the ice/snow
3. Underwater heat sources.

If the science was settled, as claimed, you would know the answer to that question. It is not a mere detail, it goes directly to what can be done to mitigate the problem.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10700
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: 15,000 scientists in 184 countries warn about negative global environmental trends

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Nov 16, 2017 5:49 am

The only reason to continue is to find out how deep the stupid hole is.

I decline.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10486
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: 15,000 scientists in 184 countries warn about negative global environmental trends

Postby xouper » Thu Nov 16, 2017 5:56 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:The only reason to continue is to find out how deep the stupid hole is.

I decline.


I win.

I have posed two key questions you can't answer, thus refuting your claim that the science is settled.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10700
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: 15,000 scientists in 184 countries warn about negative global environmental trends

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Nov 16, 2017 6:03 am

Certain issues are settled, others aren't. You are conflating the two.

But as stated....................not worth the candle.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10486
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: 15,000 scientists in 184 countries warn about negative global environmental trends

Postby xouper » Thu Nov 16, 2017 7:11 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:Certain issues are settled, others aren't.


Climate Sensitivity is a key issue and is directly relevant to how much warming is caused by CO2. And you admitted you don't know that number. Without it, the climate models cannot predict how warm it might get.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
True Skeptic
Posts: 10700
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: 15,000 scientists in 184 countries warn about negative global environmental trends

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Nov 16, 2017 7:12 am

really?
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10486
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: 15,000 scientists in 184 countries warn about negative global environmental trends

Postby xouper » Thu Nov 16, 2017 7:30 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:really?


You don't know?

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10077
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: 15,000 scientists in 184 countries warn about negative global environmental trends

Postby Lance Kennedy » Thu Nov 16, 2017 7:53 am

http://www.meteor.iastate.edu/gccourse/ ... ctrum.html

The problem is that Xouper was asking the wrong question. He should have asked for the greenhouse gas absorption spectrum, which has been worked out in detail for many gases. The reference above deals with this. For carbon dioxide, the spectrum varies according to the wavelengths involved. But it can be calculated, just how much heat is absorbed for each wavelength of infra red.

The key thing is that these calculations have been made, and they are fully consistent with the global warming that has been observed. Do not ask me to do those calculations, since I am not a climate scientist, and that is beyond me. But qualified researchers have done the work, and the absorption tallies with observed warming.

Another point of interest is temperatures outside planet Earth. I am sure we have all heard of the Goldilocks zone around stars, which lead to planets having liquid water. What you may not know is that our sun has three planets in the Goldilocks zone, not one. That is Venus, Earth, and Mars. However, Venus is too hot for liquid water, and Mars is too cold. Why, if they are also in the Goldilocks zone ? The answer is the greenhouse effect. Too much or too little. If Mars had the atmosphere of Venus, or Venus had the atmosphere of Mars, those planets would have rivers and lakes of liquid water. But Venus has too much CO2, and thus gets too hot, while Mars has too little, and gets too cold. These temperatures are only partly explainable by the distance from the sun and the greenhouse gas effect (infra red absorption by gases ) is needed to complete the explanation for their temperatures.

None of this is new science. The first work on absorption took place over 100 years ago. It has been refined since, but the whole thing is well understood and widely published. It takes a person who is wilfully into denial, probably for political reasons, to argue against it.

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8186
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: 15,000 scientists in 184 countries warn about negative global environmental trends

Postby Poodle » Thu Nov 16, 2017 8:02 am

You know, I may be completely naive but I've never understood the opposition to climate action. Climate change may or may not be exacerbated by human activity - my personal take is that it's a given. However, there's a possibility it ain't us after all.
And so what? It's damaging. But we appear to have the ability to influence it, just as we have developed abilities to influence other aspects of living on a closed-system planet. If we influence it carefully and correctly, we improve lots of lives. The down side, on the other hand, is ... errrrmm .... well - not a lot.
Tell you what - shall we just get on with it?

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10486
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: 15,000 scientists in 184 countries warn about negative global environmental trends

Postby xouper » Thu Nov 16, 2017 8:23 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:The problem is that Xouper was asking the wrong question.


I asked a question that is directly relevant to predicting how much warming will be caused by an increase in CO2.

It's as simple as that.

Second question, is Climate Sensitivity linear or not? That is another unsettled question.

User avatar
xouper
True Skeptic
Posts: 10486
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: 15,000 scientists in 184 countries warn about negative global environmental trends

Postby xouper » Thu Nov 16, 2017 8:27 am

Poodle wrote:The down side, on the other hand, is ... errrrmm .... well - not a lot.


Depends on how much the cost is. Some proposed solutions will literally ruin the world's economy, and some will merely damage it significantly. That's a rather large downside.

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 8K Posts
Posts: 8186
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: 15,000 scientists in 184 countries warn about negative global environmental trends

Postby Poodle » Thu Nov 16, 2017 1:06 pm

See, xouper, this is precisely the problem ...
It is a possibility that NOT disadvantaging the world economy may provide that significant damage. Of course, it is also a possibility that it won't. And, of course, humans being humans, it's all turned into a strongly polarised argument in which NEITHER side can swear by any outcome. However, being wrong about an economical braking system is merely economically damaging. Being wrong on climate could be merely economically damaging or, on the other hand, it could be fatal.
Now, as I and my fellow human beings are responsible for ensuring the well-being of our yet-to-be-born members of the human race, which should I choose? ... ooh - it's difficult ...
I really see it in those simple terms, with no buts. We put the brakes on climate change now.

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Has No Life
Posts: 19710
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: 15,000 scientists in 184 countries warn about negative global environmental trends

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Thu Nov 16, 2017 5:09 pm

Study settles prehistoric puzzle, confirms modern link of carbon dioxide and global warming
Date:
November 14, 2017
Source:
Southern Methodist University
Summary:
Fossil leaves from Africa resolve a prehistoric climate puzzle and confirm the link between carbon dioxide and global warming. Research previously found conflicting data on high carbon levels and its link to climate change about 22 million years ago. But a new study found the link existed then as now. The finding sheds light on recent and future increases in atmospheric carbon and its impact on our planet.

Fossil leaves from Africa have resolved a prehistoric climate puzzle -- and also confirm the link between carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and global warming.

Research until now has produced a variety of results and conflicting data that have cast doubt on the link between high carbon dioxide levels and climate change for a time interval about 22 million years ago.

But a new study has found the link does indeed exist for that prehistoric time period, say researchers at Southern Methodist University, Dallas.

The finding will help scientists understand how recent and future increases in the concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide may impact the future of our planet, say the SMU researchers.

The discovery comes from new biochemical analyses of fossil leaves from plants that grew on Earth 27 million years ago and 22 million years ago.

The new analyses confirm research about modern climate -- that global temperatures rise and fall with increases and decreases in carbon dioxide in our atmosphere -- but in this case even in prehistoric times, according to the SMU-led international research team.


Continues...
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.


Return to “Climate Change”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest