Climate Change And Alarmists

[K7JEM]

The scientific evidence is foolproof. Predictions are not science. Results are.

We'll see in 20 years. Almost nothing that was predicted 20 years ago came about. Yet it was all based on scientific evidence.

What you should do is make some predictions for the future of mankind, seal them in an envelope, then open it in 20 years, then look at it again in 40 (or have your grandkids do it). Use the best scientific evidence you can find. Your grandkids will get a chuckle.

Joe

[NL7W]

This reminds me of a movie...

From: The Core (2003)

Col. Robert Iverson: Forgive me, but, you know I'm not the expert here, but what if the core is thicker or thinner? I mean, what if it's not what you think it is? Isn't that going to affect the way the explosions are...
Dr. Conrad Zimsky: Yes, yes, yes, yes, and what if the core is made of cheese? This is all best guess commander. That's all science is, is best guess.
Col. Robert Iverson: So my best guess is you don't know.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0298814/quotes?qt=qt0402400


I always chuckle at this one... great movie by the way.

The scientific evidence is foolproof. Predictions are not science. Results are.

[KG6MZS]

We'll see in 20 years.

In 20 years predictions will still not be science.

It is a matter of epistemology. "Proof" is an abstract concept that is only perfectly suited for purely abstract pursuits like mathematics. In the natural or applied sciences there is no magic number of times an experiment is repeated whereby the hypothesis is "proved." Science continually invites the experiment to be repeated lest something changes - better understanding of the phenomena or more precise technique.

[KT1F]

We will move away from fossil fuels when the economics dictate that to occur.

I'm guessing that by "economics", you're thinking of money.

Money is often only a small part of the cost of something.

[AF6LJ]

How do you account for the decrease in the rate of warming between 1945 and 1960 when the output of the sun was slightly higher than usual? "It's the sun" just doesn't square with the observations.

73

Brian G8ADD

Not true.
The Earth as a body absorbs heat and it takes a while for the effects to be seen.
You are working under the false impression that change in the Sun makes change in the Earth's climate happen instantly.

It doesn't work that way.

Besides what fraction of a percent is fifteen years in the life of the Earth.
Or for that matter what percentage of the Ice age cycle is fifteen years?

in a word;
negligible............

[AF6LJ]

This reminds me of a movie...

From: The Core (2003)

Col. Robert Iverson: Forgive me, but, you know I'm not the expert here, but what if the core is thicker or thinner? I mean, what if it's not what you think it is? Isn't that going to affect the way the explosions are...
Dr. Conrad Zimsky: Yes, yes, yes, yes, and what if the core is made of cheese? This is all best guess commander. That's all science is, is best guess.
Col. Robert Iverson: So my best guess is you don't know.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0298814/quotes?qt=qt0402400


I always chuckle at this one... great movie by the way.

Thanks for that quote.
And that is assuming that the science in question isn't full of Fraud.

[N6DLH]

Hmm, with the last ice age about 15000 years ago, it is obvious that there has been warming in the climate. But that also makes me wonder, how many Ice ages has the world been through in the last couple of million years?

In the last 2 million years there have been about 60 glacial advances, or long durations of very cool periods causing the formation glaciers and expansion, these are followed by rapid warming that cause glacial retreat.

You see the pattern here?

[G8ADD]

Not true.
The Earth as a body absorbs heat and it takes a while for the effects to be seen.
You are working under the false impression that change in the Sun makes change in the Earth's climate happen instantly.

It doesn't work that way.

Besides what fraction of a percent is fifteen years in the life of the Earth.
Or for that matter what percentage of the Ice age cycle is fifteen years?

in a word;
negligible............

I am working under a false impression? ;-)

OK, Sue, tell me. When did the sun warm up enough to produce the "hockey stick"? What is the lag that you postulate? How much lag for the atmosphere? How much lag for the oceans? How much lag for the land masses? Let me see graphs relating measured changes in the sun's output to the changes in atmosphere, ocean and continents, put it on a scientific footing for me, give me the data. Lets have a prediction from you to tie down the science - how much do you expect the recent prolongued minimum to cool the Earth by, and when do you expect it to happen, coz it ain't happened yet! Note that the relative rapidity of the hockey stick puts a limit to the length of the lag.

73

Brian G8ADD

PS Its 0045 here, I'm hitting the sack, I'll enjoy reading your proof in the morning. Goodnight!

[NL7W]

Right on...

I mentioned 9 "ice ages", but I started out saying there was likely a countless number (I edited that for some here would challenge such ambiguity), as in a large and unknown number of them. Our Sun, the solar system, the galaxy and beyond are and have been affecting Earth since it has formed. Earth's natural cyclic activity is well known, documented, and fact. Man's changable forces on Earth are miniscule, or infinitesimal, as compared the extraterrestrial forces acting on the Planet. Therefore, cyclic history and trending should offer reasonable expectations for Earth's future environment -- Man notwithstanding.

It's "big picture" understanding that fails so many.

My extreme INTJ personality cuts through the man-made BS and grasps the macro. I have a built-in and attuned BS filter...

Hmm, with the last ice age about 15000 years ago, it is obvious that there has been warming in the climate. But that also makes me wonder, how many Ice ages has the world been through in the last couple of million years?

In the last 2 million years there have been about 60 glacial advances, or long durations of very cool periods causing the formation glaciers and expansion, these are followed by rapid warming that cause glacial retreat.

You see the pattern here?

[N2EY]

Our Sun, the solar system, the galaxy and beyond are and have been affecting Earth since it has formed. Earth's natural cyclic activity is well known, documented, and fact.

Not exactly.

What we have are conclusions deduced from fossil, geological and other evidence, using the best scientific methods available.

For example, somebody takes an ice core sample in the Antarctic, and deduces what the climate and atmosphere were like 15,000 years ago based on a scientific model. They don't have direct measurements, because our ancestors weren't keeping scientific records.

So those "facts" may change as the models are refined.

Man's changable forces on Earth are miniscule, or infinitesimal, as compared the extraterrestrial forces acting on the Planet.

How do you know that?

There are over six billion of us humans here. Individually we can't do all that much, but when we get together....

Look at the mess the Deepwater Horizon disaster made in the Gulf of Mexico. That was one oil well that leaked for a few months. Or Chernobyl - one little nuclear reactor that got out of control. Or Lake Erie and Hudson River pollution...

The Earth's atmosphere has a mass of about 5 x 10^15 tons - quite a lot! However, it is only about 392 parts per million CO2. Round it off to 400 parts per million and we get .04% or a .0004 as a fraction. So the mass of CO2 in the atmosphere is about 2 x 10^12 tons.

Now since there are, say, 6 x 10^9 human beings on the planet, the planetary CO2 per person works out to about 3 x 10^2 tons per person - 300 tons for each of us at the present level!

So if each human being puts out a couple of tons of CO2 per year which is not absorbed by other systems, the percentage CO2 in the atmosphere will climb and climb. Remember that it's not just the CO2 each of generates individually, but the collective uses as well. I may never take a trip on a ship, yet the fleets of the world are dumping tons of CO2 into the air nonetheless.

Even if my numbers are off by an order of magnitude, the point is still true: human activities can have a big effect, simply because there are so many of us.

Therefore, cyclic history and trending should offer reasonable expectations for Earth's future environment -- Man notwithstanding.It's "big picture" understanding that fails so many.

Yes, it does.

73 de Jim, N2EY