February breaks global temperature records by 'shocking' amount

NarrowBandFtw said:
Why do you hope that? Regardless, without offering an opinion on / taking sides on climate change science anyone should be able to appreciate the irony I was pointing out.
Click to expand...

If the comment was serious it would be misinformed but its not serious so its all good :)
 
NarrowBandFtw said:
Why do you hope that? Regardless, without offering an opinion on / taking sides on climate change science anyone should be able to appreciate the irony I was pointing out.
Click to expand...

Only if you assume that there was a point in time in the past when Venus wasn't a hell hole...
 
Garson007 said:
Yet here we are as people, taking holidays in Canada and Egypt. Hell, we could even emigrate there. I doubt the climate would be of much concern.
Click to expand...

Ecosystems are delicate. Many plants, insects and animals have evolved in a very insular way. Specific to a region, and pivotal to the food chain and or plant reproductive cycle. Sudden climate change only needs to eliminate one of them for an entire region to be affected.
Also temperature increases or decreases can change the rainfall of a region quite dramatically. The increased temps are certainly to blame where the US drought is concerned, along with a whole heap of other droughts around the world. All it would take is for next year and the year after to experience the same kind of temperatures as this year, and things could turn dire very quickly.
 
SoulTax said:
Ecosystems are delicate. Many plants, insects and animals have evolved in a very insular way. Specific to a region, and pivotal to the food chain and or plant reproductive cycle. Sudden climate change only needs to eliminate one of them for an entire region to be affected.
Also temperature increases or decreases can change the rainfall of a region quite dramatically. The increased temps are certainly to blame where the US drought is concerned, along with a whole heap of other droughts around the world. All it would take is for next year and the year after to experience the same kind of temperatures as this year, and things could turn dire very quickly.
Click to expand...
We can still comfortably adapt. Some species might not, but that's evolution for you; if the ecosystem cannot survive then it just doesn't. We will just plant whatever grows under the climatic conditions that form.
 
Cray said:
Only if you assume that there was a point in time in the past when Venus wasn't a hell hole...
Click to expand...

Indeed.

NarrowBandFtw said:
Why do you hope that? Regardless, without offering an opinion on / taking sides on climate change science anyone should be able to appreciate the irony I was pointing out.
Click to expand...

Does the idea of Earth becoming uninhabitable not alarm you in the slightest? In the billions of years that our Universe has been going for... A year is a little blip in comparison.. The Earth is heating up month to month...

With all our amazing technology that we have available, do you think it's not possible for humans to try reverse these effects? Even though, the scientific consensus and the smartest minds for the last few decades have all said humans are causing the green house effect to worsen... Is it not the greenhouse effect? Is it something else? Why not try find out what else it is and try to save the planet?

I think it's quite f'd up for these scientists that study and work their entire lives gathering research to have tit-bits of their research selectively plucked out to deny their data... I mean a scientist saying, that the Earth is in a climate emergency... Just to have people laugh it off.. It's very, very strange how humans go about things...
 
skimread said:
The whole point is the debate - of those who say that man doesn't cause environmental change and that the earth is naturally getting hotter every year. However if the earth dramatically gets hotter one cannot refute man influence as the cause

The key part in the article is "far bigger margin than ever seen before". That is why the figures are shocking.

Man, animals and plants have evolved over billions of years. 1 degree in one year is a big deal. If you cannot realize that, then you might as well believe all the continents fit into Africa.
Click to expand...

So we have billions of years of climate data then ? In other words how do you know it would make a difference ? Over billions of years ?
 
Garson007 said:
We can still comfortably adapt. Some species might not, but that's evolution for you; if the ecosystem cannot survive then it just doesn't. We will just plant whatever grows under the climatic conditions that form.
Click to expand...

That's a good idea... But I don't know about comfortably...

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/nov/29/climate-change-syria-civil-war-prince-charles

Many say that the terrorism in Syria started/OR is made much worse because of climate change... I'm not so sure they can grow anything there... It's not so Syrias until it affects you directly...
 
Mach III said:
Does the idea of Earth becoming uninhabitable not alarm you in the slightest?
Click to expand...

Of course it does, it still doesn't change the fact that it is funny and ironic that people seriously want us to draw comparison between greenhouse effects on Venus and Earth when the one has never been inhabited by humans and on the other humans are considered to be the major factor.

Mach III said:
the scientific consensus and the smartest minds for the last few decades have all said humans are causing the green house effect to worsen...
Click to expand...

The scientific consensus of the IPCC panel, definitely not that of the NIPCC panel, which also contains respected scientists and smart people regardless of the respect their climate report findings enjoy in the press.

Mach III said:
I think it's quite f'd up for these scientists that study and work their entire lives gathering research to have tit-bits of their research selectively plucked out to deny their data...
Click to expand...

They brought it upon themselves to an extent to be honest, if scientists doggedly remained objective and didn't allow lobbyists, governments and Al Gore types of the world to use their research to further their own interests I suspect less people would even think of dismissing or laughing at their research. There's been meddling from all sides, which doesn't help the science at all.
 
Garson007 said:
But it won't. Nobody is even predicting it.
Click to expand...

In the first link I shared, there is Steven Hawking and Carl Sagan predicting it.

It makes perfect logical sense.. The ice caps in the north pole trap CO2, as well as reflect light back up... If they melt, not only is there light not being reflected back, but the trapped CO2 is released as well. It is a domino effect.

A year ago, all the major news networks were running articles on the next mass extinction having started...

The Astrophysicists that study planets and the galaxy; are all concerned about Global Warming, and they attribute it to human action. Not only are they vocal about it warning the public, but one of the top astrophysicists was consulted for the movie, "Interstellar" - an appeal to the human imagination...

Unfortunately the fossil fuel industries grip runs very deep, and they try to convince the public that it is a hoax... You can have a look at what Noam Chomsky has to say about that as well on YouTube... The time to act was years ago...

Look at the motives these people have: The astrophysicists... They spend their lives studying and learning about the galaxy... what do they have to gain? Or the fossil fuel industries? They get to ensure that their business remains in operation securing their obscene wealth for years to come.
 
NarrowBandFtw said:
The scientific consensus of the IPCC panel, definitely not that of the NIPCC panel, which also contains respected scientists and smart people regardless of the respect their climate report findings enjoy in the press.
Click to expand...

NIPCC = Heartland

Heartland Institute: American Petroleum Institute ($25,000, 2008), Chrysler Foundation
($105,000, 2004-06), Donors Capital Fund ($25.6 million, 2005-11), Donors Trust ($554,000,
2008-10), ExxonMobil ($531,500, 2001-06), General Motors Foundation ($165,000, 2004-10)
and Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation ($25,000, 2011).
Click to expand...

Further reading.: http://www.climatesciencewatch.org/2013/09/09/heartland-institute-nipcc-fail-the-credibility-test/

They brought it upon themselves to an extent to be honest, if scientists doggedly remained objective and didn't allow lobbyists, governments and Al Gore types of the world to use their research to further their own interests I suspect less people would even think of dismissing or laughing at their research. There's been meddling from all sides, which doesn't help the science at all.
Click to expand...

Using their research does not equal influencing the research itself. Ultimately it comes down to a similar situation as smoking, where tobacco companies provided funds to spread pseudo science. We are seeing the same with oil companies.
 
NarrowBandFtw said:
Of course it does, it still doesn't change the fact that it is funny and ironic that people seriously want us to draw comparison between greenhouse effects on Venus and Earth when the one has never been inhabited by humans and on the other humans are considered to be the major factor.



The scientific consensus of the IPCC panel, definitely not that of the NIPCC panel, which also contains respected scientists and smart people regardless of the respect their climate report findings enjoy in the press.



They brought it upon themselves to an extent to be honest, if scientists doggedly remained objective and didn't allow lobbyists, governments and Al Gore types of the world to use their research to further their own interests I suspect less people would even think of dismissing or laughing at their research. There's been meddling from all sides, which doesn't help the science at all.
Click to expand...

None of which scientists belong in the same sentence as Carl Sagan.

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/03/24/3638084/neil-degrasse-tyson-florida-climate-ban/

NIPCC vs IPCC : http://www.climatesciencewatch.org/2013/09/09/heartland-institute-nipcc-fail-the-credibility-test/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGdi_pjrX4w

They successfully made people doubt the science...

EDIT: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/noam-chomsky-gop_us_56a66febe4b0d8cc109aec78
 
Last edited:
Mach III said:
In the first link I shared, there is Steven Hawking and Carl Sagan predicting it.
Click to expand...
Derp. Carl Sagan has been deceased for decades and Hawking also complains about AI - he should stick to black holes.

Mach III said:
It makes perfect logical sense.. The ice caps in the north pole trap CO2, as well as reflect light back up... If they melt, not only is there light not being reflected back, but the trapped CO2 is released as well. It is a domino effect.
Click to expand...
You do realise that Earth doesn't normally have polar caps, right? Ice ages are rare. The only reason we are currently in an ice age is because of a freak tectonic event that drove South America into North America.

Mach III said:
A year ago, all the major news networks were running articles on the next mass extinction having started...

The Astrophysicists that study planets and the galaxy; are all concerned about Global Warming, and they attribute it to human action. Not only are they vocal about it warning the public, but one of the top astrophysicists was consulted for the movie, "Interstellar" - an appeal to the human imagination...

Unfortunately the fossil fuel industries grip runs very deep, and they try to convince the public that it is a hoax... You can have a look at what Noam Chomsky has to say about that as well on YouTube... The time to act was years ago...
Click to expand...
...

Mach III said:
Look at the motives these people have: The astrophysicists... They spend their lives studying and learning about the galaxy... what do they have to gain? Or the fossil fuel industries? They get to ensure that their business remains in operation securing their obscene wealth for years to come.
Click to expand...
It's all a conspiracy man. (I don't deny climate change, I deny doom.)
 
Garson007 said:
Derp. Carl Sagan has been deceased for decades and Hawking also complains about AI - he should stick to black holes.


You do realise that Earth doesn't normally have polar caps, right? Ice ages are rare. The only reason we are currently in an ice age is because of a freak tectonic event that drove South America into North America.


...


It's all a conspiracy man. (I don't deny climate change, I deny doom.)
Click to expand...

Where you put the "..."'s - Just google, "6th mass extinction" ...

and no, conspiracy is secret "evil" organizations like the 'Illuminati' - that's conspiracy.

Climate change and leading to conditions which no longer satisfy life are not a conspiracy:

http://climate.nasa.gov/effects/

These affects that are happening now were predicted decades ago.. Now suddenly it's the 'IN-thing' to deny science.
 
Unhappy438 said:
NIPCC = Heartland
Click to expand...

Yip I know, the IPCC is also not free from having financial backing from people with an agenda though:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/02/04/bombshell-ipcc-chairman-takes-money-from-wwf/
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/01/when_it_comes_to_the_ipcc_foll.html

Not to mention the billions that companies combating climate change stand to make from many governments, I think it was in The Great Global Warming Swindle where some scientists also flat out stated that research grants were easier to come by if your topic followed the consensus agenda and not so when you propose to look into the counter viewpoint.

Using their research does not equal influencing the research itself. Ultimately it comes down to a similar situation as smoking, where tobacco companies provided funds to spread pseudo science. We are seeing the same with oil companies.
Click to expand...


Agreed, only the energy companies are much better prepared, they've hedged their bets, one of the biggest players in renewable energy is none other than Shell, the major oil company, so they are ready to make profits either way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X