Information

Climate Concerns

The "CLIMATE CONCERNS" group is dedicated to discussion regarding the topic of the ever present and serious issue of changes to our climate due to the introduction into the atmosphere of human induced effects which prove harmful to the environment and which eventually may prove destructive to our planet. 

Members: 51
Latest Activity: Jan 3

Reference/Research Sites

Discussion Forum

How Woody Guthrie can help us fight for science

Started by Joan Denoo Jan 3. 0 Replies

Oklahoma, the home of protest singer Woody Guthrie, provides an example of resistance in the 1930s class and culture wars between rural and urban values. If Woody could use his voice to speak up, so…Continue

Tags: method, Permaculture, soil, voices, farming

Framing Climate Destabilization

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Bertold Brautigan Dec 9, 2016. 22 Replies

The words we use and the images they evoke shape public comprehension of Catastrophic Climate Destabilization's immanence. Here are a few terms from the past few days. It's a tiny…Continue

Tags: communicating climate science, Climate Destabilization, framing

Jet Stream Mayhem begins Tues

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Ruth Anthony-Gardner Dec 3, 2016. 3 Replies

Siberian air…Continue

Tags: jet stream waves

Comment Wall

Comment

You need to be a member of Climate Concerns to add comments!

Comment by Ruth Anthony-Gardner on December 17, 2016 at 6:19pm

To change from the serious talk, sort of, how about a satire from The Onion .

Saying the multinational oil and gas conglomerate had “really dodged a bullet,” ExxonMobil CEO Rex Tillerson told reporters Wednesday how relieved he was now that it was finally too late to do anything about climate change.

... he felt as if a tremendous weight had been lifted from his shoulders now that catastrophic climate change was an inescapable certainty.

Comment by Čenek Sekavec on December 15, 2016 at 1:05am

Don:  Yep.  They make pains to point out that the recent stuff is not peer reviewed. Wish they would make more of a distinction between which are and aren't, but nothing can be done.

I know about the ice core data.  Was pointing out that some periods when that ice was being made were times when the arctic had zero ice according to the model and confirmed by geological strata.

Zero ice, but without the CO2 / Methane levels.

Therefore while we are within parameters for natural phenomenon with elevated levels we are also a partial influence. 

It's ridiculous to say we can exist on this earth and *not* influence it. Anthropogenic change is a fact.

Ruth:  Your graph and Don's graph match up rather nicely :)

Comment by Donald L. Engel on December 14, 2016 at 4:15pm

Ruth, the Little Ice Age hit bottom around 1600, but it skidded along the bottom until between 1680 and 1700,  They were still ice skating on the Thames River in the early 1800s.  It was dropping into the lowest point from 1300 to 1600, but the ice age lasted from 1300 to about 1800. 

Comment by Ruth Anthony-Gardner on December 14, 2016 at 3:58pm

If the Denier in Chief did do away with White House press briefings, irony strikes, since they're the ones who gave him millions of dollars of free advertising.

Comment by Ruth Anthony-Gardner on December 14, 2016 at 3:07pm

Donald, you said that, "...the climatologists have said that the global temperature has been rising at about 1.5 degrees C per century."

I don't know your source, but this makes no sense to me.

According to NASA, "In the past, a one- to two-degree drop was all it took to plunge the Earth into the Little Ice Age." Your rate of change implies that the Little Ice Age happened only a hundred years ago. It happened from 1300 to 1600.

NASA says that the global average surface temperature rose 0.6 to 0.9 degrees Celsius (1.1 to 1.6° F) between 1906 and 2005. That's 0.3°C in about a century, not 1.5°C, and most of that increase is in the last few years rather than being evenly distributed.

Just since we've had these discussions, we've seen the temperature jump from 0.85°C rise to this year's 1.2°C rise.

My impression is that you read an unreliable source which promotes fake news about climate change. New cherry-picked or misleading claims keep appearing. In the case of this claim, it seems the author's intent was to reassure readers that the current rate of rise isn't new or frightening.

Here's a NASA climate temperature graph till 2015, that I modified by putting in the predicted 1.2°C rise for 2016.

Doesn't the latest slope look steeper to you?

And no, it's not all from El Nino.

Comment by Donald L. Engel on December 14, 2016 at 3:01pm

Ceneck, you gave this URL in an entry lower on this page:

http://www.arctic.noaa.gov/Report-Card/Report-Card-2016

Did you read that report?  The author switched poles in the middle of the article.  He started talking about the Arctic losing ice, and then switched to the Antarctic and said the ice is growing, and not receding.  Then I read about the author, and it says he is a co-founder of the Tea Party.  That pretty much explains the trickery involved in his article.

Comment by Grinning Cat on December 14, 2016 at 2:25pm
Comment by Ruth Anthony-Gardner on December 14, 2016 at 12:18pm
Scientists who produced the annual Arctic Report Card warned the situation was changing so quickly it was “outpacing our ability to understand and explain” what they were witnessing.

“The warmest temperature anomalies were centred on Alaska, Svalbard in the Atlantic sector and the central Arctic,” the report said.

Arctic temperatures have hit levels last seen a ridiculously long t...

Comment by Donald L. Engel on December 14, 2016 at 12:51am

"Cenek, the Vostok Ice Core Data graph is taken from the Antarctic, not the Arctic.  The Antarctic has never melted completely away in the last 420,000 years,  Some thing interesting for all of you:  google, "Scientists who have removed their names from the IPCC Report".

Comment by Čenek Sekavec on December 13, 2016 at 6:22pm

Don warmth estimates from prehistory are based on extrapolating from the partial pressure of greenhouse gasses.  

So if you accept the indirect measurements of prior temperatures you accept the climate model that permits it.

We can very accurately measure the amount of man made emissions. We can get a decent estimate of known natural emissions. We can fairly well measure how those gasses migrate through the atmosphere. We have a fairly good understanding of some of the carbon reuptake processes. 

Given all that, anthropogenic climate change is a good argument. 100% man caused? Not a chance. 0%?  Equally unlikely. 

I think there is real issue in assigning moral values to climate facts. As you are aware in the past the arctic ice cap have many times melted completely away.  The global temperature has been much hotter, and much colder. The sea levels have been much much higher, much much lower. 

There is no "Ought" in climate science, only "Is".

 

Members (51)

 
 
 

line

Update Your Membership :

Membership

line

line

Nexus on Social Media:

line

Latest Activity

Joan Denoo replied to Joan Denoo's discussion Republicans’ 4-Step Plan to Repeal the Affordable Care Act By ROBERT PEARJAN. 4, 2017 in the group Politics, Economics, and Religion
20 minutes ago
Joan Denoo replied to Joan Denoo's discussion Republicans’ 4-Step Plan to Repeal the Affordable Care Act By ROBERT PEARJAN. 4, 2017 in the group Politics, Economics, and Religion
23 minutes ago
Joan Denoo replied to Joan Denoo's discussion Republicans’ 4-Step Plan to Repeal the Affordable Care Act By ROBERT PEARJAN. 4, 2017 in the group Politics, Economics, and Religion
24 minutes ago
Bertold Brautigan replied to Joan Denoo's discussion Republicans’ 4-Step Plan to Repeal the Affordable Care Act By ROBERT PEARJAN. 4, 2017 in the group Politics, Economics, and Religion
57 minutes ago
Grinning Cat replied to Joan Denoo's discussion Republicans’ 4-Step Plan to Repeal the Affordable Care Act By ROBERT PEARJAN. 4, 2017 in the group Politics, Economics, and Religion
1 hour ago
Joan Denoo commented on Ruth Anthony-Gardner's group Hang With Friends
1 hour ago
Loren Miller replied to Joan Denoo's discussion Republicans’ 4-Step Plan to Repeal the Affordable Care Act By ROBERT PEARJAN. 4, 2017 in the group Politics, Economics, and Religion
2 hours ago
Joan Denoo added 2 discussions to the group Politics, Economics, and Religion
2 hours ago

© 2017   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service