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: 50
Latest Activity: on Sunday

Reference/Research Sites

Discussion Forum

Jet Stream Mayhem begins Tues

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Ruth Anthony-Gardner on Sunday. 3 Replies

Siberian air…Continue

Tags: jet stream waves

Framing Climate Destabilization

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Joan Denoo Nov 8. 19 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

Comment Wall

Comment

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

Comment by Joan Denoo on January 15, 2016 at 3:34pm

Comment by Donald L. Engel on January 15, 2016 at 1:14pm

Grinning Cat, before Copernicus published his work in 1512, 100% of the world's population (That is absolutely everyone) believed the earth was flat, and the entire universe spun around the earth. 

Percentages of believers don't prove anything.  Only facts count, and there aren't enough facts to prove anything yet.  In fact, the facts that are available show that we are in a normal ice age/warming cycle, and we still aren't as warm as the last four warming periods.

Comment by Grinning Cat on January 15, 2016 at 9:41am

President Obama was wrong when he tweeted that "97% of scientists agree: climate change is real, man-made and dangerous."

Turns out the actual number is above 99.9%.

Yesterday, Hemant Mehta of Friendly Atheist highlighted that finding by James Lawrence Powell, executive director of the National Physical Science Consortium. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2016/01/14/do-97-of-sc...

In Powell's own analysis, out of 24,210 papers dealing with climate change, only five denied anthropogenic global warming. Only one of those five has been cited by another author, and that exactly once.

Mehta's telling conclusion: There are literally more Republicans in Congress who deny climate science than there are published scientists who feel the same way.

Related: 6% of scientists are Republican. Scientists have no explanation for why that number is so high.

Comment by Donald L. Engel on January 14, 2016 at 11:42pm

Joan, I'm not being disrespectful, but I'm not sure I understand your point in this last entry.  Are you pointing out that there were human remains found in the moraine?  If so, that is not suprising to me, because they think humans came across the land bridge some 15,000 years ago during the last ice age.  I'm sure many, if not all, died and the glacier absorbed their bodies, and then later deposited them in the moraines. 

Comment by Joan Denoo on January 14, 2016 at 9:41pm

As globe warms, melting glaciers revealing more than bare earth

When I lived near Kenai, Alaska for two years, I spent many happy hours roaming the beach between Cook's Inlet and the very high glacial hills of gravel left from the last Great Ice Age. Bones of humans, mammoths, mastodons, and all kinds of wildlife came tumbling down as the sand fell away from the land.

This report is of the remains melting out of glaciers, a treasure trove, worldwide.

"as the once-frozen world emerges from slumber, it’s yielding relics, debris – and corpses – that have laid hidden for decades, even millennia.”

Comment by Gerald Payne on December 29, 2015 at 3:27am

I think the interpretation is that oceanic carbon doesn't affect climate but the worry is despite this atmospheric carbon has reached dangerous levels. I personally think the variables in the mix are such that the interpretations are at best educated speculations and that we're still in the throes of the last ice age.

Comment by Joan Denoo on December 29, 2015 at 12:55am

Čenek, what did I just read?  

Comment by Donald L. Engel on December 28, 2015 at 10:52pm

Cenek, what is the difference between organic carbon, and oceanic?  I tried to read your link, but I couldn't understand anything in the first paragraph, so I quit reading it.

 

Comment by Čenek Sekavec on December 28, 2015 at 9:02pm

*organic carbon not oceanic

Comment by Čenek Sekavec on December 28, 2015 at 8:56pm

This is a graph of CO2 for the last 500 million years.  Here is a link to the original paper. This is good, raw data with rigidly defined error bars. pCO2 is the partial pressure in medium: (t) being CO2 in the air and (O) being CO2 in the oceans. (if I read this right)

Temperature and CO2 wise we're at the bottom of a 300 million year low. As Greenpeace co-founder Patrick Moore said: the sun, not greenhouse gasses, is the primary influence of climate change.

I lean more toward his hypothesis.

However as stated plainly at the end of the excellent paper I linked:

  • "Superficially, this observation would seem to imply that pCO2 does not exert dominant control on Earth's climate at time scales greater than about 10 My. A wealth of evidence, however, suggests that pCO2 exerts at least some control. [The graph] cannot by itself refute this assumption. Instead, it simply shows that the “null hypothesis” that pCO2 and climate are unrelated cannot be rejected on the basis of this evidence alone."

 

Members (50)

 
 
 

line

Update Your Membership :

Membership

line

line

Nexus on Social Media:

line

Latest Activity

© 2016   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service