Earth Sciences Today is hot

[Clems Knee]

Reading the 2014 IPCC report and the 1.5 degree report https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/
It is apparent that a massive issue is that of timescale.
The reports don’t really consider what is going to happen after 2100. They consider likely effects (and give degrees of confidence) for 1.5, 2 and 4 degree increases in average temperatures. If the increases are above 2 degrees by the end of this century, it is likely that they will continue to rise and have much more extreme effects. 2100 isn’t that far away. My children could reasonably expect to see the end of the century.

The average temperature has increased by 1 degree since industrialisation and has led to measurable changes in climate due to anthropogenic drivers.
This has already led to an increase in extreme weather events:

Effects of climate change

Climate change is already having visible effects on the world. The Earth is warming, rainfall patterns are changing, and sea levels are rising. These changes can increase the risk of heatwaves, floods, droughts, and fires.

www.metoffice.gov.uk

The likelihood is that extreme events will become more commonplace and more damaging.

The other problem with timescale is that of lag. The increased bushfires and droughts of Australia over the last few years is a result of a lack of action 20 years ago. No matter what policies are enacted, the temperature rise and associated effects will continue over the next 20 years, before being either mitigated or exacerbated depending on the effectiveness of policies being enacted now.

 

[Ron The Bear]

Potentially, I agree with you. The biggest problems with satellite data is that it only goes back to 1979, while regular weather balloon measurements go back to 1958, and satellite temperatures must have calculations applied to them (ie they are potentially affected by techniques - homogenising or otherwise) unlike weather balloons where the temperature is measured directly.

Yes! The short history is a reason many researchers prefer terrestrial datasets. The corrections - other than one error correction pointed out by the RSS satellite team and accepted by Spencer & Christy - are common to all satellite datasets. The calculations required to convert microwave readings to temperatures are mechanical, while corrections for orbital decay etc. don't produce the wholesale change that has been inflicted on terrestrial datasets. The hundreds of monthly UAH charts online show consistent temperature curves, unlike some other datasets which change markedly, and always towards a warmer present.

 

[Total Power]

2020 on track to be one of three warmest years on record

Climate change continued its relentless march in 2020, which is on track to be one of the three warmest years on record. 2011-2020 will be the warmest decade on record, with the warmest six years all being since 2015, according to the World Meteorological Organization.

public.wmo.int

Climate change continued its relentless march in 2020, which is on track to be one of the three warmest years on record. 2011-2020 will be the warmest decade on record, with the warmest six years all being since 2015, according to the World Meteorological Organization.

 

[Ron The Bear]

2020 on track to be one of three warmest years on record

Climate change continued its relentless march in 2020, which is on track to be one of the three warmest years on record. 2011-2020 will be the warmest decade on record, with the warmest six years all being since 2015, according to the World Meteorological Organization.

public.wmo.int

Climate change continued its relentless march in 2020, which is on track to be one of the three warmest years on record. 2011-2020 will be the warmest decade on record, with the warmest six years all being since 2015, according to the World Meteorological Organization.

Send some of it Melbourne's way, coldest year since 1996. Spent a motza on keeping the place warm!

 

[Total Power]

Send some of it Melbourne's way, coldest year since 1996. Spent a motza on keeping the place warm!

We went through this before. Yes Shepparton been the same, doesnt invalidate anything i have said above. Both you and Snake need to stop quoting and believing in junk science.

 

[Noidenous]

We went through this before. Yes Shepparton been the same, doesnt invalidate anything i have said above. Both you and Snake need to stop quoting and believing in junk science.

Junkier than 'all the ice will disappear by 2008'?

 

[Total Power]

Junkier than 'all the ice will disappear by 2008'?

Yes junkier than that while what you said was certainly an alarmist exaggeration but the trend is correct. Snake quoted a 'scientist' who said CO2 helps cooling not warming mostly out of fraudulent organizations like Heartland. The earth has gotten significantly warmer though, those predictions been correct, sea ice is at a historic low in this decade since records started too.

This is the science board, if you wish to post 'science' , lets see some 'science', don't post nonsensical conspiracy theories from bloggers and fraud institutions funded by the Koch brothers.

 

[Noidenous]

Yes junkier than that while what you said was certainly an alarmist exaggeration but the trend is correct. Snake quoted a 'scientist' who said CO2 helps cooling not warming mostly out of fraudulent organizations like Heartland. The earth has gotten significantly warmer though, those predictions been correct, sea ice is at a historic low in this decade since records started too.

This is the science board, if you wish to post 'science' , lets see some 'science', don't post nonsensical conspiracy theories from bloggers and fraud institutions funded by the Koch brothers.

Ok, how about the science that shows CO2 rises after the warming has already occurred?

 

[Total Power]

Ok, how about the science that shows CO2 rises after the warming has already occurred?

This has been discussed already in the CC thread

Politics - Climate Change Paradox (cont in part 2)

Except plenty of the models have gotten things right but these things never get a mention. https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2943/study-confirms-climate-models-are-getting-future-warming-projections-right/They get more of a mention than when they get things wrong. That conveniently gets left out on...

www.bigfooty.com

 

[Ron The Bear]

We went through this before. Yes Shepparton been the same, doesnt invalidate anything i have said above. Both you and Snake need to stop quoting and belie0ving in junk science.

Just sayin'.

Nobody has been able to explain this one satisfactorily - despite the biggest drop in human emissions since WW2 due to corona, it has made not a rat's arse of difference to the rise in CO2 concentration in the atmosphere.

Exactly what sacrifice is required for it to register?

 

[Total Power]

But you are the expert, are you not?

I listen to the people who dedicated their life to it, but some like you would rather listen to bloggers and Heartland insititute.

Your inablity to backup your claim has killed any credibility you had. If 'science' said that, you should be able to demonstrate.

 

[Total Power]

Just sayin'.

Nobody has been able to explain this one satisfactorily - despite the biggest drop in human emissions since WW2 due to corona, it has made not a rat's arse of difference to the rise in CO2 concentration in the atmosphere.

Exactly what sacrifice is required for it to register?

This has been done to death in the CC thread, It's a lagging indicator you think 100 years of rise in co2 will be offset by 3 months of inactivity? show me one scientist who agrees with you?

 

[Total Power]

Oh, so you're a repeater. I get it.

I listen to people with credibility, you listen to bloggers.

 

[Ron The Bear]

This has been done to death in the CC thread, It's a lagging indicator you think 100 years of rise in co2 will be offset by 3 months of inactivity? show me one scientist who agrees with you?

These blokes were looking for it in March (and thought maybe they were seing it).

in Hawaii’s air, scientists seek signs of economic shock on CO2 levels

He said scientists were now studying data from the mountain in the middle of the Pacific Ocean for signs that the economic slowdown linked to the coronavirus could reduce the rise in atmospheric carbon concentrations.

I'm just looking for a slowdown - any sort of sign that indicates we have any control whatsoever over climate.

 

[Total Power]

Erm, in the 70's they thought we were going to enter a new glacial ice age.

This was then revised to 'but the ocean rise'.

The scientism is strong in this one.

This has been addressed a hundred times before too, there was a cooling period in between, but the models have largely been successful

Study Confirms Climate Models are Getting Future Warming Projections Right - NASA Science

A new evaluation of global climate models used to project Earth's future global average surface temperature finds that most have been quite accurate.

climate.nasa.gov

Crickets, yet again, you got nothing. I asked for science, not your opinion

 

[Total Power]

These blokes were looking for it in March (and thought maybe they were seing it).

in Hawaii’s air, scientists seek signs of economic shock on CO2 levels


I'm just looking for a slowdown - any sort of sign that indicates we have any control whatsoever over climate.

Can you tell me why you keep posting the same stuff which has been answered in the CC thread? you received several answers to the same post there. If you don't buy it, it's your problem but this has been addressed.

 

[Ron The Bear]

Can you tell me why you keep posting the same stuff which has been answered in the CC thread? you received several answers to the same post there. If you don't buy it, it's your problem but this has been addressed.

Post a link to the explanation, please. I don't remember seeing it and can't even find the thread.

 

[Ron The Bear]

Everyone knows the real issue is overpopulation. Reduce population, reduce demand for resources. But nobody wants to be the bad guy and put a cap on it.

 

[Clems Knee]

Everyone knows the real issue is overpopulation. Reduce population, reduce demand for resources. But nobody wants to be the bad guy and put a cap on it.

Of course overpopulation is the ultimate cause. We don’t have to reduce population by killing people though. That just leads to people having more children. Population change is a product of birth and death rates (and migration rates if you are only talking about countries).

The only things that have lead to lower birth rates have been improved living standards and the education and emancipation of women. In the meantime, technology and reducing the carbon footprints of significant polluters can have an effect on the scale of the climate change.

 

[Clems Knee]

This is the Science forum, not the mindless moron forum. I think Noidenous has lost its way.

Climate change can be discussed in the Politics forum as the response to climate change has become a political issue.
The fact of climate change and what can be done to reduce its effects on the biodiversity of our planet are the preserve of science and exist independently of what politicians say, and what mindless trolls post.

And Red and Green makes yellow.

 

[Noidenous]

This is the Science forum, not the mindless moron forum. I think Noidenous has lost its way.

Climate change can be discussed in the Politics forum as the response to climate change has become a political issue.
The fact of climate change and what can be done to reduce its effects on the biodiversity of our planet are the preserve of science and exist independently of what politicians say, and what mindless trolls post.

And Red and Green makes yellow.

Thanks for that redundant drivel.

Perhaps you would like to contend Planck's Law in your own words despite Total Power's total failure to invoke its inference in the question of molecular thermal properties.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Thanks for that redundant drivel.

Perhaps you would like to contend Planck's Law in your own words despite Total Power's total failure to invoke its inference in the question of molecular thermal properties.

No, he’s right.

4 pages of your inane rubbish, be gone.

 

[Total Power]

Post a link to the explanation, please. I don't remember seeing it and can't even find the thread.

Politics - Climate Change Paradox (cont in part 2)

WTF? You linked a Wordpress blog with no author referenced from a site 'And then there's Physics', which in turn references the Media Watch program. So what cr@p are you dishing up? WTF? You linked a Wordpress blog with no author referenced from a site 'And then there's Physics', which in...

www.bigfooty.com

there's been multiple responses to the same post about Mt Lona. Fair enough if you disagree with it, but it's been done.

 

[Total Power]

Everyone knows the real issue is overpopulation. Reduce population, reduce demand for resources. But nobody wants to be the bad guy and put a cap on it.

I am working on a project with the EU government called the 'circular economy', you might want to read up a more about it? there are so many ways to produce food and support the environment without actually destroying it.

Do you know how much food the first world nations waste ever year? that can easily end world hunger!

 

[Ron The Bear]

there's been multiple responses to the same post about Mt Lona. Fair enough if you disagree with it, but it's been done.

Well yeah, you could say I disagree. Two posts suggesting Mauna Loa is measuring the effect of local emissions which weren't worth responding to. Manua Loa was chosen (by Keeling) as a site where the atmosphere is representative of the entire northern hemisphere.

There's been no lagging effect, there's been no effect at all despite CO2 emissions being down about 7% across the globe. If climate is as fragile as some suggest, I would expect it to register. We're talking about rate of increase of CO2 concentration here, not total CO2.