It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

The Delusion of Climate Change

page: 4
12
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 21 2016 @ 09:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

All of your links came up behind a paywall... I have access to IEEE, but not others. From the abstracts alone, here are my impressions:

1. Quite possible there is a link. The urban island effect, especially on temperature sensors that have been overtaken by commercial expansion, is a major source of the higher recorded temperatures IMO. That is one reason why I do not fully accept the reported increases in global average temperature. The others are: lack of long-term consistent data, primarily in uninhabited/remote/undeveloped areas; scale of reported temperature increases compared to scale of 'normal' temperature fluctuations. In summer, it is also almost self-evident that higher temperatures would lead to increased power usage. Not so sure the same could be said during the wintertime.

2. Interesting proposal. I know both the recent California drought and the extreme winter cold in the Deep South are a result of a drastically changed Jet Stream trajectory. It's no stretch of the imagination to believe that other droughts (like the one we are in right now) are also connected. I am still not convinced what has caused this shift, but I have heard it is caused by volcanic activity in the South Pacific.

3. I was actually able to access this one at work. Somewhat inconsistent on a few points, but there is a general trend. I noticed, however, that the "low Ph" was using 1100 ppm CO2... that's a far cry from what we have today. If we reached 1000 ppm in a short time (say a decade or two), I would start to become concerned.

4. Sorry, but the abstract on this one read biased to me. Perhaps the article itself isn't, but I have no way to verify that.


That is one of the biggest political slam dunks in favor of Climate Change,

Nah, it just means Exxon is as bad as Jim Hansen. I try to ignore them both.


The PROBLEM is that many of the deniers cannot separate a science discussion from a political one when it comes to this topic.

Nor can many of the supporters.

It's human nature to focus on the good of one's 'side' of a debate and the bad on the opposing 'side.' But the truth is that both sides typically use similar tactics and have similar shortcomings. May we someday rise above our nature in that respect.

TheRedneck




posted on Nov, 21 2016 @ 09:52 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck




Interesting proposal. I know both the recent California drought and the extreme winter cold in the Deep South are a result of a drastically changed Jet Stream trajectory.

The locations of the polar jet streams (which I assume you are talking about) are determined by the interface between polar (cool) air masses and temperate (warmer) air masses. The jet stream is a result of climate and weather, not a cause.

www.weatherquestions.com...

edit on 11/21/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 21 2016 @ 10:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Very well. Allow me to restate.

There is an observable connection between the Jet Stream and some of the weather anomalies in the mainland US.

I still don't know the cause.

TheRedneck



posted on Nov, 21 2016 @ 10:26 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck
As far as "knowing" the cause, I suppose that is a matter of degree. However there is very much evidence which shows what determines the location of a jet stream. It would appear that the location of the jet stream is primarily dependant upon temperature variation between large air masses. Since the northern polar jet stream seems to be demonstrating recent "unusual" characteristics and since computer models and the physics which drive those models predicts this sort of thing and observations indicate that the world is warming...

Is it unreasonable to think that the observed warming correlating to modeled behavior imply that the behavior of the jet stream is due to warming? While it can't be "known", it sure as hell can be indicated. Strongly so.



posted on Nov, 21 2016 @ 10:40 PM
link   
There's a lot of reasons for climate change but i very well doubt its due to flatulating cows as spoken by the dishonest words of Gore himself. I suppose these people will come up with a 10001 reasons as to why global warming is taking place which to me isn't really an issue at all.



posted on Nov, 22 2016 @ 06:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: rexsblues
a reply to: Krazysh0t

No my OP is arguing against the liberal position that something can be done about it. I've mentioned 3 or 4 seperate times now that I'm not denying climate change is real.

6.5 Billion, is a pretty good estimate of the number of people who can't actually comprehend the nature of the subject or could care less, thus the point of the OP.

So AGAIN...what are you advocating that's remotely in the realm of possibility????? What is your position? What are you defending?

I'm not even going to expect a mattered response, but try debating my point this time, if you can.

So your thread is just a bunch of negativeness, "Guys don't worry about Climate Change because we can't fix it and there is no point in trying!"



posted on Nov, 22 2016 @ 06:44 AM
link   
The only delusion in this thread belongs to the people who are too stupid to acknowledge overwhelming scientific consensus.



posted on Nov, 22 2016 @ 06:51 AM
link   
a reply to: Dr X

Guess what? Stupid is running the world now, the prez elect is a denier about the changing climate. So, it is hopeless.



posted on Nov, 22 2016 @ 07:41 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

I do know the following, Phage:
  • The direction of the Jet Stream has changed across North America in the last decade.
  • Colder air is somehow being funneled from the Arctic into the Eastern half of the US.
  • Warmer air is being trapped in the Southwestern US.
  • Pacific storms which used to bring snow to the Sierra Nevada are instead moving north and missing California.
  • This change is sporadic. The variation was not as severe last winter.
  • Average temperatures in my area were below normal for the last few years... as tracked by NOAA, reported by Weather Underground, and analyzed by me personally.

I also know (thanks to a conversation with you a few years back) that the Bering current has warmed, contributing to Arctic melt. This coincides with the new location of the Jet Stream in the Pacific. I fail to see any reasonable cause and effect between this general phenomenon and carbon dioxide levels in the range we see them. If one exists, I would be amazed that the pop-sci alarmists haven't publicized it 24/7.

It is very easy to look at a variation and say "Look! There's proof of Global Warming!" It's more difficult to determine the mechanism by which it can be attributable to Global Warming.

TheRedneck



posted on Nov, 22 2016 @ 08:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: rexsblues
a reply to: Krazysh0t

No my OP is arguing against the liberal position that something can be done about it. I've mentioned 3 or 4 seperate times now that I'm not denying climate change is real.

6.5 Billion, is a pretty good estimate of the number of people who can't actually comprehend the nature of the subject or could care less, thus the point of the OP.

So AGAIN...what are you advocating that's remotely in the realm of possibility????? What is your position? What are you defending?

I'm not even going to expect a mattered response, but try debating my point this time, if you can.

So your thread is just a bunch of negativeness, "Guys don't worry about Climate Change because we can't fix it and there is no point in trying!"


Now you get it.



posted on Nov, 22 2016 @ 08:28 AM
link   
a reply to: rexsblues
So basically you are worse than a denier. You are short changing humanity's ingenuity. Still have your head in the sand though. Just for different reasons than I originally assumed.



posted on Nov, 22 2016 @ 09:36 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

No my heads just closer to the ground, you need to work on getting yours out of the sky.







 
12
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join