Let's Pretend AGW is a Thing

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: syrinx high priest

Well, that's sort of obvious. If it gets colder, it has to be a sure sign of too much heat.

Not.

TheRedneck

its a common mistale people make It drives me nuts. We get a cool day in June and people want to know "what happened to global warming?"

aaaahh !!!

why don't you think human activity is driving most of the spike?

a reply to: rnaa

better agricultural yields;


Completely false for the reason cited above: greater mass, but lower nutritional value. Also floods and droughts are not helpful for maintaining consistent agricultural yields.

No, it's not completely false. I think I know what paper you are getting your information from. More 'science with an agenda' if you ask me. Is this from your 'paper'?

“… As the ecosystems were markedly N limited, plants with minimal productivity responses to eCO2 likely acquired less N than ambient CO2-grown counterparts because access was decreased, and not because demand was lower.”

Translation: these studies took place in already-nitrogen-starved ecosystems.
Too bad they wouldn't redo their work using some N based fertilizer...

The genetic resources and variability of the plant kingdom including the humanity adapted grain, oil seed and pulse crops are immense.
It will be little more than a normal genetics selecting and crossing program to both find, cross and breed plant varieties that can both benefit substantially more in yield increases from enhanced CO2 and also have protein levels and grain qualities that are quite adequate and match today’s crops in those desirable and essential qualities.
And with GMO technology advancing rapidly, the modification of the internal genetic characteristics of grain crops without introducing any other foreign genetic material as in some current convential GMO’s will likely be able to compensate for lower N and protein levels in humanity’s main crops but still enjoy the much enhanced yields from the higher atmospheric CO2.

How is accelerating the loss of habitat by coastal flooding, human migrations, and other reactions to climate change going to reverse the downward trend of biodiversity?

Coastal flooding due to climate change?
This has been happening?
I was unaware, do you have proof of this?

a reply to: syrinx high priest

I know... if the planet warms significantly, it can cause a shift in weather patterns that could funnel cold air into places where it used to be warm. It's just that this is overused... the cooling would be limited to very few areas, and the overall rise in average temperature would mitigate it.

No one day of anything anywhere is indicative of anything; the climate is a chaotic system. But that's also a problem when attempting to measure a 'global temperature.' The noise in the system is itself so massive that it would take a very large signal to detect with any certainty. Thus, I do not admit that we have even seen a 'spike' in global temperatures... I accept that we may be experiencing such, simply because I don't see any real proof either way.

If we are experiencing a spike, I simply don't believe the cause is carbon dioxide levels. 0.04% is a very low amount to be attributing such extreme change to, and while I do not state it is impossible, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. I have not yet seen extraordinary proof. It is my belief that any human-caused response would be more likely to be due to deforestation, particulate pollution, or albedo change (as in the urban heat island effect).

Oh, and my refution of limited observed anomalies works both ways: it also means nothing when there's a warm week in December...

TheRedneck

originally posted by: TruMcCarthy


Not really, it's just a hunk of rock. I want humanity to expand out into the solar system/galaxy/cosmos. After all the Earth will become unlivable someday, no matter how great of stewards we are, there are many natural disasters we will have no control over, in fact we're already overdue. We might as well use whatever resources this rock has to offer to get us out of here, and try to preserve the greatest thing the Earth has ever produced, humanity.

Incorrect. I mean, you may be right in that the earth may become uninhabitable one day, but this is not a forgone conclusion.

What we are stuck in is a cycle of improper resource use and management. If we change the way we manage and utilize our resources, that solves the problem. Properly utilizing our resources, the earth could support many times our present population, while still maintaining a healthy environment.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: rnaa

It is impossible to roll back the damage, and it is too late to prevent a lot of damage. That CO2 will stay in the atmosphere for a LOOOOOONNNNNNGGGGGG time.

Give me a little time and enough of the right equipment, and I could reduce the carbon dioxide concentration to any number you would find suitable.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

That is such a absurd idea that it borders on the moronic.

I also thought I should state my opinion that you should come up with some better insults. Try to be a little more subtle and intellectual. You're not going to convince anyone of the validity of your arguments by alienating them in the process of the discussion. I thought I should offer my opinion here, but of course do what you want.

a reply to: Metallicus

I process all of my green waste. I compost a good deal of it, and use the wood to run my smoker and wood stove. This helps to reduce the amount of energy that my municipality needs to use to collect and process said waste. If everyone in my municipality did this, that energy figure would be a zero. I also have a grey water line from my kitchen sink, which helps to reduce the load on my municipality's sewage system. It also waters my herb garden.

originally posted by: D8Tee
a reply to: rnaa

Humans are putting a big chunk of that carbon right back into the atmosphere in a few centuries. It is simply not credible that that cannot have a detrimental effect on all life on the planet.

It's not all detrimental, stop being so alarmist.
The C02 fertilization effect is leading to increased biomass on planet earth, crop yields are up.
Amongst the benefits of global warming include: fewer winter deaths; better agricultural yields; probably fewer droughts; maybe richer biodiversity. It is a little-known fact that winter deaths exceed summer deaths

Lol! A decrease in winter deaths?! Never seen that used before! My god please tell me you are joking with this silliness! That's similar to saying...
Amongst the benefits of house fires include: increased work for firefighters, major resource for neighborhood to cook hot dogs (only while it's still burning of course...once it's completely destroyed...well, we will cross that bridge when we come to it.)

Too funny.

originally posted by: Argus100

originally posted by: D8Tee
a reply to: rnaa

Humans are putting a big chunk of that carbon right back into the atmosphere in a few centuries. It is simply not credible that that cannot have a detrimental effect on all life on the planet.

It's not all detrimental, stop being so alarmist.
The C02 fertilization effect is leading to increased biomass on planet earth, crop yields are up.
Amongst the benefits of global warming include: fewer winter deaths; better agricultural yields; probably fewer droughts; maybe richer biodiversity. It is a little-known fact that winter deaths exceed summer deaths

Lol! A decrease in winter deaths?! Never seen that used before! My god please tell me you are joking with this silliness! That's similar to saying...
Amongst the benefits of house fires include: increased work for firefighters, major resource for neighborhood to cook hot dogs (only while it's still burning of course...once it's completely destroyed...well, we will cross that bridge when we come to it.)

Too funny.

Bet you it's been studied, grant money passed out under the umbrella of climate change research.