OK Mr. Smartypants explain this

a reply to: anonentity

I think that if the recent rainfalls came down as snow, glaciation wouldn't be far behind, then a runaway Albedo might happen.

That would require cooler summers as well. That snow has to stick through the whole year.

You can see what happens when the sun goes out just by looking at the night temps. in desert areas.

Yes. That happens when there is a lack of cloud cover. Infrared can radiate freely out of the atmosphere so the surface cools down. In a way, it's like CO2. The more CO2 there is, the less heat can radiate away.

Well I went through the thread and gave everyone a star who replied.. for your replies and thoughts I thank you no matter what side of this argument you find yourself..

We do not really have a winter around here.. we go from rainy season which can get darn hot after a rain which jacks the humidity up to our dry season which on some days can reach 43C+ temp wise. This being our cooler season means only a fan at night without the air conditioner and day time temperatures for the most part in the mid 80s. Best time of the year for me and it will last until mid February if history is any indicator.. Saying that we have had a few years where it got so cold that people in the sticks died from exposure as the temps during the night dropped to around high 30s to low 40s.. Exposure may not be totally correct as a charcoal or a wood burning fire in one's shack/house to keep warm is not a good idea due to asphyxiation..

If the temps were like this all the time this place would be crowded with people from all over the world.

On the first page of this thread Dr. UAE posted a video that actually has workable solutions for both pollution and climate change.. Thanks Doc as I have not seen that video before

originally posted by: Dr UAE
here is what Professor Jordan Peterson had to say when he was asked about climate change and climate policy

a reply to: underwerks

general scientific consensus.

But where is the underlying data? You telling me all those scientists saw/used the same secret data? And if not, how do they know they can trust it? They have no right keeping the data secret if they expect anything to be done about it

I also am not a climate change denier, but I haven't seen evidence it is human caused and no way to verify those scientific conclusions (if only through third party organizations, analysis, etc)

All these people need to learn that their "good word" isn't nearly enough any more. Everything requires provable and accountable facts or it is only logical to reject that conclusion

Funny you mention this I noticed the 50 pound bag of spuds that used to be priced 18.99$ is now 24.99$.
Dang winter.
a reply to: 727Sky

a reply to: JBurns

But where is the underlying data?

Various places. This one is more convenient to use than some.
berkeleyearth.org...

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: JBurns

But where is the underlying data?

Various places. This one is more convenient to use than some.
berkeleyearth.org...

Thank you, this is exactly what I was talking about

Although I have no idea what most of it means It is still reassuring to know those who do understand it can browse it at their leisure

I have no problem accepting this conclusion. Some of us are well prepared against disasters, natural or otherwise Those who aren't should start now!

a reply to: JBurns

You can also check their code.
berkeleyearth.org...

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: JBurns

You can also check their code.
berkeleyearth.org...

Thanks Phage.... that is pretty in-depth

I never did understand why renewable sources of energy are not being tapped more frequently. Nuclear power is just one of those, but solar, water, wind, all of those make for great sources of power. I couldn't really guess whether it is feasible to replace non-renewable entirely but it is inevitable that will be the end result some day.. if just from running out

a reply to: Athetos


Just an anecdote but check out the average summer temperatures in Iceland this year. They are just south of the arctic circle and experience some long hours of sunlight. This year they are way down .www.accuweather.com...
It might be worth adding that the Greenland Viking colony disappeared during the Maunder minimum, according to midden evidence they were slow to adapt from European type farming to Inuit practices, whereas the Vikings in Iceland were eating fish and seal . during this period.

a reply to: 727Sky

Well done SnF!

originally posted by: infolurker
a reply to: 727Sky

For me, I don't doubt the climate is changing but A Financial Scam is not a solution.

Even environmental leftest know it is a scam... here is one of their videos which clearly lay it out.

Now, Trillions are on the line for special interest groups if we don't implement the carbon credit scam. It is the largest transfer of wealth from the poor and middle class to the rich in history.

This scam is why the French are being hosed at the fuel pump and rioting about it.

originally posted by: OneBigMonkeyToo

originally posted by: AM10101
It's both. The earth goes through periodic changes on it's own due to a billion different factors. We also have become a factor with our industry. If anyone seriously thinks we've had zero impact on the planet with what we pump out in in different pollutants and that we can just do whatever we want with no consequences then I don't what to say.

The planet is changing but we don't have to give it a boost. We're going to need that time to adapt just like our evolutionary ancestors did.

^^ This.

No climate scientist will ever deny that our planet has gone through cyclical change over time. The big difference is the rate and speed at which our climate is shifting, and that shift coincides remarkably with when we started chucking out all that carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide is a very small part of our atmosphere's composition, which why it doesn't require much additional inputs to make a big difference.

We obviously did once have a relatively carbon dioxide rich atmosphere, that's where our fossil fuels came from. Our planet managed just fine under those conditions. We will not.

Yet we are at about 15% of the Earth's max CO2 found by the geological records. So, why get upset over Carbon when we are at historic low CO2 when it this whole thing has been a farce to raise funds for some other reason but the Earth?

a reply to: anonentity
The temperatures drop significantly during an one minute eclipse as well. Last one we had around here was in summer, in fact dont think it even lasted a minute, most like seconds. Middle of summer, over 80 degrees out. And I saw people running in to grab there coats because it got cold during it, by the time they came back? Well no doubt many missed the show.

So ya, gradual cooling. If a few seconds can effect things so? Well? The possibilities are endless were that big bright thing in the sky is concerned.

You see the problem is there investing to much in carbon credits, and not enough in potatoes and wheat. A foolish strategy indeed. But it is to be expected I suppose.

Though in the scope of things. Investing in potato that grow in snow or desert sands, may be the only long term strategy. In fact it may be the only viable strategy. And everything else may just be a waste of time, and play pretend.

But the definition of progress, seems to take a myriad of different meanings here. Just as the definition and meaning of global warming has taken a myriad of different meanings and interpretations these past few short years.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: JBurns

But where is the underlying data?

Various places. This one is more convenient to use than some.
berkeleyearth.org...

That is some great database. Thanks.
Of particular interest are the temperature Anomalies , both monthly and yearly. There are bursts since the 1700's but the end of the list is kind of spectacular. Is it possible there could be an effect generated by the advanced technology that is capturing the data?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: TheOne7

Heh. Good point.

The eruption of Mt. St. Helen's put something like 10 million tons of CO2 into the atmosphere over 9 hours. People produce that amount in 2.5 hours. Pinatubo did reach a higher rate of production though, for a few hours.

volcanoes.usgs.gov...

I don't think you did the math this time Phage. I have to ask myself, was that on purpose?

Etna alone produces 5,800,000 Tons/year of CO2 and Man 36 Million per year.

"We can measure the degassing of Mt. Etna extremely well, and find that it adds about 16,000 tons of CO2 to the atmosphere each day, or 5.8 million tons per year."
www.forbes.com...

and Wiki has the Man made CO2 totaling 36,000,000 tons/year.
en.wikipedia.org...
(granted: Wiki lies sometimes)

Volcano's produce 200,000,000 tons/year CO2 according to Scientific America report:
www.scientificamerican.com...

a reply to: Justoneman

If you read on in the last NG article you find the synopsis, ...

"Greenhouse gas emissions from volcanoes comprise less than one percent of
those generated by today’s human endeavors."

originally posted by: charlyv
a reply to: Justoneman

If you read on in the last NG article you find the synopsis, ...

"Greenhouse gas emissions from volcanoes comprise less than one percent of
those generated by today’s human endeavors."

And there we have the probable deliberate lie. I just found the data to compare and posted it for all of us to read above. I am using Wiki as my source for Human output and SA for the geology report.

ETA; 200 Million Tons from Earth and 68 Million from man, each year while the level of CO2 has been at historic lows from the geological records we have.

a reply to: Grambler

The first part and most telling part ever...the liberal left brain statement that climate and weather are not the same...funny stuff indeed.

The intellectualism that claims just because it is cold does not mean it is warm is also part of that.

Nothing means anything, just believe us that carbon is the real doom and gloom...oh and all deniers are terrible people.

originally posted by: ParasuvO
a reply to: Grambler

The first part and most telling part ever...the liberal left brain statement that climate and weather are not the same...funny stuff indeed.

The intellectualism that claims just because it is cold does not mean it is warm is also part of that.

Nothing means anything, just believe us that carbon is the real doom and gloom...oh and all deniers are terrible people.

That isn't a liberal left brain statement...that's science. Weather and climate are very different things.

Weather: The day-to-day state of the atmosphere and it's short term variations measured in minutes up to weeks.
Climate: The weather of a certain place averaged out over an extended period of time, typically 30 years.
Link: nsidc.org...

An example: I live up in the Rockies (9,000 feet above sea level). This summer we had a few days over 80 degrees. Are sunny, 80 degree days the average climate 9,000 feet in the Rockies? Definitely not. Meaning, if someone asked you to describe the climate of where I live, no one would say "oh, it's usually sunny and 80 here!" Sure, there are a few days of that each year, but it certainly isn't the climate.

That's why weather and climate are very different things. It isn't a political thing. Stop trying to make it political.

a reply to: 727Sky

When you state that freak weather is occurring where it has never occurred before, is this by direct observation by yourself ? And what sort of time line is "never" ? 10 years ? 50 years ? 150 years ? Since recorded weather observations only go back so far, I am just curious. Since most of the Gorish facts, as in Al Gore "inconvenient truths" are mostly based on very convenient made up numbers from never never land, I am curious as to where this inconvenient truth about the observations are coming from ?