Tech Support Guy banner

Global Warming/Climate Change

44K views 795 replies 18 participants last post by  SeanLaurence 
#1 ·
Even though global warming is real and observed, it's still a political football to be exaggerated by some and denied by others.
These distortions didn't start with Trump or the current liberal left, the players of extremes have been at it since at least the beginning of the GW Bush administrations.

Unfortunately for humanity, science and reality are moving the projected scenarios closer and closer to some of those early gloom and doom projections.

And the same usual suspects on the conservative right are spreading lies to support denial.
A 1656 page National Climate Assessment ( https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/ ) came out of the Trump administration recently only to be denied by Trump and the usual denier suspects.

Interesting article by Joseph McCarthy, an associate editor at weather.com discussing the immediate reaction and distortions from the denier camp.

https://features.weather.com/major-national-climate-report-came-deniers-got-tv/

The fact that Trump is a global warming denier is just cause to be skeptical of the denier mentality.
Science and reality is just cause to call them out on their lies.

(in my humble opinion, of course :D )
 
See less See more
#2 ·
https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/

Summary Findings

These Summary Findings represent a high-level synthesis of the material in the underlying report. The findings consolidate Key Messages and supporting evidence from 16 national-level topic chapters, 10 regional chapters, and 2 chapters that focus on societal response strategies (mitigation and adaptation). Unless otherwise noted, qualitative statements regarding future conditions in these Summary Findings are broadly applicable across the range of different levels of future climate change and associated impacts considered in this report.
 
#3 ·
Since the 1960's, the global population has increased by a BILLION people about every 15 years.
That in itself makes global warming a very real fact.
I feel bad for my grandchildren and great-grandchildren who will be exposed to the consequences.
:(

---------------------------------------------------------------
 
#6 ·
https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/

Climate change affects the natural, built, and social systems we rely on individually and through their connections to one another. These interconnected systems are increasingly vulnerable to cascading impacts that are often difficult to predict, threatening essential services within and beyond the Nation's borders.
 
#7 ·
Interesting article:

Rising Tides: How Near-Daily Flooding of America's Shorelines Could Become the Norm

http://www.climatecentral.org/news/...ericas-shorelines-21935?utm_source=feedburner

From 2005 to 2015, the median annual frequency of flooding days more than doubled along the stretch of coast from Florida to North Carolina, according to an analysis by scientists at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). The coast between Virginia and Maine saw a median increase of 75 percent during the same period.
 
#8 ·
Greenland's melting snow makes new hockey stick (graph)

The last 20 years were no natural fluke.
Too much to copy and paste, but here's the graph:



( If you are reading this Lanmaster Mike, I still have a couple parcels half way up the Rockies for lease :D )
 
#9 ·
Sadly, I've reached the point of no longer being concerned about climate change. The coming generations will have to make do with what they get environmentally, same as all past generations have done. In the USA we will continue to elect twits that say there is no climate change and man is not the problem - that's not going to change - and currently, we're going backwards, what with standards being eliminated for clean air, water, drilling / mining in National Forest, wildlife refuges, coral formations dying, pollution of our oceans. Nothing will get done UNTIL it's too late or welcome to "The Book of Eli" world of the future.

Every single time since Reagan, Bush II the nation has elected republicans that roll back or cancel environmental progress made. I haven't a clue what to call the current occupant of the White House since he has no set tenets, just a vile chameleon, bent on power and destruction. A true pariah. Rule by kakistocracy.
 
#10 ·
................... I haven't a clue what to call the current occupant of the White House since he has no set tenets, just a vile chameleon, bent on power and destruction. A true pariah. Rule by kakistocracy.
I see him simply as a malevolent opportunist.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wino
#12 ·
Johnny b, we appear to be on the same life course. :D

I too care, just quit fretting about something I have no control over. I do my part - recycle, recycled when it wasn't a fad; don't throw trash out car windows; try saving my resources or not wasting (water, heat). Always left camp sites cleaner than they were when arrived along with not destroying facilities (burning park bench for firewood as an example). It's frustrating to see the direction we are headed, but my conscience is clear. I do hope to be around for the next 2020 election and maybe even eke out enough extra time to see the Orange Stain and family in prison - wishful thinking, but gives me incentive.:p
 
#15 ·
All that certainly helps.
But one large problem is how we derive energy, mostly through oxidation of hydrocarbons.
There have been some interesting designs with ceramic fuel cells, but for mass generation, coal and even natural gas are favorites and currently large sources of CO2.
Nuclear reactors pollute and are hazards waiting for human error, to fail.
The Chinese have been working with fusion technology and I've read of some small successes, while the DB in the Oval office promotes coal and threatens to curtail the tax credits for electrical plugin vehicles, further locking us into hydrocarbons.

I had hoped to see some real success with fusion tech in my life, but I don't think that's in the cards any more for the US.

Reality......not enough people in the US think long term, vote short term promises, and don't get worried until they are in the middle of a bad situation.
 
#13 ·
Climate change is a force of nature.

Politicians have NOTHING to do with it.

Climate change has been happening ever since this planet was formed, and it's not going to stop because of bunch of whining cry-babies find it interrupts their selfish, egotistical, brain dead, neanderthal, a**backwards, moronic lives of sitting around on their cell phones texting idiotic nonsense to the person sitting 5 feet away from them, and being rude jerks to everyone else on the planet because they don't get their way.

Yes, humans have SOME effect on environment which has SLIGHTLY effected some parts of the climate, but it's like .01%.

Most of the climate change is due to the earth shifting over the past 100 years.........and we just happen to be in the wake of it.

President bashers aren't any better than the things they bash him for, which just makes them all hypocrites. The president doesn't believe in "climate change" because he knows humans have no control over it.

"Climate change" B.S. is just another reason for corrupt politicians and "world leaders" to drain even more tax dollars from us working stiffs who live from paycheck to paycheck.
 
#14 · (Edited)
Climate change is a force of nature.

Politicians have NOTHING to do with it.

Climate change has been happening ever since this planet was formed, and it's not going to stop because of bunch of whining cry-babies find it interrupts their selfish, egotistical, brain dead, neanderthal, a**backwards, moronic lives of sitting around on their cell phones texting idiotic nonsense to the person sitting 5 feet away from them, and being rude jerks to everyone else on the planet because they don't get their way.

Yes, humans have SOME effect on environment which has SLIGHTLY effected some parts of the climate, but it's like .01%.

Most of the climate change is due to the earth shifting over the past 100 years.........and we just happen to be in the wake of it.

President bashers aren't any better than the things they bash him for, which just makes them all hypocrites. The president doesn't believe in "climate change" because he knows humans have no control over it.

"Climate change" B.S. is just another reason for corrupt politicians and "world leaders" to drain even more tax dollars from us working stiffs who live from paycheck to paycheck.
You appear to be confused.
Probably a political issue.
The science behind climate change/global warming has been well established. The current deniers are no better than the exaggerators. And they both are politically motivated.

Climate change/global warming is an event and reckless human activity an element that adds to environmental changes beyond the norm.
It's measurable with science to describe the activity, and theory to project future results.

Hypocrisy has nothing to do with reality.
Only those that deny reality ;)

Most of the climate change is due to the earth shifting over the past 100 years.........and we just happen to be in the wake of it.
:D

Is that you, Lanmaster? LOL!
 
#16 ·
Fusion is what I feel will be the future. Electric is just a stop gap. On the other hand, I don't see carbon fuels (coal, oil, gas) going out of use for another 50+ years, albeit a diminishing commodity . The USA will fall behind in new eco technology if we continue down the same political highway we're on now. Turnip doesn't believe in climate change or global warning because he doesn't understand what's happening, plus he no more cares about the planet than any other denier or your last name isn't Trump.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Johnny b
#18 ·
Most of the individuals accused of being climate change deniers do believe that humans impact climate change; but, not to the extent that is claimed by the many in the climate change supporters camp. I have overheard several reasons that move many individuals to not believe in primarily human driven climate change.

Here are some of the reasons that I have heard based upon varying levels thought processes:
  1. Climate Change (scoff) just a new name for Global Warming. Couldn't get the people to buy into Global Warming so they changed the name (HA!).
  2. Climate Change has been occurring throughout the history of the earth, why should I suddenly think that man has the ability to change the course of nature.
  3. Don't worry. The next big volcano to go off will decrease the global temperature for a couple of years.
  4. So let me get this straight, too hot - Climate Change, too dry - Climate Change, too wet - Climate Change, too clod - Climate Change, drought - Climate Change, flooding - Climate Change, blizzard - Climate Change. Us normal folk call that weather.
  5. Egypt used to be lush with greenery and covered in foliage. So, what did the Egyptians do to cause the Climate Change that turned their land into a desert.
  6. We know that the earth used to be much warmer in prehistoric times. So, what did the dinosaurs do to fix their Global Warming problem.
  7. The hockey-stick graph was proven to be a lie, based upon faulty math.
  8. Climate change supporting (scientists and organizations) have been caught lying (via compromised e-mails) about the information contained within published Climate Change reports.
  9. Short of a nuclear war; solar flares, solar winds, the earth's elliptical orbit, the tilt of the earth, shifting plate tectonics, and the path of the jet-stream all have a significantly greater impact on Climate Change than anything man could do.
  10. If Climate Change is really that big of a problem, why pick on the United States to make small reductions, when other countries produce significantly more greenhouse gasses? China being subject number one.
  11. Liberal politicians keep getting caught in lies used to support Climate Change. Normally followed by an Al Gore - fish swimming in the street - comment.
  12. Yep, weren't we all supposed to be dead already from this whole Global Warming thingy?
  13. Ummm, in the 70's /early 80's, the news told us to worry about Global Cooling.
  14. Considering the history of the planet there is little to no empirical data to prove the Global Warming theories.
  15. If the weatherman cannot accurately predict the weather/temperature next year, next month, next week, tomorrow, even today (sometimes); then how can they predict the weather/temperature 10 years from now?
I am sure that there are more; but, I am tired of typing. ;)
 
#19 · (Edited)
Heard it all before.
Here, actually, a decade ago.
Science keeps describing the situation and the deniers keep posting non sense, just like above.
Thank you for the examples :)

If the weatherman cannot accurately predict the weather/temperature next year, next month, next week, tomorrow, even today (sometimes); then how can they predict the weather/temperature 10 years from now?
Thank you for that. It's the typical response from those that don't understand the difference between 'weather' and 'climate'.
No wonder you seem so confused :D

BS receptivity. :(
 
#20 ·
Chawbacon? What is your view on climate change? Do you believe humans contribute or that it is, how do you say, just a new name for global warming?
 
#25 ·
Hello Valis. I will gladly provide my opinion. Unfortunately, it is a bit more complicated than a yes/no.

In my view, mankind can and does impact our climate; however, I also believe that there are many additional factors/forces that affect our perception of climate which have a much greater actual impact on the Earth's climate.

On the political perception wing, yes, I do think that Climate Change is Global Warming in sheeps clothing; but, I do not really care about the name. Personally, I believe that individuals supporting climate change are receiving a bad wrap due to self-inflicted credibility wounds. Additionally, supporters in the media have over-hyped the concerns and dissenters in the media have latched onto the self-inflected wounds and use them to decry any suggestion of steps towards addressing legitimate concerns. The resulting, toxic, political environment has severely impacted our ability to have rational dialog on the subject.

In my opinion, climate is much more than the temperature of the earth and the discussion should really be a very basic one, of which, the media has lost sight. Both sides of the media need to get rid of the arguable science stance, and discuss the issue in brass tacks.
  1. We need the air to breath. Keep it clean.
  2. We need the water to drink. Keep it clean.
  3. We need the land for raising uncontaminated crops and animals. Keep it clean.
  4. Everyone needs to help US keep OUR planet clean.
This is a simple message that everyone understands and would be much more effective that the current bologna zingers being bantered about today.
 
#24 · (Edited)
https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/

Communities, governments, and businesses are working to reduce risks from and costs associated with climate change by taking action to lower greenhouse gas emissions and implement adaptation strategies. While mitigation and adaptation efforts have expanded substantially in the last four years, they do not yet approach the scale considered necessary to avoid substantial damages to the economy, environment, and human health over the coming decades.
Essentially, addressing environmental issues is more productive in a business sense than ignoring the issues that cause environmental /economic stress.
And those comments come from scientists hired by the US government, not liberal think tanks or political parties.

It should be noted that one of the great greenhouse polluters, coal, is being replaced by less costly alternatives that are less destructive.
It makes no sense to arbitrarily embrace inefficiency from an economic pov.

Coal is on it's way out. It's become inefficient relative to new tech and vast natural gas supplies in addition to solar and wind generation.

http://time.com/coals-last-kick/
Between 2011 and 2016, U.S. coal producers lost more than 92% of their market value. The state's fortunes have stagnated in stride. Today West Virginia ranks 49th in per capita income, 50th in educational attainment and 49th in life expectancy.
In the rest of the article, it's obvious politics becomes the response to environmental issues rather than pragmatic solutions ( that happen anyway in a free market economy ) that expand new economic possibilities through new technologies.
Embracing destructive technologies past their prime, while being phased out makes no sense as in the West Virginia example.

Merely eliminating a process isn't an answer. Replacing it with something more efficient is a logical response.

Being a modern day Trumptonian Ludite isn't profitable, nor healthy.
 
#26 ·
Between 2011 and 2016, U.S. coal producers lost more than 92% of their market value. The state's fortunes have stagnated in stride. Today West Virginia ranks 49th in per capita income, 50th in educational attainment and 49th in life expectancy.
Hey Johnny,

I agree in general with the post; however, the Time article reference is a bit of a fallacious argument. The coal industry during this time frame was significantly impacted by President Obama's executive orders, his public statements, his support of the EPA towards the reduction of emissions produced by coal burning plants, and the inevitable investor pullbacks based upon the Presidents stance on coal.
 
#31 ·
Wow! Ok. For those that are having problems understanding the nuances of my perception on Climate Change, I will drastically oversimplify:

Man-made Global Warming - Mostly BS
Keep the planet clean. - Yeah. Makes perfect sense.

By the way Johnny... Do you realize that you are perfectly acting out my complaint/concern with media involvement? Does it really matter that we disagree on the questionable science? Why not put aside the continued insults, name calling, and belittlement of opinion when we are in agreement that everyone needs to take better care of the only planet there is to live on? If people would allow the common sense discussion to occur, realistic solutions could be found and the realistic objectives of both viewpoints would most likely be met.
 
#32 · (Edited)
I notice a lot of avoidance in your responses to questions put to your comments, Jack.

Why is that?

In my view, mankind can and does impact our climate; however, I also believe that there are many additional factors/forces that affect our perception of climate which have a much greater actual impact on the Earth's climate.
Do you understand the concept of climate 'tipping points'?
Apparently not.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tipping_point_(climatology)
It's mankind's addition to climate pressures that is hastening tipping point events as opposed to a system functioning with out mankind's destructive activities , reacting to natural influences.
You should read this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tipping_point_(climatology)#Outline

And political insults have nothing to do with the current conversation nor will they get you any points. The topic is of a scientific nature. And I get the feeling you'd like to make it political by introducing arbitrary commentary that's non scientific in nature. Essentially trolling.
It's not exactly new to this topic :cool:
Like the made-up BS you posted here:
https://forums.techguy.org/threads/global-warming-climate-change.1219967/page-2#post-9564486

Or your above over-simplification:
Man-made Global Warming - Mostly BS
with out any scientific explanation to back up that out-burst.

Saying it doesn't make it so. Demonstrating there is evidence would, but you don't.

the nuances of my perception on Climate Change
It appears your political support of Trumptonian logic is all you have to offer.
You say 'it's so' and in your mind that appears to be enough to 'make it so'.
That appears to be the Trumptonian version of Lysenko's fallacy.

Do you realize that you are perfectly acting out my complaint/concern with media involvement?
I realize you are desperately trying to steer the conversation away from the science involved in global warming/climate change :D

Does it really matter that we disagree on the questionable science?
You haven't posted any commentary of a scientific nature.
Just wild claims of denial.

Why not put aside the continued insults, name calling, and belittlement of opinion when we are in agreement that everyone needs to take better care of the only planet there is to live on?
I suggest you review this thread.
You are only getting whiny as your lack of constructive participation becomes obvious.

If people would allow the common sense discussion to occur,....
Like your first post in this thread?

Here are some of the reasons that I have heard based upon varying levels thought processes:

Climate Change (scoff) just a new name for Global Warming. Couldn't get the people to buy into Global Warming so they changed the name (HA!).
Climate Change has been occurring throughout the history of the earth, why should I suddenly think that man has the ability to change the course of nature.
Don't worry. The next big volcano to go off will decrease the global temperature for a couple of years.
So let me get this straight, too hot - Climate Change, too dry - Climate Change, too wet - Climate Change, too clod - Climate Change, drought - Climate Change, flooding - Climate Change, blizzard - Climate Change. Us normal folk call that weather.
Egypt used to be lush with greenery and covered in foliage. So, what did the Egyptians do to cause the Climate Change that turned their land into a desert.
We know that the earth used to be much warmer in prehistoric times. So, what did the dinosaurs do to fix their Global Warming problem.
The hockey-stick graph was proven to be a lie, based upon faulty math.
Climate change supporting (scientists and organizations) have been caught lying (via compromised e-mails) about the information contained within published Climate Change reports.
Short of a nuclear war; solar flares, solar winds, the earth's elliptical orbit, the tilt of the earth, shifting plate tectonics, and the path of the jet-stream all have a significantly greater impact on Climate Change than anything man could do.
If Climate Change is really that big of a problem, why pick on the United States to make small reductions, when other countries produce significantly more greenhouse gasses? China being subject number one.
Liberal politicians keep getting caught in lies used to support Climate Change. Normally followed by an Al Gore - fish swimming in the street - comment.
Yep, weren't we all supposed to be dead already from this whole Global Warming thingy?
Ummm, in the 70's /early 80's, the news told us to worry about Global Cooling.
Considering the history of the planet there is little to no empirical data to prove the Global Warming theories.
If the weatherman cannot accurately predict the weather/temperature next year, next month, next week, tomorrow, even today (sometimes); then how can they predict the weather/temperature 10 years from now?

I am sure that there are more; but, I am tired of typing.
You really think that was an intellectual attempt at a discussion? :D
Like a member in the distant past, all you seem to offer is trolling.
Sure it's fun, at least till you get called out for it LOL!

Why not put aside the continued insults, name calling, and belittlement of opinion when we....
What insults, name calling and belittlement are you referring to other than noting your constant whine when things go typically wrong for you? ( :D )

So, let's look at your sincerity.

Man-made Global Warming - Mostly BS
And then follow up a few sentences later with:
If people would allow the common sense discussion to occur, realistic solutions could be found and the realistic objectives of both viewpoints would most likely be met.
LOL!
I'm sure others see the contradiction :D

You did finally respond to Tim's question . ( " Man-made Global Warming - Mostly BS "

But I suspect you aren't going to respond to mine.
 
#41 ·
You did finally respond to Tim's question . ( " Man-made Global Warming - Mostly BS "

But I suspect you aren't going to respond to mine.
Johnny, you are correct, I do not typically reply to inflammatory and accusatory questions. Simply because these type of questions/statements move the topic from a discussion to an argumentative debate. However, I will attempt to wade through the cacophony and reply to some of the pertinent points.

It's mankind's addition to climate pressures that is hastening tipping point events as opposed to a system functioning with out mankind's destructive activities , reacting to natural influences.
That may be true; but, the presumed "tipping point" is based upon a man-made data set that is entered into a computer to develop a "computer model." Additionally, the data sets supporting the model seems to change every year, or so, making the "tipping point" a moving target. Furthermore, the models and reports concerning climate change have been found to use questionable tactics where data appears to have been cherry-picked, actively omitted, and/or manipulated to not contradict with the global warming theory. Here are a few articles on that topic:
https://principia-scientific.org/nasa-exposed-in-massive-new-climate-data-fraud/

I suggest you review this thread.
You are only getting whiny as your lack of constructive participation becomes obvious.

Like your first post in this thread?
Not a pertinent point; but, deserving of a response.

My original post in this thread simply noted some of the objections overheard from many individuals that do not give credence to the global warming theory. I never stated that these were my beliefs and openly stated that the viewpoints were made with varying levels of thought processes. As a bit of personal advice, you may want to avoid speaking on the behalf of individuals that does not share your viewpoint, as that practice is neither becoming, nor professional.
 
#33 ·
More from the US Government's scientists Fourth National Climate Assessment:
https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/

The quality and quantity of water available for use by people and ecosystems across the country are being affected by climate change, increasing risks and costs to agriculture, energy production, industry, recreation, and the environment.
.............
Rising air and water temperatures and changes in precipitation are intensifying droughts, increasing heavy downpours, reducing snowpack, and causing declines in surface water quality, with varying impacts across regions.
.................
Groundwater depletion is exacerbating drought risk in many parts of the United States, particularly in the Southwest and Southern Great Plains. Dependable and safe water supplies for U.S. Caribbean, Hawai'i, and U.S.-Affiliated Pacific Island communities are threatened by drought, flooding, and saltwater contamination due to sea level rise.
 
#35 ·
That certainly is a major problem to deal with.
Overcrowding, dwindling resources and an environment becoming more and more unfriendly as time passes.
Add to that governments that 'pass the buck' to the future and that future begins to look grim.
 
#36 ·
I see hundreds of pleas for charity to keep starving children alive in various parts of the world. Money should go to birth control. I know the argument that the children are there to keep the elders of the family in their old age, but if they are dying they are not able to do anything at all. China started limiting families but they have stopped that now. I don't know why, perhaps the muslims are out breeding them. Which is what one muslim said to me they would do in the UK.
 
#37 ·
It is not the AMOUNT of people at all. We are nowhere near critical mass as far as humans go. If humans rank in the top 10 globally of biomass I would be surprised. It is what we, as humans, produce as waste products.

And brigham? I fail to see what Muslims have to do with climate change. Please keep this thread related to that topic as religion does not figure into science.

Thanks,

v
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chawbacon
#38 ·
This needs to be addressed....

Chawbacon said:
Man-made Global Warming - Mostly BS
You need to justify this. I can justify at least a 4% change in CO2 emissions directly related to anthropogenic enterprises and will be happy to do so.

Hell, I've been paid for my research in that topic.

So yeah, I am going to need some sources (preferably peer reviewed) that show that anthropogenic climate change is bogus
 
#39 ·
This needs to be addressed....

You need to justify this. I can justify at least a 4% change in CO2 emissions directly related to anthropogenic enterprises and will be happy to do so.

Hell, I've been paid for my research in that topic.

So yeah, I am going to need some sources (preferably peer reviewed) that show that anthropogenic climate change is bogus
Hello Valis,

I cannot argue against anthropogenic enterprises having caused a significant increase in CO2 emissions, and the subsequent absorption of CO2 into our atmosphere. There is just too much data proving that to be true. Although, since we breath out CO2 and plants absorb CO2 to survive, I am not convinced that CO2 is such a bad molecular structure. However, the bi-products created by burning fossil fuels is extremely concerning for our environment. Also, more concerning to me, is that there has to be a balance between CO2 and Oxygen that needs to be maintained to ensure a breathable atmosphere.

For me, the anthropogenic thought process introduced to the world by the IPCC (concluding that CO2 is a greenhouse gas that creates global warming) has some basic problems; because, my understanding is that water is a more powerful greenhouse gas than CO2 and there is significantly more water in the atmosphere than CO2. https://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/vapor_warming.html

Valis, please understand that I am not trying to be a smart butt with this statement. I would sincerely value your opinion, since you seem to have a professional background in this area and my scientific understanding is admittedly limited.
 
Top