sharetrader
Page 142 of 142 FirstFirst ... 4292132138139140141142
Results 2,116 to 2,130 of 2130
  1. #2116
    老外
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    941

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blackcap View Post
    You are also just ignoring the urban heat island effect over time making the newer data warmer than the older data. This effect makes it convenient to show warming. Most gauges and the ones at airports too have been affected by airport expansions over time (as planes and jets and tarmac gets closer to where the gauges are housed) and those in the cities also effected by urban sprawl and other development.

    If you really want to get into the effect, scientists have studied it quite a bit. China is a great example due to its rapid urbanisation - theoretically if UHI was something which had a serious impact, China would be the place where it would be most obvious. But it has had a negligible effect. https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley....9/2008JD009916


    Again, you are focusing on a single cherry and ignoring the rest of the data and the trend. The trend is the same for most of the sites where the UHI would be a problem compared to where it is not. Essentially you are saying: "LOOK AT THIS TREE! It is not average, therefore averages mean nothing."

  2. #2117
    Guru minimoke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Christchurch, New Zealand.
    Posts
    4,614

    Default

    Looks like Antartic sea ice is at usual average levels. "Sea ice extent in the Southern Ocean grew steadily in May at the rate of 123,000 square kilometers (47,000 square miles) per day, somewhat faster than the 1981 to 2010 average growth rate of 108,000 square kilometers (42,000 square miles) per day. This pushed Antarctic ice extent from third lowest at the start of the month to sixth lowest by June 1. Ice extent was near average for all regions except for a broad section of the far eastern Weddell Sea, where ice extent was less than the 1981 to 2010 average. The eastern Ross, Amundsen, and Bellingshausen Seas began the month with less ice cover than average, but rapid growth in these regions brought ice extent to near average by the end of the month." (From the National Snow and Ice Data Center).

    The polar bears will also be happy! "
    In 2017, the cumulative daily melt area for the Greenland ice sheet was the smallest since 1996,"

  3. #2118
    Update Ready To Install
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Floating Anchor Shoals
    Posts
    6,576

    Default

    Regardless of their wooing the greens this is positive. Not one comment on the other thread.still in shock prob, a reality shock LOL.

    Nats support climate drive

  4. #2119
    Guru
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Wellington, New Zealand
    Posts
    2,652

    Default

    Here is the graph, looking all hunky dory if you ask me:

    http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/ch...sea-ice-graph/

  5. #2120
    老外
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    941

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by minimoke View Post
    Looks like Antartic sea ice is at usual average levels. "Sea ice extent in the Southern Ocean grew steadily in May at the rate of 123,000 square kilometers (47,000 square miles) per day, somewhat faster than the 1981 to 2010 average growth rate of 108,000 square kilometers (42,000 square miles) per day. This pushed Antarctic ice extent from third lowest at the start of the month to sixth lowest by June 1. Ice extent was near average for all regions except for a broad section of the far eastern Weddell Sea, where ice extent was less than the 1981 to 2010 average. The eastern Ross, Amundsen, and Bellingshausen Seas began the month with less ice cover than average, but rapid growth in these regions brought ice extent to near average by the end of the month." (From the National Snow and Ice Data Center).

    The polar bears will also be happy! "
    In 2017, the cumulative daily melt area for the Greenland ice sheet was the smallest since 1996,"
    Please don't introduce polar bears onto Antarctica, their numbers would boom eating all the penguins.

    Sea ice is an indicator of change over time. Not so much happening in Antarctica as explained previously it is worse in the Northern Hemisphere. The real concern in Antarctica is the loss of ice sheet, which you may have read recently in the news has been speeding up: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-018-0179-y

  6. #2121
    老外
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    941

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blackcap View Post
    Here is the graph, looking all hunky dory if you ask me:

    http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/ch...sea-ice-graph/
    Please test your eyes, this year is well below the long term average. Pick the 1981-2010 median and then this years. Still looking hunky dory (whatever that means?)

  7. #2122
    Guru
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Sth Island. New Zealand.
    Posts
    4,296

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blobbles View Post
    Still looking hunky dory (whatever that means?)
    Fish chunks.

  8. #2123
    Guru minimoke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Christchurch, New Zealand.
    Posts
    4,614

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blobbles View Post
    Please don't introduce polar bears onto Antarctica, their numbers would boom eating all the penguins.

    Sea ice is an indicator of change over time. Not so much happening in Antarctica as explained previously it is worse in the Northern Hemisphere. The real concern in Antarctica is the loss of ice sheet, which you may have read recently in the news has been speeding up: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-018-0179-y
    See how the narrative changes as teh facts fail to support teh original premise.

    We dont hear about polar bears so much nowadays as their numbers are increasing. Likely due to the ban on hunting them.

    See how its not called Global Warming anymore as it paused. So its no called Climate Change.

    See how sea ice no longer is the focus as its not shrinking. so the shift is to land ice.

    And in the meantime grandchildren keep getting born and they continue, as they have throughout history, to live in the world they find themselves. No need to keep thinking of them.

    Notice how its green house gasses and not CO2. Since CO2 just keeps on going up and noting is playing ball.

  9. #2124
    老外
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    941

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by minimoke View Post
    See how the narrative changes as teh facts fail to support teh original premise.

    We dont hear about polar bears so much nowadays as their numbers are increasing. Likely due to the ban on hunting them.

    See how its not called Global Warming anymore as it paused. So its no called Climate Change.

    See how sea ice no longer is the focus as its not shrinking. so the shift is to land ice.

    And in the meantime grandchildren keep getting born and they continue, as they have throughout history, to live in the world they find themselves. No need to keep thinking of them.

    Notice how its green house gasses and not CO2. Since CO2 just keeps on going up and noting is playing ball.
    Nobody is changing any of those things, we are just talking about different aspects of sightly different problems. Temperatures continue to rise (short term aberrations mean little, the trend is important), sea ice continues to shrink (particularly in the Northern Hemisphere as shown by satellites: http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/ch...sea-ice-graph/) and CO2 continues to be the worst GHG. it's just a large topic area, if you don't understand the differences in terminology I suggest education, not denial. You seem to be expecting uniform changes in a complex system, which is a failure of understanding of the system you are talking about.

  10. #2125
    Update Ready To Install
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Floating Anchor Shoals
    Posts
    6,576

    Default

    I know its in some peoples nature to be a contrarian or a minority.Fundamentaly embrace who you are ,but habits can easily be changed


    Majority support all-party action on climate change

  11. #2126
    Update Ready To Install
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Floating Anchor Shoals
    Posts
    6,576

    Default

    I wish they were wrong or at least out timeframe wise.



    Scientists' warning: Climate change may cause 'uninhabitable Earth'



  12. #2127
    Guru minimoke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Christchurch, New Zealand.
    Posts
    4,614

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joshuatree View Post
    I wish they were wrong or at least out timeframe wise.



    Scientists' warning: Climate change may cause 'uninhabitable Earth'

    Its gotta be true - the polar bear on ice photo does it!

  13. #2128
    always learning ... BlackPeter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Canterbury
    Posts
    3,827

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joshuatree View Post
    I wish they were wrong or at least out timeframe wise.



    Scientists' warning: Climate change may cause 'uninhabitable Earth'

    You read it on the internet - therefore it must be true ...

    But hey - if they want to be credible, than they better avoid these ridiculous exaggerations. Could anybody explain why earth would be uninhabitable with 4 degrees warmer and 60 m higher sea levels? It happened before - and nature was thriving. Dinosaurs just didn't survive the subsequent cooling down ... and yes, we might need to move our coastal towns inland.

    Seriously - I guess parts of Australia have at the moment the worst drought since 1965. Sounds bad, doesn't it? But doesn't this say that they had a worse drought in 1965? Was this global warming as well? So where is the trend line?

    For sure it looks like the Northern hemisphere has a hot summer. Is it getting warmer overall? Short term - looks like it. Increasing urbanization and sprawling civilization is not good for the environment, no matter whether they produce too much CO2 or not. Each city increases the local temperature by roughly 2 degrees - just by sealing land and by introducing dark colors (roofs) vs the original forests / pampas. Has this anything to do with CO2? No.

    So, yes - there is change and some (many) humans probably have a problem. Can we fix that with rampant sensationalism? No. Can we moderate that by reducing our reproduction rate, adapting to the new conditions and reducing everybody's environmental footprint (like less rubbish, less plastic, less hot air, less sealed ground, apartment houses instead of lots of single dwellings, less travel, environmentally friendly agriculture)? Probably. Lets do it. Lets start with getting some sensible government back at the helm instead of a bunch of kids which makes the problem with their ill thought through fundamentalism just worse (like stopping local oil and gas exploration and increasing this way our CO2 footprint).
    ----
    "Prediction is very difficult, especially about the future" (Niels Bohr)

  14. #2129
    Update Ready To Install
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Floating Anchor Shoals
    Posts
    6,576

    Default

    Wow youve come a long way bp, congrats on acknowledging it.

  15. #2130
    always learning ... BlackPeter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Canterbury
    Posts
    3,827

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joshuatree View Post
    Wow youve come a long way bp, congrats on acknowledging it.
    I don't think I have changed my views ... but maybe you have changed what you read into my (or out of my) posts ;
    ----
    "Prediction is very difficult, especially about the future" (Niels Bohr)

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •