|
|
Post by Ariete on May 24, 2019 12:33:13 GMT -5
I agree that's true but that graph doesn't show that. Here's a graph showing a decrease in the number of pirates is the prime driver of climate change
If not pirates, it might be something else.
I'll try the Hiromant approach to climate change and apply it to geopolitics,
Starting point: Russia is a threat to Estonia Claim by someone: Russia will annex Estonia before the year 2010 Reality: It didn't happen Hiromant: Therefore Russia is not a threat to Estonia
|
|
|
|
Post by Hiromant on May 24, 2019 12:51:35 GMT -5
Well let's hope climate doesn't decide to get aggressive in its foreign policies any time soon then... 
Also, if Russia was climate, it would have been Dallol here for 50 years in the past century and we'd have reason to be afraid, because past behavior is the best predictor of future behavior.
|
|
|
|
Post by P London on May 24, 2019 16:22:52 GMT -5
Has anyone heard of Piers Corbyn?
|
|
|
|
Post by nei on May 24, 2019 16:37:21 GMT -5
Has anyone heard of Piers Corbyn? isn't he Jeremy Corbyn's brother? |
|
|
|
Post by P London on May 24, 2019 16:44:34 GMT -5
Has anyone heard of Piers Corbyn? isn't he Jeremy Corbyn's brother? I just realised that while reading the Wikipedia article about him. |
|
|
|
Post by knot on May 24, 2019 17:49:27 GMT -5
Has anyone heard of Piers Corbyn? Aye, already know him; one of my favourite sceptical experts. |
|
|
|
Post by P London on May 24, 2019 18:06:32 GMT -5
Has anyone heard of Piers Corbyn? Aye, already know him; one of my favourite sceptical experts. I came across him a couple years ago. He seems truthworthy and unbiased. Even if he's not 100% correct I still appreciate him putting out an alternative viewpoint on climate. |
|
|
|
Post by Ariete on May 25, 2019 6:38:36 GMT -5
Does anyone in the general population have first hand knowledge or first hand experience with this?
First-hand experience of climate change? Sure. Ask birdwatchers in Finland, and they will tell you that migratory birds arrive every year earlier. Ask ice-fishers and ice-skaters in Finland, and they will tell you that there's less sea ice and the lakes become ice-free earlier and earlier. Ask ski centre owners in Finland, and they tell you that the snow arrives later and later every year, and they have to rely on manufactured snow all the time. Ask me, and I'll tell you that 70% of Christmas Eves had snow on the ground when I was a kid. In the 2000s it has been 45%.
|
|
|
|
Post by Speagles84 on May 25, 2019 9:09:05 GMT -5
Does anyone in the general population have first hand knowledge or first hand experience with this? First-hand experience of climate change? Sure. Ask birdwatchers in Finland, and they will tell you that migratory birds arrive every year earlier. Ask ice-fishers and ice-skaters in Finland, and they will tell you that there's less sea ice and the lakes become ice-free earlier and earlier. Ask ski centre owners in Finland, and they tell you that the snow arrives later and later every year, and they have to rely on manufactured snow all the time. Ask me, and I'll tell you that 70% of Christmas Eves had snow on the ground when I was a kid. In the 2000s it has been 45%.
I've been analyzing my regions climate stats from 1953 to 2018. Its not clear its warming here, however, the climatic averages standard deviations of each 30 year period are increasing. If I exclude the 1960-1985 period, the temperatures are near the same as now. BUT.. seems every year or two is a "coldest" or "warmest" ever which certainly shouldn't happen given 65 years of data (ex 2014 was a top 5 coldest year here, 2016 was the warmest). The arctic and subarctic regions are CERTAINLY warming. I just don't understand how people can't understand that. If you look at any subarctic or arctic station with significant data - you will see its warming. After seeing the glaciers receding in Alaska, I looked at lots of data from Fairbanks, Barrow, and Nome. CLEARLY WARMING, no signs of cooling off or stabilizing either.
The stupid media hysteria of claiming "polar bears are dying" is the stupidest argument however - they are nearly all time high populations due to easier winters - not a lack of sea ice. This argument seems to have a lose-lose mentality to me sometimes.
|
|
|
|
Post by P London on May 25, 2019 14:58:08 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by P London on May 25, 2019 15:00:11 GMT -5
Does anyone in the general population have first hand knowledge or first hand experience with this?
First-hand experience of climate change? Sure. Ask birdwatchers in Finland, and they will tell you that migratory birds arrive every year earlier. Ask ice-fishers and ice-skaters in Finland, and they will tell you that there's less sea ice and the lakes become ice-free earlier and earlier. Ask ski centre owners in Finland, and they tell you that the snow arrives later and later every year, and they have to rely on manufactured snow all the time. Ask me, and I'll tell you that 70% of Christmas Eves had snow on the ground when I was a kid. In the 2000s it has been 45%.
That is only a drop in the ocean compared to the hundreds of thousands of years of earth climatic changes. Human lifespan is too short and we are too biased to judge something so complex. And your percentages. Are they based on statistics or perceived stats? |
|
|
|
Post by Ariete on May 25, 2019 15:23:54 GMT -5
That is only a drop in the ocean compared to the hundreds of thousands of years of earth climatic changes. Human lifespan is too short and we are too biased to judge something so complex. And your percentages. Are they based on statistics or perceived stats?
Oh, we have ice core samples, atmospheric analyses, geological and historical records and all kinds of shit. Even tree-rings prove climate change. A human lifespan is short, but we still know that there were dinosaurs on this planet, and we also know what killed the dinosaurs 65 billion years ago. Long before humans even were here. We can see evidence in space of the Big Bang 14.6 billion years ago. We have got within fractions above absolute zero with the right measurements, something which is not observed in our universe. It's called science.
My percentages are from the FMI. I don't make shit up out of thin air.
Our planet's climate has changed a lot in the past and it will continue to change. The thing is that it has never changed so rapidly before. And when scientists started to look into it why that is, they came to the conclusion that the reason is our human actions.
|
|
|
|
Post by P London on May 25, 2019 17:08:05 GMT -5
That is only a drop in the ocean compared to the hundreds of thousands of years of earth climatic changes. Human lifespan is too short and we are too biased to judge something so complex. And your percentages. Are they based on statistics or perceived stats?
Oh, we have ice core samples, atmospheric analyses, geological and historical records and all kinds of shit. Even tree-rings prove climate change. A human lifespan is short, but we still know that there were dinosaurs on this planet, and we also know what killed the dinosaurs 65 billion years ago. Long before humans even were here. We can see evidence in space of the Big Bang 14.6 billion years ago. We have got within fractions above absolute zero with the right measurements, something which is not observed in our universe. It's called science.
My percentages are from the FMI. I don't make shit up out of thin air.
Our planet's climate has changed a lot in the past and it will continue to change. The thing is that it has never changed so rapidly before. And when scientists started to look into it why that is, they came to the conclusion that the reason is our human actions.
Dinosaurs technically didn't die out 65 Million years ago as birds are their direct living desdesants. Also we can never know 100% if the common held scientist belief that most dinosaurs and other species died out due to a meteor. As for climate analysis I'm not going to pretend to be an expert but climate change has always happened. Analysis of climate throughout earth's history has showed that our climate has always been shifting. As recent as 400 years ago Earth was gripped by a cool spell. As recent as 40 years ago scientists were worrying about global COOLING. During recent prehistory (less than 100,000) hippos were swimming up and down the river Thames. Maybe we are warming maybe but I highly doubt it's due to human activities. Carbon dioxide is only a small part of Earth's atmosphere. Even if we are warming this won't be the end for earth or humanity. We will survive. I will post some articles in the upcoming days to strengthen my argument. |
|
|
|
Post by Speagles84 on May 25, 2019 17:23:10 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by P London on May 25, 2019 17:35:38 GMT -5
I doubt anything interesting will happen. |
|
|
|
Post by knot on May 26, 2019 3:55:46 GMT -5
So you wanna play the anecdotal game, fellas? Game on.  Back in the 1970's, winters in my region (and likewise Western NSW) used to be much warmer; it used to reach 15° C maxima in June and August occasionally, of which seems to be downright impossible nowadays—struggles above even 10° C, in fact! Ask any local farmer, fisherman, grazier, hunter, game warden, butcher, or forester alike...and they will all tell you the same thing—providing that they've experienced the 1970's NSW winter conditions, that is to say. You see? I can play the anecdotal game too, so don't you worry.  |
|
|
|
Post by urania93 on May 26, 2019 5:06:24 GMT -5
Playing pure anecdotes, my home villages used to have lying snow all over the winter when my parents and grandparents were kids, now it barely snows in comparison.
All the glaciers around this sector of the Alps are also quickly reducing their extension in the last century, which is becoming quite worrisome also because glaciers and the snow accumulated on the mountains are one of our main water reservoirs during the summer.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lommaren on May 26, 2019 5:31:25 GMT -5
If we're to play the anecdotal game here knot , could you explain how Norrköping could be colder than Southern Finland today in Februrary in the 50's and 60's with five months between 1954 and 1963 with below -5°C February means but have 1.4°C highs for that month for 2002-2018? That's the time when the Baltic Sea is at its coldest and thus temperatures are mostly affected by a warming climate. I know you've accepted that Scandinavia is getting warmer, but obviously this still is stark proof of what's happening.
January and December 2010 were shock months here, but still both February 1956 and January 1963 were colder still and only February 1961 being clearly warmer than the new averages, one month out of 22! January 1957 was still close to the median winter month of nowadays.
  That being said, modern nuclear power still is the answer to how the world can avoid fossile fuel dependency. Therefore only sensible pro-nuclear solutions are applicable for the time being. That is the case to a degree of 110 %. |
|
|
|
Post by knot on May 26, 2019 5:38:43 GMT -5
Lommaren That only suggests that regional warming is indeed the correct term, as opposed to global warming—notice the difference? The Scandinavian Peninsular is warming...but it's quite the opposite here in NSW.
|
|
|
|
Post by urania93 on May 26, 2019 6:15:29 GMT -5
Lommaren That only suggests that regional warming is indeed the correct term, as opposed to global warming—notice the difference? The Scandinavian Peninsular is warming...but it's quite the opposite here in NSW. Global warming = the temperature averaged over all the Earth surface is increasing, not "the temperature over every single inch of the globe is increasing". In other words, global warming is the average of the temperature changes over all the regions you can define. |
|
