Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » OK........I've had enough of this
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: OK........I've had enough of this [message #95518 is a reply to message #95502] |
Mon, 04 February 2008 18:56   |
Neil
Messages: 1645
Registered: April 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>
>Hey Don, it's true that one of the expected byproducts of global warming
>is increased extreme weather events, including winter weather events.
This is like saying that one of the byproducts of global
stupidity is that people will get more intelligent.
Let's see, what else can we blame on opposite-cause events like
this? If you gain weight, then you'll get skinny? If you become
rich, it means you can't afford a place to live? If you go
crazy, then it means you're sane? Nope, none of those make
sense. Hmmm.... doesn't seem to work with ANYTHING else except
global warming, where a cold, cold winter can be blamed on too
much heat.
Neil
|
|
|
|
| Re: OK........I've had enough of this [message #95520 is a reply to message #95518] |
Mon, 04 February 2008 18:20 |
Dedric Terry
Messages: 788
Registered: June 2007
|
Senior Member |
|
|
But temperature changes cause weather changes, and the greater the
temperature change, the more extreme the weather. A small change at a
global level can cause big changes at the regional level (e.g. introduce
warmer winds into a cold climate and you'll get snow, sleet, etc).
At the same time, weather comes in cycles, so to measure increases and
decreases in weather patterns you have to go back many decades, or even
centuries.
DT
On 2/4/08 7:56 PM, in article 47a7c26a$1@linux, "Neil" <OIOIU@OI.com> wrote:
>
> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hey Don, it's true that one of the expected byproducts of global warming
>
>> is increased extreme weather events, including winter weather events.
>
> This is like saying that one of the byproducts of global
> stupidity is that people will get more intelligent.
>
> Let's see, what else can we blame on opposite-cause events like
> this? If you gain weight, then you'll get skinny? If you become
> rich, it means you can't afford a place to live? If you go
> crazy, then it means you're sane? Nope, none of those make
> sense. Hmmm.... doesn't seem to work with ANYTHING else except
> global warming, where a cold, cold winter can be blamed on too
> much heat.
>
> Neil
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: OK........I've had enough of this [message #95523 is a reply to message #95518] |
Mon, 04 February 2008 20:25 |
Kim
Messages: 1246
Registered: October 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
"Neil" <OIOIU@OI.com> wrote:
>This is like saying that one of the byproducts of global
>stupidity is that people will get more intelligent.
Hehe, I see your point. I mean I'm sure everybody sees it, but...
(1) Weather has always been a bit like that. I mean generally the equator
is warm and the poles are cold, but we all know that things like tornadoes,
storms, rain, temperature etc, don't follow this simple rule. Otherwise we'd
have one global weather prediction and you'd just add 2 degrees because you're
closer to the equator than GMT (T for temp ;o)
(2) Scientists predicted this well over two decades ago, and have become
more confident of it each year. Meanwhile the planet has heated each year,
and extreme weather events have increased. This is commonly accepted as explaining
your wacked storms and tornadoes of the last decade. Indeed you break the
tornado record almost every year now, and the planet breaks the temp record.
You examples aren't as rock solid as they appear in any case:
>If you gain weight, then you'll get skinny?
Well one might have thought that eating couldn't make you skinny, but the
more celery you eat...
>If you become rich, it means you can't afford a place to live?
Well if you get rich emitting greenhouse gasses can you buy a new planet?
;o)
>If you go crazy, then it means you're sane?
Ask Galileo. He was mad. The dude claimed the earth was round, and that the
moon surface wasn't flat but had mountains. He then invented and built this
thing called a telescope so people could look through it at the moon. People
thought he had won until all the top scientists discussed it and explained
that "No, the surface of the moon is totally flat, but it's covered in a
TRANSPARENT MATERIAL which can't be seen by the telescope". Thank goodness
for that.
Now that doesn't refute your points very solidly, but all rules have limits.
I trust the people who are acclaimed as experts, and put there hand up saying
"This is what will happen" which was then followed by that thing actually
happening. Generally speaking when somebody claims to be an expert and I
can't fault their claims I trust them.
I'd be interested as to whether anybody else on the planet, who doesn't support
global warming, correctly predicted the increase in extreme weather events
with some alternate reason. I'm sure they have concocted some explanation
by now, now that they see it, but when I'm deciding who to take my horse
betting advice from, I trust the guy who predicted 9 of the last ten races
before, not the guy who has a good excuse after the event...
....nor, indeed, the guy who posts on a NG saying "I know nothing about horses,
but that blokes horse tipping method doesn't make sense to me!". ;o)
Cheers,
Kim.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: OK........I've had enough of this [message #95531 is a reply to message #95518] |
Mon, 04 February 2008 21:33 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Neil wrote:
> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>> Hey Don, it's true that one of the expected byproducts of global warming
>
>> is increased extreme weather events, including winter weather events.
>
> This is like saying that one of the byproducts of global
> stupidity is that people will get more intelligent.
We can only hope! :^)
An increase in extreme weather events is predicted by climate scientists
as a consequence of the current climate change event.
It may seem counter-intuitive until you really think about it.
Warmer ocean water, more evaporation, more energy in weather systems to
carry the moisture farther, this can bring more snow over the mountains.
(And again, any single weather event can't be linked to the current
climate change by itself. But over time we can measure patterns.)
Another recent study shows the possibility for earlier rain and earlier
snow pack melting leading to quicker snow pack degradation. So even
though individual weather systems may dump a lot of moisture (hang in
there, Deej!), it may not stay around as long or melt as slowly. Which
means we may be facing possible water shortages in some areas.
http://climate.weather.com/articles/watertrends020108.html
"They found that up to 60 percent of changes in river flow, temperature
and snow pack between 1950 and 1999 can be attributed to human
activities, such as driving, that release emissions including carbon
dioxide and other greenhouse gases into the atmosphere."
> Let's see, what else can we blame on opposite-cause events like
> this?
Don't be confused by the term "global warming." It doesn't mean equal
heat everywhere on the globe, weather doesn't work like that.
That's one reason to use the "climate change" label instead. It's more
accurate and less confusing to people. Another is that as the surface
warms (on average), the mesosphere cools. Both from the same mechanism,
the additional heat absorption and re-radiation from additional
greenhouse gases.
It's interesting to read about this stuff.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_atmosphere
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_effect
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_chemistry
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meteorology
Cheers,
-Jamie
www.JamieKrutz.com
> Neil
|
|
|
|
| Re: OK........I've had enough of this [message #95533 is a reply to message #95531] |
Mon, 04 February 2008 22:59 |
Neil
Messages: 1645
Registered: April 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I'd love to stick around & read more of your one-trick-pony-
turn-every-single-fucking-thread-on-this-board-into-a-global -
warming-rant...
....but right now I've got to go buy some carbon credits.
Neil
Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>Neil wrote:
>> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>> Hey Don, it's true that one of the expected byproducts of global warming
>>
>>> is increased extreme weather events, including winter weather events.
>>
>> This is like saying that one of the byproducts of global
>> stupidity is that people will get more intelligent.
>
>We can only hope! :^)
>
>An increase in extreme weather events is predicted by climate scientists
>as a consequence of the current climate change event.
>
>It may seem counter-intuitive until you really think about it.
>
>Warmer ocean water, more evaporation, more energy in weather systems to
>carry the moisture farther, this can bring more snow over the mountains.
>
>(And again, any single weather event can't be linked to the current
>climate change by itself. But over time we can measure patterns.)
>
>Another recent study shows the possibility for earlier rain and earlier
>snow pack melting leading to quicker snow pack degradation. So even
>though individual weather systems may dump a lot of moisture (hang in
>there, Deej!), it may not stay around as long or melt as slowly. Which
>means we may be facing possible water shortages in some areas.
>
> http://climate.weather.com/articles/watertrends020108.html
>
>"They found that up to 60 percent of changes in river flow, temperature
>and snow pack between 1950 and 1999 can be attributed to human
>activities, such as driving, that release emissions including carbon
>dioxide and other greenhouse gases into the atmosphere."
>
>
>> Let's see, what else can we blame on opposite-cause events like
>> this?
>
>Don't be confused by the term "global warming." It doesn't mean equal
>heat everywhere on the globe, weather doesn't work like that.
>
>That's one reason to use the "climate change" label instead. It's more
>accurate and less confusing to people. Another is that as the surface
>warms (on average), the mesosphere cools. Both from the same mechanism,
>the additional heat absorption and re-radiation from additional
>greenhouse gases.
>
>It's interesting to read about this stuff.
>
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_atmosphere
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_effect
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_chemistry
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meteorology
>
>Cheers,
> -Jamie
> www.JamieKrutz.com
>
>
>
>> Neil
|
|
|
|
| Re: OK........I've had enough of this [message #95535 is a reply to message #95533] |
Mon, 04 February 2008 22:02 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Neil wrote:
> I'd love to stick around & read more of your one-trick-pony-
> turn-every-single-fucking-thread-on-this-board-into-a-global -
> warming-rant...
Heh. It was hardly a rant, Neil. You should see it when I really cut
lose. ;^)
I didn't bring up climate change in this thread. I just responded to it,
like you.
> ...but right now I've got to go buy some carbon credits.
If you think that's best.
Cheers,
-Jamie
www.JamieKrutz.com
> Neil
>
>
> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>> Neil wrote:
>>> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>>> Hey Don, it's true that one of the expected byproducts of global warming
>>>> is increased extreme weather events, including winter weather events.
>
>>> This is like saying that one of the byproducts of global
>>> stupidity is that people will get more intelligent.
>> We can only hope! :^)
>>
>> An increase in extreme weather events is predicted by climate scientists
>
>> as a consequence of the current climate change event.
>>
>> It may seem counter-intuitive until you really think about it.
>>
>> Warmer ocean water, more evaporation, more energy in weather systems to
>
>> carry the moisture farther, this can bring more snow over the mountains.
>>
>> (And again, any single weather event can't be linked to the current
>> climate change by itself. But over time we can measure patterns.)
>>
>> Another recent study shows the possibility for earlier rain and earlier
>
>> snow pack melting leading to quicker snow pack degradation. So even
>> though individual weather systems may dump a lot of moisture (hang in
>> there, Deej!), it may not stay around as long or melt as slowly. Which
>> means we may be facing possible water shortages in some areas.
>>
>> http://climate.weather.com/articles/watertrends020108.html
>>
>> "They found that up to 60 percent of changes in river flow, temperature
>
>> and snow pack between 1950 and 1999 can be attributed to human
>> activities, such as driving, that release emissions including carbon
>> dioxide and other greenhouse gases into the atmosphere."
>>
>>
>>> Let's see, what else can we blame on opposite-cause events like
>>> this?
>> Don't be confused by the term "global warming." It doesn't mean equal
>> heat everywhere on the globe, weather doesn't work like that.
>>
>> That's one reason to use the "climate change" label instead. It's more
>> accurate and less confusing to people. Another is that as the surface
>> warms (on average), the mesosphere cools. Both from the same mechanism,
>
>> the additional heat absorption and re-radiation from additional
>> greenhouse gases.
>>
>> It's interesting to read about this stuff.
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_atmosphere
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_effect
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_chemistry
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meteorology
>>
>> Cheers,
>> -Jamie
>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>
>>
>>
>>> Neil
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: OK........I've had enough of this [message #95536 is a reply to message #95531] |
Mon, 04 February 2008 22:02 |
Tony Benson
Messages: 453
Registered: June 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
So you're saying we're all pretty much f*cked then, huh Jamie. We really are
our own worst enemies. The problem now is we can't do much to stop it. Short
of deciding, as a species, to go back to living "pre-industrialization" life
styles. Wanna place any bets on that happening? ;>)
Seriously, I don't know if I believe everything the doomsayers are
preaching. I also don't think we're doing the world any good though by the
amount of carbon we pump into the air. Hopefully, we still have enough time
to figure out a clean way to produce the energy we need to maintain our
current and growing rate of consumption. I just don't see us all getting
around on horses, plowing our fields with oxen, and reading by candlelight
anytime soon.
Maybe the Mayans's were right? Four years and counting is it? :>o
Tony
On 2/4/08 11:33 PM, in article 47a7f891@linux, "Jamie K"
<Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
> Neil wrote:
>> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>> Hey Don, it's true that one of the expected byproducts of global warming
>>
>>> is increased extreme weather events, including winter weather events.
>>
>> This is like saying that one of the byproducts of global
>> stupidity is that people will get more intelligent.
>
> We can only hope! :^)
>
> An increase in extreme weather events is predicted by climate scientists
> as a consequence of the current climate change event.
>
> It may seem counter-intuitive until you really think about it.
>
> Warmer ocean water, more evaporation, more energy in weather systems to
> carry the moisture farther, this can bring more snow over the mountains.
>
> (And again, any single weather event can't be linked to the current
> climate change by itself. But over time we can measure patterns.)
>
> Another recent study shows the possibility for earlier rain and earlier
> snow pack melting leading to quicker snow pack degradation. So even
> though individual weather systems may dump a lot of moisture (hang in
> there, Deej!), it may not stay around as long or melt as slowly. Which
> means we may be facing possible water shortages in some areas.
>
> http://climate.weather.com/articles/watertrends020108.html
>
> "They found that up to 60 percent of changes in river flow, temperature
> and snow pack between 1950 and 1999 can be attributed to human
> activities, such as driving, that release emissions including carbon
> dioxide and other greenhouse gases into the atmosphere."
>
>
>> Let's see, what else can we blame on opposite-cause events like
>> this?
>
> Don't be confused by the term "global warming." It doesn't mean equal
> heat everywhere on the globe, weather doesn't work like that.
>
> That's one reason to use the "climate change" label instead. It's more
> accurate and less confusing to people. Another is that as the surface
> warms (on average), the mesosphere cools. Both from the same mechanism,
> the additional heat absorption and re-radiation from additional
> greenhouse gases.
>
> It's interesting to read about this stuff.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_atmosphere
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_effect
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_chemistry
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meteorology
>
> Cheers,
> -Jamie
> www.JamieKrutz.com
>
>
>
>> Neil
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: OK........I've had enough of this [message #95541 is a reply to message #95536] |
Mon, 04 February 2008 22:35 |
Jamie K
Messages: 1115
Registered: July 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Tony Benson wrote:
> So you're saying we're all pretty much f*cked then, huh Jamie.
Me? No, I'm not saying that.
We would have been better off not dragging our feet for so long, but
there's still time to make a difference, and people ARE acting on what
we know.
> We really are
> our own worst enemies. The problem now is we can't do much to stop it.
It's important to realize that's not true.
Doing nothing would be a very risky choice.
Some warming has happened, some will still happen no matter what we do
because of how long greenhouse gases already added will stay in the
atmosphere.
But a significant amount of warming can still be prevented. There's a
lot we can do, some of which we are already doing.
> Short
> of deciding, as a species, to go back to living "pre-industrialization" life
> styles. Wanna place any bets on that happening? ;>)
I haven't seen that idea proposed in any serious mitigation plan. :^)
> Seriously, I don't know if I believe everything the doomsayers are
> preaching.
Nor I. There are always exaggerations. But if you avoid some of the more
hyperbolic special interest groups and stick closely to the science, the
more likely range of possible outcomes is worth paying attention to and
working to mitigate.
> I also don't think we're doing the world any good though by the
> amount of carbon we pump into the air.
It might be good for some places where a warmer climate is at least a
superficial improvement, but bad overall for the possible shock of rapid
ecosystem change, threats to coastlines and hard to predict outcomes
like the possible melting of permafrost (which would release methane,
another greenhouse gas), changing of ocean currents and other rolls of
the dice.
> Hopefully, we still have enough time
> to figure out a clean way to produce the energy we need to maintain our
> current and growing rate of consumption. I just don't see us all getting
> around on horses, plowing our fields with oxen, and reading by candlelight
> anytime soon.
I don't know that horses are all that great of a solution, although I
like horses. :^)
But we have a lot of options. There are a lot of efficiency improvements
we can make in building design, city planning and manufacturing;
logistical improvements to transportation; more efficient uses of fossil
fuels; increased use of renewable energy; and faster adoption of more
efficient technologies.
Here are a few different perspectives:
http://carbonsequestration.us/Papers-presentations/htm/Pacal a-Socolow-ScienceMag-Aug2004.pdf
http://www.ases.org/climatechange/
http://www.westernresourceadvocates.org/energy/clenergy.php
http://www.ipcc.ch/
I highly recommend this issue of Scientific American:
http://www.sciam.com/sciammag/?contents=2006-09
Especially this article:
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=a-plan-to-keep-carbon-in
Worth a trip to the library.
> Maybe the Mayans's were right? Four years and counting is it? :>o
What did the Mayan's say?
Cheers,
-Jamie
www.JamieKrutz.com
> Tony
>
>
> On 2/4/08 11:33 PM, in article 47a7f891@linux, "Jamie K"
> <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>
>> Neil wrote:
>>> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote:
>>>> Hey Don, it's true that one of the expected byproducts of global warming
>>>> is increased extreme weather events, including winter weather events.
>>> This is like saying that one of the byproducts of global
>>> stupidity is that people will get more intelligent.
>> We can only hope! :^)
>>
>> An increase in extreme weather events is predicted by climate scientists
>> as a consequence of the current climate change event.
>>
>> It may seem counter-intuitive until you really think about it.
>>
>> Warmer ocean water, more evaporation, more energy in weather systems to
>> carry the moisture farther, this can bring more snow over the mountains.
>>
>> (And again, any single weather event can't be linked to the current
>> climate change by itself. But over time we can measure patterns.)
>>
>> Another recent study shows the possibility for earlier rain and earlier
>> snow pack melting leading to quicker snow pack degradation. So even
>> though individual weather systems may dump a lot of moisture (hang in
>> there, Deej!), it may not stay around as long or melt as slowly. Which
>> means we may be facing possible water shortages in some areas.
>>
>> http://climate.weather.com/articles/watertrends020108.html
>>
>> "They found that up to 60 percent of changes in river flow, temperature
>> and snow pack between 1950 and 1999 can be attributed to human
>> activities, such as driving, that release emissions including carbon
>> dioxide and other greenhouse gases into the atmosphere."
>>
>>
>>> Let's see, what else can we blame on opposite-cause events like
>>> this?
>> Don't be confused by the term "global warming." It doesn't mean equal
>> heat everywhere on the globe, weather doesn't work like that.
>>
>> That's one reason to use the "climate change" label instead. It's more
>> accurate and less confusing to people. Another is that as the surface
>> warms (on average), the mesosphere cools. Both from the same mechanism,
>> the additional heat absorption and re-radiation from additional
>> greenhouse gases.
>>
>> It's interesting to read about this stuff.
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_atmosphere
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_effect
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_chemistry
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meteorology
>>
>> Cheers,
>> -Jamie
>> www.JamieKrutz.com
>>
>>
>>
>>> Neil
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sat Nov 09 19:21:23 PST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01766 seconds
|
The PARIS Forums
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
