I heard this on my local "Republican/right-wing radio" today. My take on anyone who confirms or denies global warming are that we simply don't have enough data either way. Earth is estimated at 4.534 billion years old. I haven't read anything that shows we have been recording temperature data for more than around 1000-2000 years at most and only around 150 years on the global scale. We would need at least 45 million years of data to even have 1% of "control" data. On a long enough timeline the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
Damn! It all makes perfect sense now. The entire human race died off 20 years ago and we are all part of some AI experiment run amok. Without human intervention, things keep getting weirder and weirder. That explains Bruce Jenner and antifa. No, wait.....that still doesn't explain AOC.
Originally posted by ls3mach: I heard this on my local "Republican/right-wing radio" today. My take on anyone who confirms or denies global warming are that we simply don't have enough data either way. Earth is estimated at 4.534 billion years old. I haven't read anything that shows we have been recording temperature data for more than around 1000-2000 years at most and only around 150 years on the global scale. We would need at least 45 million years of data to even have 1% of "control" data. On a long enough timeline the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
Paleoclimatology is when scientists use indirect methods to make inferences about what the Earth's climate was like, before there were any systematic attempts by modern humans (or Homo sapiens) to make and record weather data and other climate-related observations. And going farther backwards in time, before there were any modern humans... and then before there were any of the ancestors of modern humans... Homo habilis; what have you.
Ice Cores. Chemical analysis of air bubbles trapped in Greenland or Antarctic ice considered to have been solidly frozen without interruption for thousands or tens of thousands of years. Marine Sediments. Chemical analysis and other clues from the fossil (carbonate) shells of species that lived tens or hundreds of thousands of years ago, and even farther back in time. Species like shellfish--oysters and clams--and species of coral.
There's more to Paleoclimatology than just that. But those are two kinds of evidence from the field of Paleoclimatology that are used to make inferences and reconstruct aspects of what the Earth's climate was like, before there were any human observers of it.
The climate is partially determined by inputs that change over time, but change in such a slowly incremental way that the changes are only significant on time scales of tens of millions or hundreds of millions of years. Continental Drift. The Baseline Energy (excluding short term variations such as Sun Spot cycles) that the Earth receives from the Sun.
There are the scientific arguments for active or proactive Climate Mitigation measures, starting with the reduction of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions. That's at the top of almost everyone's list.
The scientific arguments for Climate Mitigation purposely disregard the climate-related factors like Continental Drift and Baseline Solar Radiation that are only significant on very long time scales, because no one who is the least bit serious about Climate Mitigation is thinking ahead or projecting into the future more than one thousand years from now, at most. And that's on the high side. Climate Mitigation advocates are thinking almost entirely about the current century, forward to 2100, and then about the next century after that.
Is that being short-sighted? Actually, no. Human societies do not make plans for the next 1000 years or beyond. "We" are just not ready for that. Whether it's about the climate, or anything else.
When we look backwards in time, using the evidence from Paleoclimatology, we need not and actually must not look too far backwards in time, for data that is relevant to the issues of Climate Mitigation. We don't want to consider or compare with ancient climates when the Continents and Oceans were not as they are today, or when the Baseline Solar Radiation was different than has been observed over the last 100 years. The Continents and Oceans will not be changed by Continental Drift in any significant way for the next 1000 years. And "ditto" for Baseline Solar Radiation. Those are changes that would take way more than just 1000 more years to make any difference, as far as the Earth's climate.
This is my effort to respond to the Original Post. Post #0. The first message in the thread. It is kind of a skeletal effort, because there is more that goes into it than just the four specific parts of it that I touched on, of Ice Cores and Marine Sediments, and Continental Drift and Baseline Solar Radiation. It would have to be filled out with other knowledge to have a more complete explanation. But here's the takeaway: Climate Mitigation advocates do not look too far backwards in time, in terms of reconstructing previous climate conditions, and do not look too far forwards in time, in terms of predicting or projecting future climate conditions. Of Necessity, and With Good Reason.
It's perfectly OK (even admirable) for Kia Motors USA to use the tagline "It doesn't have to make sense." But that's for preferring certain (Kia) cars and SUVs. Not for Climate Mitigation. That's when "It has to make sense." It doesn't make sense to argue against Climate Mitigation by bringing up "Snowball Earth" or other far distant episodes of the Earth's climate, because that was way too long ago, and too many other factors were different. Apples and Oranges. To wit. QED.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 03-19-2019).]
The argument for global warmingclimate changeclimate mitigation redistribution of wealth only makes sense to one world government socialists.
You do realize that all climate change predictions are based on computer models that do not reflect the reality of our natural climate fluctuations, right?
I didn't think so.
[This message has been edited by olejoedad (edited 03-20-2019).]
rinselburg, most of what scientists know "would have to be filled out with other knowledge" in order to have a picture large enough to try to make estimates and take drastic actions. I still think if they really believed it, wouldn't some of the believers be "moving to higher ground", or perhaps making homes in caves, creating societies that could survive the climates they predict will occur? etc.
Since today we are only looking at the last 150 years, who is to say that the changes we are experiencing today is not "normal"? Yes there are the ice cores and such, but they do not break down the climate to such a small scale and are more an average of a few thousand years. It is really only recently that we are able to look at climate data on such a small scale, so calling it a precedence in warming is basically jumping the gun.
Back in the 70's there was this fear of global cooling and another ice age was coming, now it is the opposite. They only thing that people can agree on is the climate is changing (as it always has). But one thing for certain is that we as a higher "species" (and I use that term lightly) really should be cleaning up our act, but to implement a "carbon tax" on people is nothing but a money grab for some government's pet project. Even this carbon capture and storage is BS. How knows what the long term effects are of doing this? Remember asbestos was a miracle material at one point in time until it was discovered long term effects of it.
Then we get some "Hollywood" types that have made movies about "global warming", but what happened to the profits from said movies? I can bet that zero profits from any said movie went into any research to try and reduce pollution or better our lives. It all went into their own pockets. No different than Mr. Gore's carbon credit company.
Here in Canada, we have this idiot running the country that implemented a carbon tax saying it was for the environment, and what does this clown do? Just recently he is on a "family" vacation in Florida, but had to take time out from his "vacation" to fly back to Ottawa here in Canada on a private jet so that he could take some pictures for a press release. Then this same clown gets back on the private jet and fly's back to Florida to finish his "vacation". What about his "carbon foot print" and a trip that wasn't really necessary. Pictures should have been taken before if they were to be released while he was away, or after. But this is the kind of hypocrisy that goes around with these global warming doom sayers. Same goes for all these people that have to get together in Paris to talk climate - guess video conferencing is not good enough when you can make it into a "vacation" on the tax payers dime.
Meteorologist are the lower tier of climate scientists. Study longer and they become experts. They cant predict the weather for the rest of the day accurately for the most part. I believe the planet just keeps on doing what its always done for 4.5 billion years and no one has any control over any of it. I have no schooling at all in weather and my predictions for daily weather are more accurate than any local or national news program. I look out the window at sunup and make my decisions. In winter I generally predict cold and in summer predict warm. Sometimes you have a fluke day.
some recent forecasts for me by forecasters;
...rain all day Saturday and Sunday with 3 inches expected. Reality, drizzled 2 or 3 times Saturday evening barely wetting pavement.
...clear and sunny with high in 50s. Reality 3-4 inches of wet snow.
...heavy rain all day saturday with local flooding. Reality, two 5 minute downpours.
Look the grass is green and Southern California isn't in a drought anymore. Global warming. Cant just enjoy it has to be something bad.
