Climate Change: We're Doomed

[Zhen Li]

The scientific consensus is that human caused climate instability is a fact.

Nice evidence.

[Malcolm]

The scientific consensus is that human caused climate instability is a fact.

Nice evidence.

Get real, my friend, you want evidence:

http://climate.nasa.gov

You've got your head in the sand.

[dharmagoat]

Zhen Li, I appreciate the time and effort that has gone into your post, but I remain unconvinced. I have neither the knowledge of the details nor the inclination to respond, but I know enough to be certain that your argument is a futile one.

[Zhen Li]

http://climate.nasa.gov

Oh yeah?

I wonder what scientists within NASA think of this...

49 Former NASA Scientists Send A Letter Disputing Climate Change

49 former NASA scientists and astronauts sent a letter to NASA Administrator Charles Bolden last week admonishing the agency for it’s role in advocating a high degree of certainty that man-made CO2 is a major cause of climate change while neglecting empirical evidence that calls the theory into question.

One reason for attempting to sail the Arctic in 2013 was a prediction from NASA scientists in 2008 that the Arctic would be “mostly free of ice by 2013.” Jay Zwally, the ice satellite project scientist at NASA Goddard, said in 2008 that the Arctic appeared to be at a “tipping point” from which there was no return. “We not only have the warming of the atmosphere, we have a warming of the ocean that is affecting this. It has been surprising to everybody, this decrease in area. This is a marked departure, and this is suggesting to us that maybe we are getting at this tipping point.”

Five years later, however, Arctic ice coverage had rebounded by 60% in 2013, forcing early closing of the passage and trapping sailors and climate tourists. Douglas Pohl, the North West Passage correspondent for Sail World, said the Passage became blocked in late August. “At least 22 yachts and other vessels are in the Arctic,” he reported on Aug. 29. “Some who were less advanced have retreated and others have abandoned their vessels. Still others are caught in the ice, in an unfolding, unresolved drama.”

The Arctic rescues were eventually completed, but Mr. Pohl says the chances of an ice-free Arctic look slim. In an email exchange Thursday, Mr. Pohl warned against expectations of an open NW Passage. “I seriously doubt that the Arctic will be ice free anytime soon. I for one would not be planning a NW Passage without extensive research demonstrating to my satisfaction as the vessel master that there is a likely reduction in ice levels when compared to 2013.”

At both the South and North Poles, then, the science and experience of climate change and global warming are still not quite on the same course.

Who's really got their head in the sand?

The closed mindedness and lack of self-criticism some people have really surprises me.

Your basic lack of understanding how the scientific method and doubt works is just astonishing.

[dharmagoat]

Zhen Li, you can nitpick til the cows come home.

The argument for anthropogenic climate change stands secure.

[Zhen Li]

And yet you keep pushing an opinion.

That is so illogical. Don't you understand how extremely irrational that is?

[dharmagoat]

And yet you keep pushing an opinion.

That is so illogical. Don't you understand how extremely irrational that is?

You throw a wall of dubious information at us and expect us to reply in detail?

[Schrödinger’s Yidam]

Regardless of the actions or non-actions of politicians, I believe that every barrel of oil will eventually be dug up an burned. It's too easy to sell on the open market. We might be able to postpone the day that the oil runs out, but that day will come. All the carbon that had been filtered and buried out of the atmosphere over millions of years will be replaced back into it. And the consequences will be had--whatever they may be.

Does anybody doubt this? It is hard to see a scenario where it does not happen. It seems more a matter of when, not if.

[Malcolm]

Extreme weather events, including extreme cold snaps are consistent with a warming climate. In other words climate and weather are not the same thing.

[dharmagoat]

Zhen Li, you are getting perilously close to being insulting.

[Schrödinger’s Yidam]

A bit of trivia: after 9/11 all the jets over America were grounded for a few days. Over those few days there was a measurable decrease in the nighttime temperatures over the whole country.

Sorry, don't have a reference.

[Malcolm]

This story can be summed up very simply: a group of retired NASA scientists with no climate science research experience listened to a few climate scientists and a few fossil fuel-funded contrarian scientists, read a few climate blogs, asked a few relatively simple questions, decided that those questions cannot be answered (though we will answer them in this post), put together a very rudimentary report, and now expect people to listen to them because they used to work at NASA. It's purely an appeal to authority, except that the participants have no authority or expertise in climate science.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/NASA-re ... tter2.html

[Zhen Li]

Yeah Malcolm, I've heard it all before. Everything on that site, every single thing on that site.

Zhen Li, you are getting perilously close to being insulting.

Yes, I noticed that too.

For my own good, and for everyone else's, I'm going to stop using this site. I'm through with you all and your little biased sites. None of you understand how to make arguments, and none of you understand how science works.

I can't get anywhere with anybody. It's not benefiting me, and it's not benefiting others. It's a prime example of a waste of time.

[Malcolm]

Zhen Li, you are getting perilously close to being insulting.

Yes, I noticed that too.

For my own good, and for everyone else's, I'm going to stop using this site.

I can't get anywhere with anybody. It's not benefiting me, and it's not benefiting others. It's a prime example of a waste of time.

Perhaps we are not as stupid as you presume. We simply have not bought into right wing climate denial.

[dharmagoat]

Zhen Li, you are getting perilously close to being insulting.

Yes, I noticed that too.

For my own good, and for everyone else's, I'm going to stop using this site.

I can't get anywhere with anybody. It's not benefiting me, and it's not benefiting others. It's a prime example of a waste of time.

Or, you could modify your approach a little.

It would be a shame for you to leave.

[Kim O'Hara]

That's stupid.

Science doesn't work like that.

I feel sorry you.

Zhen Li,
You have stopped posting off-topic - that's good. On the other hand, you have become quite offensive in your manner - that's not good.
And you are wrong if you reject the firm conclusion of the overwhelming majority of climate science experts. This is what it looks like:

Powell-Science-Pie-Chart.png (51.48 KiB) Viewed 2250 times

Kim

[reddust]

I dont buy into the left-right agenda and I am a skeptic of man made climate change argument. I don't want spend my time arguing about this. Time will be the decider on this debte. Lets stop trying to fix samsara (sarcasm) I've been told...don't leave. Lets have some good Dharma debates

[Malcolm]

I dont buy into the left-right agenda and I am a skeptic of man made climate change argument. I don't want spend my time arguing about this. Time will be the decider on this debte. Lets stop trying to fix samsara (sarcasm) I've been told...don't leave. Lets have some good Dharma debates

Closed biosystem + increasing carbon inputs from burning petrochemicals = warming.


Granted, it will change in a thousand years or so after we either stop burning oil for energy or we run out...

Of course it will come as no surprise to any one that I am a deep ecologist/left biocentric ala The late David Orton.

http://home.ca.inter.net/~greenweb/lbprimer.htm

[Zhen Li]

Do you need any more evidence to prove that opinions on this are almost always politically motivated than this?:

Perhaps we are not as stupid as you presume. We simply have not bought into right wing climate denial.

I am not a conservative, and political opinions have nothing to do with evaluating arguments. Science can't be based on politics, it's based on empirical observation!

Don't all you biased politically motivated liberals understand that ALL of your stock high school-level arguments from websites have answers. Even that stupid graph you posted. And every answer has an answer in reply equally as smarmy and unctuous.

You can only argue science based on facts! It's so simple...

[Schrödinger’s Yidam]

Granted, it will change in a thousand years or so after we either stop burning oil for energy or we run out...

How so? The carbon will still be there. It took millions of years for the carbon to be scrubbed out of the atmosphere by plants to get it to the point it is at.