CR4® - The Engineer's Place for News and Discussion®


Previous in Forum: Unknown Future   Next in Forum: Full Vacuum (FV) Design Pressure
Close
Close
Close
Page 1 of 2: « First 1 2 Next > Last »
Guru
Engineering Fields - Mechanical Engineering - New Member Fans of Old Computers - TRS-80 - New Member Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member Safety - Hazmat - New Member Hobbies - Fishing - New Member United States - Member - New Member

Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Detroit MI, USA
Posts: 2109
Good Answers: 213

Climate Change

02/01/2013 9:04 AM

1st of all, this post is not meant to spark a debate on whether global warming or climate change are real or a debate about the politics associated with it. I believe climate change is a natural cycle that the earth goes through.

I would like to know if anyone is experience odd weather that can be linked to climate change.

I live in Michigan, just north of Detroit. We are known for our weather extremes but this is ridiculous.

Last week, we had the coldest temperatures for the last few years. It was -2 F (-19 C). Monday we had just about every precipitation imaginable in a couple of hours. We got 2" (5cm) of snow, followed by sleet, freezing rain, and rain. The next 2 days got warmer with flooding rain and thunderstorms. High winds in the 50mph (80kph) range were also felt. Wednesday it was 61 F (16 C) at 3:30am when I woke up and stayed in the 60's most of the day. Yesterday it was 20 F (-7 C), today it is 16 F (-9). We had a 40 F difference in highs in 24 hours.

Anybody else going through some wild, crazy, or odd weather?

__________________
How we deal with death is at least as important as how we deal with life. --CAPTAIN KIRK, Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
Register to Reply
Interested in this topic? By joining CR4 you can "subscribe" to
this discussion and receive notification when new comments are added.

Comments rated to be Good Answers:

These comments received enough positive ratings to make them "good answers".

Comments rated to be "almost" Good Answers:

Check out these comments that don't yet have enough votes to be "official" good answers and, if you agree with them, rate them!
Guru

Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 40058
Good Answers: 1598
#1

Re: Climate Change

02/01/2013 9:29 AM

I think a better question might be, "is anybody NOT experiencing odd weather".

As to the cause, there's the rub.

I think that we can all agree that the earth, not Hong Kong, not LA, but the whole banana goes through warming and cooling cycles.

These will, of course, affect the weather.

NOAA: July 2012 was the Hottest Month on Record - weather.com

We've had our share of weather weirdness here in Arizona.

And this for #2 2012: Warmest Year on Record for U.S. - weather.com

Register to Reply Score 1 for Good Answer
Guru
Engineering Fields - Mechanical Engineering - New Member Fans of Old Computers - TRS-80 - New Member Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member Safety - Hazmat - New Member Hobbies - Fishing - New Member United States - Member - New Member

Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Detroit MI, USA
Posts: 2109
Good Answers: 213
#2
In reply to #1

Re: Climate Change

02/01/2013 9:35 AM

I think for us here in the northern midwest, 2012 was the warmest year on record, period, not just July. I will check on that fact.

__________________
How we deal with death is at least as important as how we deal with life. --CAPTAIN KIRK, Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
Register to Reply
2
Power-User
Popular Science - Weaponology - Aerospace nut Hobbies - Musician - music enriches the soul United States - Member - Happy to be from the USA Engineering Fields - Acoustical Engineering - Pro Audio Speaker Designer Engineering Fields - Manufacturing Engineering - Aerospace ME Engineering Fields - Aerospace Engineering - Airplane nut from aeromodels to 747's

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Seattle WA
Posts: 113
Good Answers: 3
#4
In reply to #2

Re: Climate Change

02/01/2013 10:12 AM

I just turned 55 and in my memory (about 50 years worth) most every year has been different, some hotter, some colder (mostly hotter).

Considering we're coming off an ice age, I would expect it to keep getting warmer wear your sun screen.

7 or 8 years ago, we set a record for the most days in May at or over 100° in Wichita. 2011 broke a 75 year record for most days over 100° but that means that it was cooler in the 75 years from 1936 to 2011.

One thing's certain. Change.

Scott

__________________
The early bird gets the worm, but what about the early worm? A.E. Neuman
Register to Reply Good Answer (Score 2)
Guru
Popular Science - Evolution - New Member Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member

Join Date: May 2006
Location: The 'Space Coast', USA
Posts: 11172
Good Answers: 921
#17
In reply to #4

Re: Climate Change

02/01/2013 1:08 PM

Since climate changes at intervals that go from hundreds of years to millions of years, a 55 year yardstick is pretty useless for predicting future climate trends.

Add to that, your location is just one in the world and you have not actually recorded any data - just recalled from memory.

This is why I think the original poster's question is not useful to answering the question of "what is going on" by simply sampling subjective data from people that have only been alive a wink of time.

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1858
Good Answers: 42
#23
In reply to #17

Re: Climate Change

02/01/2013 3:01 PM

Thank you...thank you very much...GA

Register to Reply Score 1 for Off Topic
Guru
Engineering Fields - Mechanical Engineering - New Member Fans of Old Computers - TRS-80 - New Member Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member Safety - Hazmat - New Member Hobbies - Fishing - New Member United States - Member - New Member

Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Detroit MI, USA
Posts: 2109
Good Answers: 213
#27
In reply to #17

Re: Climate Change

02/01/2013 4:44 PM

But what I want to hear about is peoples different opinions, and stories about weather in their little parts of the world. Do they think it's because of climate change. I don't care about statistics, I can look up weather statistic's all by myself. I want to hear about your weather in your own micro climate, is it odd, or wild, do you think it's because of climate change.

__________________
How we deal with death is at least as important as how we deal with life. --CAPTAIN KIRK, Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1858
Good Answers: 42
#28
In reply to #27

Re: Climate Change

02/01/2013 4:50 PM

May I suggest this site?

Otherwise--

Western Washington, January, 2013:

Overcast

--cloud cover decreased the sunshine

Wet when it rained

--puddles formed

--lakes got higher when it rained more

The tides came and went...roughly every 6 hours

The waves in Puget Sound were higher when the wind blew

--subsided when the winds decreased

Register to Reply Score 1 for Off Topic
Guru
Engineering Fields - Mechanical Engineering - New Member Fans of Old Computers - TRS-80 - New Member Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member Safety - Hazmat - New Member Hobbies - Fishing - New Member United States - Member - New Member

Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Detroit MI, USA
Posts: 2109
Good Answers: 213
#29
In reply to #28

Re: Climate Change

02/01/2013 4:58 PM

You don't get it do you? I want to hear from actual people, I want to hear their opinions about the weather that is going on around them.

__________________
How we deal with death is at least as important as how we deal with life. --CAPTAIN KIRK, Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: South of Minot North Dakota
Posts: 8399
Good Answers: 771
#30
In reply to #29

Re: Climate Change

02/01/2013 5:41 PM

Okay.

Tuesday and wednesday night were around -18 to -22 F with wind chills down around -45 to -50 F and lower while I was working night shift.

Today is around +14 F right now with light winds. Feels darn right pleasant outside in comparison to the other nights too!

Seen worse and seen better in my life. Grandpa has stories of past weather events that go far beyond mine so there is nothing we are worried about climate change wise.

If anything we would love to see a good day to day 10+F gain year round! Or at least a 20+ F gain all winter!

(Time to go and toss another tire on the fire. Some theories say it might help but if not at least we are sure getting rid of a lot of old tires!)

Register to Reply
Guru
Engineering Fields - Mechanical Engineering - New Member Fans of Old Computers - TRS-80 - New Member Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member Safety - Hazmat - New Member Hobbies - Fishing - New Member United States - Member - New Member

Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Detroit MI, USA
Posts: 2109
Good Answers: 213
#31
In reply to #30

Re: Climate Change

02/01/2013 5:54 PM

Ok, that was the facts about your weather, is it odd or out of the norm in your opinion?

Makes me think MI weather is not so bad But I can't convince my wife of that.

__________________
How we deal with death is at least as important as how we deal with life. --CAPTAIN KIRK, Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: South of Minot North Dakota
Posts: 8399
Good Answers: 771
#33
In reply to #31

Re: Climate Change

02/01/2013 6:58 PM

See post 9 for what we North Dakotans need to see to consider the weather out of the ordinary.

Send your wife here to live from mid December to mid March. I promise it will shut her right up about living conditions anywhere else civilized.

BTW my wife is from Turkey so you can only imagine what daily complaints I get to endure about the weather.

Why is it so cold?

Why is it so windy?

Why is it snowing?

Why is it so cold and windy and snowing?

Why was it 40+ F this afternoon and now its -10 F 12 hours later?

Because it can!

Register to Reply
Guru
Engineering Fields - Mechanical Engineering - New Member Fans of Old Computers - TRS-80 - New Member Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member Safety - Hazmat - New Member Hobbies - Fishing - New Member United States - Member - New Member

Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Detroit MI, USA
Posts: 2109
Good Answers: 213
#35
In reply to #33

Re: Climate Change

02/01/2013 7:17 PM

I made her read your post, didn't help my cause. I want to take the family to the west side of the state, off Lake Michigan, to see real snow (they have been getting 12+" a day when lake effect is going) Don't think that's going to happen, either is my dream to go to Alaska in the winter..... Oh well.

She also thinks I am retarded for spending an entire day 7 miles out on Saginaw Bay ice fishing for walleye when it's 10 F and 40mph winds, to me that's fun..

__________________
How we deal with death is at least as important as how we deal with life. --CAPTAIN KIRK, Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
Register to Reply
Guru
Engineering Fields - Mechanical Engineering - New Member

Join Date: May 2008
Location: CHENNAI, TAMIL NADU, INDIA.
Posts: 1796
Good Answers: 62
#38
In reply to #33

Re: Climate Change

02/01/2013 9:36 PM

Dear Mr.tomtech,

I am of the view, that the CIRCULATION or MOVEMENT of AIR - such as STILL or FAST CIRCULATION. in the particular Zone, is the Root Cause for this extreme or Violent Variations of the Temperature. Then we have to understand WHAT CAUSES for such poor air circulation and its impact.

I am of the view that,it appears - this topic CLIMATE CHANGE is becoming a bit difficult to understand. Very recently I have read an article that, the ever increasing emission of CARBON-DI-OXIDE to atmosphere, which traps the HEAT is not contributing much to the GLOBAL WARMING, but it is the MOISTURE IN THE AIR is causing the GLOBAL WARMING.

Thanks,

DHAYANANDHAN.S

Register to Reply Score 2 for Off Topic
Guru
Safety - Hazmat - New Member United States - US - Statue of Liberty - New Member Engineering Fields - Chemical Engineering - Old Hand

Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Lubbock, Texas
Posts: 13882
Good Answers: 155
#49
In reply to #38

Re: Climate Change

02/02/2013 1:24 PM

The valley girls are going to have to stop taking so many showers.

__________________
If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Just build a better one.
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1858
Good Answers: 42
#66
In reply to #29

Re: Climate Change

02/04/2013 12:15 PM

I am an actual person...that was the weather that was going on around me...

Sheesh, what do you want? You want it all handed to you on a silver platter? If you want the data collected by real people then go to work for NOAA and be a real scientist.

I gave a good link to COCORAHS which measures rainfall. That's a huge chunk for free. If you want more/varied free data I suggest setting up your own worldwide network of data collecting junkies like they did.

Don't forget...the world is a big place...you have a lot of begging to do (in thousands of languages) for free data.

Register to Reply
Guru
United Kingdom - Member - Not a New Member Hobbies - Musician - New Member Hobbies - Fishing - New Member

Join Date: May 2006
Location: Reading, Berkshire, UK. Going under cover.
Posts: 9580
Good Answers: 457
#36
In reply to #28

Re: Climate Change

02/01/2013 7:41 PM

Is that your map of the world?

__________________
"Love justice, you who rule the world" - Dante Alighieri
Register to Reply
Guru
Popular Science - Evolution - New Member Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member

Join Date: May 2006
Location: The 'Space Coast', USA
Posts: 11172
Good Answers: 921
#32
In reply to #27

Re: Climate Change

02/01/2013 6:10 PM

Well, stories are fun, but they hold little statistical value due to their highly subjective nature.

In the end, my answer is it may be or it may not be.

It is like watching gas prices over the course of 5 days. Does that indicate a longer term trend? What can you predict with 5 days of data for the next 10 years?

That example assumes you are actually recording data, too. The idea of relying on very subjective memories for comparisons of winters or summers, rather than actually compiling data on a daily basis, is much too flawed to draw a conclusion - unless you are studying the subjective nature of the mind.

Register to Reply
Guru
Engineering Fields - Mechanical Engineering - New Member Fans of Old Computers - TRS-80 - New Member Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member Safety - Hazmat - New Member Hobbies - Fishing - New Member United States - Member - New Member

Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Detroit MI, USA
Posts: 2109
Good Answers: 213
#34
In reply to #32

Re: Climate Change

02/01/2013 7:10 PM

I am not recording data, this thread is about my curiosity. I made an observation about the weather in my little part of the world, my opinion about it. I want to hear about other peoples opinions about weather in their part of the world, their stories so to speak. I don't need validation about my beliefs on climate change being real or not or it's causes, nor do I care about yours or anybody else's beliefs on the same.

Either you think you are having odd weather or you don't, if you do think you are, then you think it's because of climate change or it isn't. There is no right or wrong answer here if you answer my post in the spirit I asked it. I really don't care about historical data, I am asking about opinions on what's going on in the here and now.

My post is for fun, for curiosity. I'm sure I'm not the only one that likes to hear what's going on in other parts of the world and what people think if even only on a small scale. I only wanted opinions on your weather, not statistics of global weather or your opinion on why I asked this.

Read Solar Eagles Post, opposite of my opinion but answered in the spirit of my OP (other than the jihad part, but that was funny), a GA from me.

So please, if you or anybody else can't answer with an observation about your weather or an opinion on why it is or isn't happening, or if my OP irritates you, step off. This is meant for fun.

__________________
How we deal with death is at least as important as how we deal with life. --CAPTAIN KIRK, Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
Register to Reply
Guru
Popular Science - Evolution - New Member Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member

Join Date: May 2006
Location: The 'Space Coast', USA
Posts: 11172
Good Answers: 921
#37
In reply to #34

Re: Climate Change

02/01/2013 8:22 PM

Well, it's Florida weather here. Every day is about the same; sunny, breezy, and warm.

The only real season we have hear is snowbird season. Either it's in season or out. :)

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 5812
Good Answers: 589
#43
In reply to #32

Re: Climate Change

02/02/2013 10:35 AM

I kind of think of it as setting up a microscope on a gravel road and guessing from the view through the microscope whether the road is going uphill or downhill.

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1057
Good Answers: 111
#50
In reply to #43

Re: Climate Change

02/02/2013 3:36 PM

Exactly. Well put.

GA.

__________________
Think big. Drive small.
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1858
Good Answers: 42
#67
In reply to #43

Re: Climate Change

02/04/2013 12:20 PM

No sh!t...

I regard the OP's idea of just for "fun" as counter-intuitive and producing negative feedback for real information.

Just because the donkey's tail is wet and moving doesn't mean the "climate" is changing.

His time would have been better spent watching the weather from various TV stations around the world...

...but that would have been actually lifting the spoon to his mouth.

Register to Reply
Guru
Canada - Member - Specialized in power electronics

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Montreal, Canada.
Posts: 1325
Good Answers: 78
#52
In reply to #4

Re: Climate Change

02/02/2013 6:50 PM

GA Snewkirk

As AH correctly pointed out, using our senses is not a good way to compare weather.

I find that the present cold front is always worst than the last one even if the thermometer states the opposite...

Our memory is not objective and we always find the present pain worst that the past one.

Anyway, we cannot do much about it. Enjoy the weather for what it is and stop worrying about it.

__________________
Experienced is earned, common sense is taught, both are rare essentials of life.
Register to Reply
Guru
Engineering Fields - Mechanical Engineering - New Member Fans of Old Computers - TRS-80 - New Member Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member Safety - Hazmat - New Member Hobbies - Fishing - New Member United States - Member - New Member

Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Detroit MI, USA
Posts: 2109
Good Answers: 213
#3
In reply to #1

Re: Climate Change

02/01/2013 10:03 AM

You already did check that fact, thanks

__________________
How we deal with death is at least as important as how we deal with life. --CAPTAIN KIRK, Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1858
Good Answers: 42
#21
In reply to #1

Re: Climate Change

02/01/2013 2:59 PM

Here's a rub: we hardly had any sun at all in July, 2012 in Western Washington. "Normally" it's quite sunny, especially in the southern peninsula and in the rain shadow.

What some see as weird weather is just the weather.

Register to Reply Score 1 for Off Topic
Power-User

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Dayton Ohio
Posts: 134
Good Answers: 4
#5

Re: Climate Change

02/01/2013 10:12 AM

Heat is energy. There is more energy in the atmosphere, hence the winds get stronger. Just keep an eye out for my ex wife on that bicycle with the dog in the basket on the handlebars.

__________________
MikeMack747
Register to Reply Score 1 for Good Answer
Guru

Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Out of your mind! Not in sight!
Posts: 4089
Good Answers: 92
#6

Re: Climate Change

02/01/2013 10:16 AM

Well all fine here, but when I read the newspaper its always the hottest year within 4 years and the wettest since 2007 and the most storms since yesterday.

Honestly I think in my age I went through all the cicles already that are announced in the paper and its all coming back again. Would you think I have seen snow for a couple of winters and yet there it was again.

Is this climate or wheather. I am pretty sure it was there before so it must be weather!

__________________
Common Sense Dictates
Register to Reply
Guru
Engineering Fields - Electrical Engineering - Been there, done that, still doing it. Engineering Fields - Control Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Long Island NY
Posts: 12264
Good Answers: 774
#7

Re: Climate Change

02/01/2013 10:30 AM

Let me see, I'll go backwards in time. Today's high is anticipated to be 32°F. Yesterday, the temperature high was 62°F at 2:00 AM EST. You may have heard that we had a little storm last October, 2012. Last winter (2011-2012) was the second warmest winter on record. Then there was the Nor'easter just prior to Halloween 2011. Before that Hurricane Irene visited us in 2011. I won't forget that in July 2011 the highest temperature ever recorded in NY happened.

Now can this series of events be proven beyond a shadow of doubt to be from climate change... no. Did the global warming "alarmists" predict these types of events will be more likely to happen due to global warming... who's to judge that?

__________________
"Don't disturb my circles." translation of Archimedes last words
Register to Reply Score 1 for Good Answer
Guru
Hobbies - Fishing - Old Salt Hobbies - CNC - New Member United States - US - Statue of Liberty - New Member

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Rosedale, Maryland USA
Posts: 5213
Good Answers: 269
#8

Re: Climate Change

02/01/2013 10:44 AM

Does not usually get that cold here maybe 10° F is about the coldest. But the changes in the weather you state are pretty much the norm.

It's rare that it gets cold and stays cold for any length of time. Last time 2009-2010 stayed about 30º F most the winter which gave us some nice snows.

__________________
Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving in a pretty, pristine body but rather to come sliding in sideways, all used up and exclaiming, "Wow, what a ride!"
Register to Reply Score 1 for Good Answer
Guru

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: South of Minot North Dakota
Posts: 8399
Good Answers: 771
#9

Re: Climate Change

02/01/2013 11:13 AM

Unless its under -50 F without the windchill or over 125 F in the shade or the temp has changed +- 80 F in 24 hours and the wind is not blowing over 100 MPH without being in a tornado we consider it all normal North Dakota weather here.

So quit complaining.

Register to Reply Score 1 for Good Answer
2
Guru
Engineering Fields - Optical Engineering - Member Engineering Fields - Engineering Physics - Member Engineering Fields - Systems Engineering - Member

Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Trantor
Posts: 5223
Good Answers: 622
#10

Re: Climate Change

02/01/2013 11:17 AM

I think we've all been hypersensitized to weather changes as a result of all the talk we've heard over the past 25 years about ice ages and then global warming, El Nino and La Nina.

I think, too, we're so used to living in conditioned environments - A/C in the summer and clean, efficient central heating in the winter - that our bodies aren't accustomed to 'real weather' anymore.

But I can remember growing up in northern Ohio in the 1960s and there would be snowy winters when we ride our sleds everyday after school, and other winters when the sleds would never come out of the garage. I remember sometimes doing my newspaper route on my bike in January in jeans and a t-shirt, and a week later having to do it on foot since I couldn't pedal through the 12 inches of snow that fell that day.

I think odd weather is simply due to 'weather'. Sometimes it's affected by El Nino and La Nina which can cause sudden changes in the jet stream, but it's just the same variability that has always been with us, we're just more sensitive to it.

__________________
Whiskey, women -- and astrophysics. Because sometimes a problem can't be solved with just whiskey and women.
Register to Reply Good Answer (Score 2)
Guru
Engineering Fields - Electrical Engineering - Been there, done that, still doing it. Engineering Fields - Control Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Long Island NY
Posts: 12264
Good Answers: 774
#12
In reply to #10

Re: Climate Change

02/01/2013 11:37 AM

You have the very essence of the difficulty in the global warming debate in your reply. The time span of the predicted global warming effect is longer than a human lifespan. The annual deviations in weather observed by an individual are greater than the trend predicted by global warming. So clearly the only way to objectively examine this effect is the much maligned and often fraudulently manipulated mathematics of statistics. Remember, statistics cannot prove anything. Statistics can only measure the likelihood of correlation.

__________________
"Don't disturb my circles." translation of Archimedes last words
Register to Reply Score 1 for Off Topic
Guru
Engineering Fields - Mechanical Engineering - New Member Fans of Old Computers - TRS-80 - New Member Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member Safety - Hazmat - New Member Hobbies - Fishing - New Member United States - Member - New Member

Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Detroit MI, USA
Posts: 2109
Good Answers: 213
#11

Re: Climate Change

02/01/2013 11:34 AM

What about the rest of the world? Europe?, Asia?, Australia?

__________________
How we deal with death is at least as important as how we deal with life. --CAPTAIN KIRK, Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
Register to Reply
4
Guru

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: at the beach in Florida
Posts: 19472
Good Answers: 1141
#13

Re: Climate Change

02/01/2013 11:51 AM

I don't see any major changes one way or the other....Lot more talk and debate about weather, but then there always has been a fair amount, it's just lately that we the people seem to be getting blamed, this was never mentioned before....but it seems we the people seem to be getting blamed for anything bad that happens anymore....I think it must stem from the jihadists view, that Americans are the root of all evil....and probably the ultra liberals that think all people are bad(except of course themselves).....but for me, I don't see any changes that I would consider out of the normal flux of weather conditions....

__________________
Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep moving. A.E.
Register to Reply Good Answer (Score 4)
Guru
Engineering Fields - Mechanical Engineering - New Member Fans of Old Computers - TRS-80 - New Member Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member Safety - Hazmat - New Member Hobbies - Fishing - New Member United States - Member - New Member

Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Detroit MI, USA
Posts: 2109
Good Answers: 213
#14
In reply to #13

Re: Climate Change

02/01/2013 11:58 AM

75 and sunny there in Florida?

__________________
How we deal with death is at least as important as how we deal with life. --CAPTAIN KIRK, Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: at the beach in Florida
Posts: 19472
Good Answers: 1141
#15
In reply to #14

Re: Climate Change

02/01/2013 12:04 PM

Currently 57° F and sunny....

__________________
Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep moving. A.E.
Register to Reply
Guru
Engineering Fields - Mechanical Engineering - New Member Fans of Old Computers - TRS-80 - New Member Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member Safety - Hazmat - New Member Hobbies - Fishing - New Member United States - Member - New Member

Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Detroit MI, USA
Posts: 2109
Good Answers: 213
#26
In reply to #15

Re: Climate Change

02/01/2013 4:36 PM

Close enough.....

__________________
How we deal with death is at least as important as how we deal with life. --CAPTAIN KIRK, Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
Register to Reply
2
Guru
Engineering Fields - Power Engineering - New Member

Join Date: May 2007
Location: NYC metropolitan area.
Posts: 3009
Good Answers: 421
#16

Re: Climate Change

02/01/2013 12:34 PM

In the past few weeks the NYC metro area has seen some pretty extreme weather. The news channels were marveling how we just had a string of days below freezing, something that hadn't happened in over three years. On the other hand I'm wondering why the temperature hadn't gotten below freezing for those three years, since as a kid I always remember that winter always equaled cold weather.

Those of us who follow the stock market know that, just like the weather, there is an element of randomness in large systems that cannot be accurately predicted with any precision. There is always a reversion to the mean, we just don't know when it will happen, how long it will take to get there, or whether there is a new mean that is developing.

So it is with the weather, just add up all those extreme temperatures and divide them by the observation period, and guess what, the average will be quite close to the historical seasonal average.

Climate change is the sum total of all the influences on our atmosphere, whether it be from the Sun, neighboring planets, deep space, internal rumblings below the mantle, or human activity. When combined with the Earth's cycles, these things are on time-frames that far exceed man's capabilities to comprehend, we are programmed to adapt or perish.

__________________
Curious minds want to know, engineering minds get answers....
Register to Reply Good Answer (Score 2)
3
Guru

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1057
Good Answers: 111
#18

Re: Climate Change

02/01/2013 1:15 PM

We had tornadoes here two days ago. Last year we had tornadoes in February. This sort of weather used to be unheard of in the winter, some say.

Last year, the water levels at our lake property in Virginia dropped to a record low, and remained low throughout the summer. If this keeps up, its value could plummet.

Sandy was unlike any storm in history -- much larger than the largest hurricanes.

It is a rare person who lives in a place where weather is not perceived as getting more extreme, just as the climate change models predict. As Arrhenius predicted in 1896, human-caused CO2 emissions have tipped the balance in a way that would have been impossible without those emissions. The models have become increasingly accurate over the last century, and so now, essentially all the climate scientists agree that the current warming rates would not be possible without the increases in CO2 and methane associated with human activities.

  • 1st of all, this post is not meant to spark a debate on whether global warming or climate change are real or a debate about the politics associated with it. I believe climate change is a natural cycle that the earth goes through.

Peculiar combination of sentences. It is a bit like writing "This is not meant to spark a debate. I believe that the scientific notion of evolution is bunk." If you removed this paragraph, you would be likely to get less debate.

  • I would like to know if anyone is experience odd weather that can be linked to climate change.

If you want no debate, this paragraph does not help either. CR4 has a few scientifically-oriented members who would find the implied connection between "odd weather" (tiny sample size, local effect ) and "climate change" (huge sample size, global effect) profoundly anti-scientific. This sets up a debate between the anti-science types and the science types. There is no climate scientist who would say that the tornado I experienced a couple days ago was caused by climate change.

It is a very rare CR4 member who continuously flies around the world sampling weather at enough places to make any conclusion whatsoever about the overall extremes in weather. Even rarer is someone who travels continuously and who also has access to the climate change models who could see if such weather and the models agree.

Talk casually to many people, and they will cite evidence of extreme whether, and many will make the logical leap that such weather is caused by global warming, despite the fact that they have absolutely no basis for comparison. (It is like handing a layman a tissue sample, and asking him if it appears cancerous.)

Below is a historical chart of strong to violent tornadoes in the US. Without doing the math, I can visually average the number to about 45 per year for the period 1950 through 1975. For the period 1980 through 2005, the average seems to be about 35. That is a significant reduction, one could say. However, the US is one small part of the world. Tornadoes are one small part of weather phenomena. Tornado reporting changes over time. etc. etc. So really, one cannot make any useful statement about tornado trends in the US. As the NOAA says, there appears to be "no trend". Making the sample size orders of magnitude smaller -- to local events observed by CR4 members, for example -- means that no connection whatsoever (which can stand up to any scrutiny) can be made. In the last week, we have had very warm temperatures (due to global warming) and very cold temperatures (due to global cooling). One would have to be profoundly anti-scientific to assert that either global warming or global cooling is occurring based on my observation of very warm of very cool temperatures.

So...

It is a huge stretch to make any connection at all with the weather observations of CR4 members (who reside in one tiny area of the world or another) and climate change. You might just as well ask: "Was this morning's porridge too hot (global warming) or too cool (global cooling)?"

__________________
Think big. Drive small.
Register to Reply Good Answer (Score 3)
Guru
Engineering Fields - Mechanical Engineering - New Member Fans of Old Computers - TRS-80 - New Member Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member Safety - Hazmat - New Member Hobbies - Fishing - New Member United States - Member - New Member

Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Detroit MI, USA
Posts: 2109
Good Answers: 213
#19
In reply to #18

Re: Climate Change

02/01/2013 1:33 PM

Climate change is real, I just don't to debate the alleged causes of it. Nobody will convince me it is not a naturally occurring phenomenon.

It is a completely natural rhythmic cycle that the earth has gone through for millions if not billions of years. You don't go from tropical conditions covering most of the earth, to ice ages, to the temperate conditions now with out climate change. Thats a fact.

I also get sick of hearing people using climate change for their own political agenda, BS!

I just want to know if anybody is have weather that they think can be attributed to climate change (in their own opinion).

__________________
How we deal with death is at least as important as how we deal with life. --CAPTAIN KIRK, Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
Register to Reply
2
Guru
Engineering Fields - Optical Engineering - Member Engineering Fields - Engineering Physics - Member Engineering Fields - Systems Engineering - Member

Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Trantor
Posts: 5223
Good Answers: 622
#20
In reply to #19

Re: Climate Change

02/01/2013 2:21 PM

Only micro-climates.

I've noticed the 'heat island' effect around major cities, like Atlanta. A few years back I lived in the Atlanta metro area and it was common to see a storm front approach dumping lots of rain, but as soon as it neared 'downtown' a hole would open in the storm and the city would get very little rain. Then the leading edge of the front would re-group on the other side of the city and start dumping rain again.

Atlanta gets odd weather also due to its location at the southern end of the Blue Ridge mountains. For example, it is both wetter and sunnier than Seattle (nearly 20 inches more rain and many more days of sunny skies per year). -- As recorded at the airport, well south of the city center.

__________________
Whiskey, women -- and astrophysics. Because sometimes a problem can't be solved with just whiskey and women.
Register to Reply Good Answer (Score 2)
Guru

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1057
Good Answers: 111
#39
In reply to #19

Re: Climate Change

02/01/2013 10:05 PM
  • I just want to know if anybody is have weather that they think can be attributed to climate change (in their own opinion).

I see.
No, there has not been any weather here or in any of the places I've traveled that can be attributed to climate change. I've experienced some reasonably extreme weather.

__________________
Think big. Drive small.
Register to Reply Score 1 for Good Answer
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1858
Good Answers: 42
#24
In reply to #18

Re: Climate Change

02/01/2013 3:06 PM

Just out of curiosity...your lake property in VA wouldn't happen to be used as a water supply in any way shape or form, would it?

Does it respond to tidal effects? Brackish? How large is the lake?

Funny thing is that several lakes in Washington state also dropped to records lows and some lakes disappeared after 70 years of maintaining a static state.

Oh, btw, they removed three dams there last year...did I fail to mention that?

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: South of Minot North Dakota
Posts: 8399
Good Answers: 771
#25
In reply to #24

Re: Climate Change

02/01/2013 4:16 PM

Does that count at my place too?

For the last 12 years my house was over 250 feet away and 40 above our local water channel.

This year now its about 30 feet away and 8 feet above our local water channel.

If calculated at this rate for change I should be underwater by April!

(Sounds like some pretty serious climate and environmental changes happened this year unless I mention the part where I moved the old house down lower in the yard.)

Register to Reply Score 1 for Good Answer
Guru
Hobbies - Target Shooting - New Member Hobbies - Fishing - New Member

Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1066
Good Answers: 12
#111
In reply to #24

Re: Climate Change

02/08/2013 7:49 AM

Are people happy or upset about losing their reservoirs and letting the water run?

Register to Reply Off Topic (Score 5)
Guru

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Geelong, Australia
Posts: 1089
Good Answers: 54
#56
In reply to #18

Re: Climate Change

02/03/2013 5:07 PM

Once again your post is one of the few talking any sense.

__________________
If there's something you don't understand...Then a wizard did it. As heard on "The Simpsons".
Register to Reply
Guru
Hobbies - Target Shooting - New Member Hobbies - Fishing - New Member

Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1066
Good Answers: 12
#110
In reply to #18

Re: Climate Change

02/08/2013 7:46 AM

The oceans rise equally all over the world, on average, over a few days. So It is possible to tell if more ice melt is occurring over the decades, even for a layman. This can be done using historical photographs and other records. That is the most reliable indicator for the average global warming skeptic like me.

Would you please give me a reference to the most profound data that indicates that mankind plays a significant role in global warming versus nature all by itself? My thought is that our behavior has very little to do with it. Even if it did, I don't think that our behavior will change much if it involves paying high prices for energy. Air pollution from coal burning is a much easier sell, and replacing coal burning with natural gas plus wind, solar etc. will be possible. Natural gas contributes half the CO2 of coal use.

We have surpassed Europe in reducing CO2 emissions, by burning less coal and more natural gas. That is even though they have surpassed us in solar and wind use. Because of their slow movement toward fracking, they will continue to import coal from us.

Register to Reply
Guru
Engineering Fields - Electrical Engineering - Been there, done that, still doing it. Engineering Fields - Control Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Long Island NY
Posts: 12264
Good Answers: 774
#115
In reply to #110

Re: Climate Change

02/08/2013 8:30 AM

I know that deniers will still claim they never saw this but I'll bring this up again.

A valid method to identify what is not the dominant cause of any effect is through statistical measurement. You measure the effect while you also measure all of the plausible causes. The causes that do not correlate well are not the dominant causes. If one or a combination of a very few measured causes correlate to the effect it does imply that these are likely the cause but it cannot prove this.

This is precisely what the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature (BEST) analysis has done by collecting an enormous amount of historical global surface temperature measurement data over the past 200+ years and compared this data with all of the proposed historical measured and recorded causes. The factor that correlates well is CO2 levels. Sun spot activity, planetary orbit cycles, planet tilt, volcanic activity and many more plausible causes are considered in this enormous effort and do not correlate with the measured warming over the measured time period.

__________________
"Don't disturb my circles." translation of Archimedes last words
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1858
Good Answers: 42
#22

Re: Climate Change

02/01/2013 3:00 PM

I doubt your "climate" changed. More like you had different weather from day to day.

yikes...

Register to Reply Score 1 for Off Topic
Guru
Hobbies - Fishing - New Member

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Raleigh, NC USA
Posts: 13725
Good Answers: 472
#40

Re: Climate Change

02/01/2013 10:55 PM
__________________
Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. Ben Franklin
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: srilanka
Posts: 2728
Good Answers: 5
#41

Re: Climate Change

02/02/2013 1:10 AM

If there was life on Mars,our earth too one day become dry,but due to what reason?. Is it natural death or man made as well as is climate change is natural or man made?. If you look back in history you will find climate changes/extinctions,sea level rising and falling, intercontinental drift etc have occurred before man evolved.

__________________
pnaban
Register to Reply Score 1 for Off Topic
Associate

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Between Nothingness and Eternity
Posts: 34
#42

Re: Climate Change

02/02/2013 10:31 AM

I've lived in southeastern Massachusetts for my entire life. The last couple of years we've had tornadoes. I never saw a tornado (in this area) before three or four years ago. Now, no one is surprised when we hear a tornado warning.

Odd weather? Yeah! very odd weather. Now I realize that 64 years isn't a long time in the overall scheme of things, but I would have bet money against a tornado coming across Narragansett Bay in my lifetime. As far as wide temperature changes, that's a way of life around here.

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Haverhill, MA
Posts: 1003
Good Answers: 121
#47
In reply to #42

Re: Climate Change

02/02/2013 12:43 PM

Worcester tornado, 1953? Hurricane of 1936? Hurricane Carol 1957? What is new?

__________________
The older I am, the better I used to be
Register to Reply
Associate

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Between Nothingness and Eternity
Posts: 34
#77
In reply to #47

Re: Climate Change

02/04/2013 9:04 PM

The central and western part of Massachusetts do get tornadoes on occasion. Some of them are severe, but in the Narragansett Bay area they were unheard of until a couple of years ago. As far as hurricanes, they follow the golf stream, they're a common experience here. But they don't start here. The tornadoes are forming over the bay. That is what's new.

Register to Reply
6
Guru
Engineering Fields - Marine Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 1597
Good Answers: 19
#44

Re: Climate Change

02/02/2013 10:37 AM

Over here in Australia we have had some rather odd weather patterns occurring, record high temperatures in many many places, big bushfires in four states, the Queensland and NSW got hit by ex-tropical cyclone (hurricane to those in the US).

This has caused major flooding in two states, Queensland and New South Wales, and the floods in some of the places have broken all previous records. Who knows what would have happened had the cyclone made landfall before it was downgraded.

With what is happening in the world, weatherwise, as you said, crazy weather. Look at the record ice melt in the Arctic which according to most weather experts is going to have effects on the worlds climate.

I for one, accept that we do have climate change, and it is caused by the nations of the world overloading its natural systems...........and something has to give, and I think that we have only just started to see the tip of the iceberg.

__________________
TO BE. or NOT TO BE. That is the question!! The Bard
Register to Reply Good Answer (Score 6)
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Haverhill, MA
Posts: 1003
Good Answers: 121
#45

Re: Climate Change

02/02/2013 11:29 AM

I have lived my entire life in New England, and we have had some wild, crazy and odd weather here, but that is normal for New England. Every year that I can remember the seasonal temperature, rain fall, and snow accumulation has been either above or below "average". According to the TV weather reporter, on any given day some weather record is "broken"

However, this winter (so far) and the last have been unusually mild, with almost no snow accumulation. Is this a result of global climate change? No, these unusual winters are due solely to the fact that two years ago my step-son (who did the snow shoveling) moved out of our house, and I was finally forced to go out and buy a snow blower.

Global warming? I will believe it when sea level has risen 120 feet and palm trees are growing on my beach front yard ( elev. 135 ft.) here in Haverhill. Then I can sell my house for big $$ and move to my wife's house in Coyoacan, Mexico (elev 7500 ft.) where there is nothing to worry about except an occasional volcanic eruption.

__________________
The older I am, the better I used to be
Register to Reply Score 1 for Good Answer
Guru

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: srilanka
Posts: 2728
Good Answers: 5
#55
In reply to #45

Re: Climate Change

02/03/2013 11:35 AM

Mining,nuclear tests,fracking etc can create tremors or quakes.

__________________
pnaban
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Haverhill, MA
Posts: 1003
Good Answers: 121
#128
In reply to #55

Re: Climate Change

02/08/2013 8:12 PM

They very well might, but volcanic eruptions and earth quakes have been happening in Mexico long before the first humans arrived there, and will be happening on a regular basis long after we have gone.

__________________
The older I am, the better I used to be
Register to Reply
3
Guru
Popular Science - Cosmology - Let's keep knowledge expanding Engineering Fields - Instrumentation Engineering - New Member Engineering Fields - Software Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Colorado, USA
Posts: 3317
Good Answers: 82
#46

Re: Climate Change

02/02/2013 11:46 AM

Here in Colorado it has been very dry. If we don't get some snow or rain I will need to get out the hose to water my trees. I don't like to do that because I think I killed a tree by over-watering it. We had our usual cold weather in Dec and Jan, but it has been warm some days, like today. I have argued in the past about climate change, but now I believe it is happening. I am not convinced that it is human caused, but surely we are contributing to it, however small or large that may be.

Register to Reply Good Answer (Score 3)
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1858
Good Answers: 42
#68
In reply to #46

Re: Climate Change

02/04/2013 12:33 PM

Are you watering the Aspens, Whitebarks, or Ponderosas?

If you aren't worried about the natural weather affecting the native trees which are a direct descendant of the climate then it isn't really that odd.

Imagine this on a larger scale, like a golf course owner in Palm Springs worried about a drought...kind of goes against reasoning.

I am not trying to be an ass here, like the OP implies, but the blaming the "climate" for the things which man has put into place being affected "negatively" by the weather...that just goes against the earth's natural system.

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Haverhill, MA
Posts: 1003
Good Answers: 121
#48

Re: Climate Change

02/02/2013 1:11 PM

Speaking of weather and climate, I just want to wish all of our members, around the world a happy Ground Hog Day

__________________
The older I am, the better I used to be
Register to Reply
Member

Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 6
#51

Re: Climate Change

02/02/2013 4:05 PM

I live in the mountains of Southern B.C., about 200 miles (ATCF- as the crow flies) from the West Coast. Again, last year, we had an extremely late spring, and the weather turned hot very quickly in July. Within a few weeks a neighboring town had the equivalent of a small tornado that uprooted and snapped hundreds of trees in that valley--something that older residents never remembered happening before. Then, in the fall the weather stayed incredibly warm, and we played golf at our local course up till December 5th, something that none of the older, or retired members remember ever being able to do.

Even in the 7 years that I have lived here I have seen many changes in the weather. The winters have become warmer and warmer for the past 4 years, but the spring is much later. Last summer we had unusual very intense rain storms that just pounded down for hours and hours.

Being newer to the area, I often ask "old-timers" if the weather is normal, as they remember it from their longer life here. Most all of them say that the weather is changing a lot--especially the warmer winters, later springs, and the later start of winter. My village, Midway, is at 2000 ft elev., about 1000 feet above Osoyoos B.C., in the very hot south Okanagan valley, that extends into Washington State. The next town to the east of us, Greenwood, is about 550 ft higher in elevation than my village, Midway. Even though this town is 1550 feet higher than the town of Osoyoos, it has begun to often have higher temperatures during the hot summer days than Osoyoos, which is often Canada's "Hot Spot". Elders in Greenwood cannot remember this phenomenon ever occurring.

I don't want to start a debate, either, about global warming, but I would like to share some logic. If my logic is flawed, please feel free to comment. I am not trying to state any opinion that is not based in fact, but am sharing only observations, and some speculation about our future.

In looking at pictures from vehicles orbiting the earth, and seeing how very thin the area containing the atmosphere is, in relation to the size of the planetary mass of the earth, I find it hard to believe that our activities on the planet are having no effect on global warming. That being said, I have seen documentaries about the ice age (s), when there were no fossil fuels being burned by humans, and these show the planet is capable of doing wondrous things. It is common knowledge that the majority of scientists agree that global warming is a reality.

What I ask myself is: "Who stands to gain the most by asserting whether humans are or aren't at least partially responsible for the increase in temperature?" "What do scientists stand to gain by asserting that we are?" vs "How much do corporations making money from carbon dioxide producing technologies stand to profit by denying that we are?"

Then, I would like to know if the scientists saying that we are, are supported, directly, or indirectly, by agencies or companies that support alternate technologies that are more carbon neutral, AND, if the scientists stating that we aren't, are in any way funded, directly, or indirectly, by companies involved in fossil fuel production,

Only as result of the accurate answering of those questions do I feel I can choose my answer, with any chance at accuracy.

As one very rational person suggested once: "Look at it this way. If global warming is happening with no help from ourselves, we still see the results. We can predict certain outcomes associated with polar ice melting, higher water levels in the oceans, drought and desertification, flooding, etc. We also can see the progression of rising temperatures from NASA heat mapping. So we know that there will be negative effects in the future if current trends continue. If we do nothing to change our technologies than we can have no effect on slowing down these phenomena associated with rising temperatures. So if we do nothing, we can extrapolate a certain result. However, if we do reduce our CO2 output, then we at least will have the opportunity to see if we can slow the process somewhat. If we continue, for several years, in this path, and find that the rate of global warming has declined, then we will know that it may be possible for us to slightly reduce the trend, or perhaps, even stop the trend of global warming. But doing nothing means that we will have to deal with the effects with no moderation, full on."

What do we really have to lose by slowing down our carbon dioxide production for a few years? Wouldn't if be worth seeing if we can effect the warming trend? Who knows, maybe we will gain more than we ever expected. The oil, gas, and coal will still be in the ground. So maybe profits will be down for a few years--can't we do without a few things and use a little restraint, for the possible better health of our planet? It isn't like we can just jump onto another one, and leave this one, with it's problems, behind us.

Maybe we could get along a little better, and stop fighting wars, and free up some of the monies that are spent on armaments around the world, to use for creating cleaner technologies that might have less harmful side effects on this wonderful home that we have been given. Our children's children may have kinder words to say, if we just try a little harder.

Register to Reply Off Topic (Score 5)
Guru

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1057
Good Answers: 111
#53
In reply to #51

Re: Climate Change

02/03/2013 12:01 AM

If my logic is flawed, please feel free to comment.


Your logic appears nearly flawless to me... but I will comment nevertheless.

It is common knowledge that the majority of scientists agree that global warming is a reality.

In fact, it is common knowledge (among educated people) that global warming is a reality and that the human-caused increases in CO2 levels are causing more rapid warming than would be the case without these higher levels. 90% of scientists believe that global warming is occurring, and 82% believe that human activities are accelerating warming. Among people who are not just educated, but educated in the sciences directly involved, 97% say that humans activities are contributing to global warming.

Arhenius, a brilliant scientist, Nobel prize winner, and the father of physical chemistry made remarkably accurate predictions of the effects of increasing CO2 levels almost 120 years ago. In recent history, as the models have become more sophisticated and more accurate, climate scientists have in a few decades gone from "most" supporting the currently accepted view to essentially "all."

Then there is the other side: Trillions of dollars are made from burning carbon-based fuels. So the energy companies benefit from spreading disinformation. The automotive industry benefits from the higher profits made on gas guzzlers vs economy cars. McMansions are more profitable than modest homes. Small wonder that there is still a strong push to discredit the science... and it is so easy to discredit science to a public stunningly ignorant of science. Even engineers, who at least learn a little science in school, are woefully uneducated re global warming. If you read the "debates" that have occurred at CR4 through the years, you will see that many CR4 engineers are oblivious to even the basics. And many will not let facts change their minds.

On one side of the issue we have college professors making $70,000- $100,000 per year. On the other side, we have the world's largest companies, in which executives are paid millions. That the message of the scientists has not been completely silenced is a small triumph of facts and science over politics and greed.

Maybe we could get along a little better, and stop fighting wars, and free up some of the monies that are spent on armaments around the world, to use for creating cleaner technologies that might have less harmful side effects on this wonderful home that we have been given. Our children's children may have kinder words to say, if we just try a little harder.

I could not agree more. And if history is a guide, developing the required technologies can be an economic boon. The fact that the Toyota Prius outsells every other car in California suggests that green cars can be good business. Peace and prosperity seem preferable to war and environmental destruction.

Odd to have to make that argument.

__________________
Think big. Drive small.
Register to Reply Off Topic (Score 6)
Guru

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: South of Minot North Dakota
Posts: 8399
Good Answers: 771
#54
In reply to #51

Re: Climate Change

02/03/2013 11:03 AM

So what about those of us who have studied up on all the theories and projections and feel that we have much to gain fit in?

The point is not everywhere and everything gets worse with warming many places stand to gain substantially from it as well!

I for one say bring the heat and I openly admit to doing everything I can within my convenience level to push my CO2 emissions up not down even though I have doubts that our collective human influences are anywhere near enough to matter in the long run being too many of our activities when weighed in against the shear volumes and numbers that nature tosses around in masses and energy levels leave what use puny humans do floating around in the smaller end of the +- aggregate of the natural levels and values.

Register to Reply
3
Power-User

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kentucky Lake
Posts: 396
Good Answers: 26
#57

Re: Climate Change

02/03/2013 5:16 PM

I for one, don't buy anything they use fear to sell. The carbon tax is just another tax. The only thing clear, is everyone will pay. Carbon credits, I consider a myth (as if anything would be left of the tax after it's been sifted through their sticky fingers). Carbon dioxide is not my enemy, unless of course it is the bases for a new tax. And the plants love it! I thought the Vostock ice cores proved that high carbon dioxide levels follow warming periods. High-resolution records from Antarctic ice cores show that carbon dioxide concentrations increased by 80 to 100 parts per million by volume 600 ± 400 years after the warming of the last three deglaciations. (There is no need for politicians riding on the backs of their environmentally concerned constituents to consider the relevance of the aforementioned scientific statement, as facts have little to do with their political agenda . Somebody spent a lot of money to get them elected to boost profits, not play "scientist". For everyone else, "How could global warming be attributed to the sun?" get your head out of the sand. The policies they are selling, through their 'End of the World is Nigh' outlet store are simply fear induced 'for profit' legislation. I don't think there is any other type of legislation anymore!)

The last two brutally hot summers coincided with increased solar insolation (c'mon spell checker get with the program). This year will be another hot one(sunburn)! The sun is currently ramping up once again to solar maximum, so flares and CMEs are more common than they were a few years ago. This cycle may peak in late 2013.... Where's the mystery in that? More accurately where's the potential revenue? Could we load them all up and send them off to "tax" the sun? Not likely, but it's fun to dream! So, this is definitely the year to push a vague, subjective, and convoluted AGW based carbon tax and once in place we will be paying it three quarters of the way through the next ice age!

Pssst, what you want to do is wait till late July, after people have been sweating it out for several week and before it has a chance to cool off. The media will do a fine job of reporting record high temperatures here and ice melting there, and basically getting everyone whipped up into a panic induced frenzy. Carefully neglect to mention that it is, duh, the sun, and BAM! a new tax is born. Here is another useful tip! If the actual laws are buried in volumes of "information" it will insure that no representative ever reads it.

I propose more accurate taxes on actual pollution, which is a very serious problem. It seems they would rather focus on benign carbon dioxide as a distraction, than deal with the life threatening problems. Therefor I propose the following taxes on solid waste, liquid effluents, and gaseous emissions....

Tributylin tax, Organochloride pesticide tax, Polybrominated diphenyl ethers tax, Pharmaceuticals (that make it through wastewater treatment) tax, Phosphorus tax, Atrazine tax, Acrolein tax, Polychlorinated biphenyls tax, Polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons tax, Dichlorodiphenyl trichloroethane tax, Cadmium tax, Zinc tax, Copper tax, Sulferdioxide tax, Mercury tax (retroactive), Lead tax, Chromium tax, Arsenic tax, Dioxins tax, Carbon monoxide (carbon dioxides evil cousin) tax, Formaldehyde tax, Nitrogen dioxide tax, (I could probably go on but the spell checker is getting hot) but we should probably throw in a nitrites tax and one for mono-sodium glutamate (sorry Chinese buffets) for good measure. This is just an attempt to list examples of actual pollution, but my point is carbon dioxide is a distraction and the least of our problems.

Life would not exist on this planet without carbon dioxide, but unfortunately, this is the only scientific word our politicians know how to pronounce, so we are faced with an economy crippling carbon tax while ignoring the pollution that our planet's inhabitants can't deal with.

Historically, global warming correlates with advancements in human civilization and precedes high carbon dioxide levels. The sun's cycles affect our weather and climate. There is no debate.

Oh, by the way the weather here is highly variable do to the fact we get everyone's leftover weather. My grandfather always remembered a time it was hotter, colder, rained more, a worse storm, longer drought, deeper snow, floods etc. One of the advantages of living 97 years is it puts things in perspective. I think that is what we need more of....... perspective.

Register to Reply Good Answer (Score 3)
Guru

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1057
Good Answers: 111
#58
In reply to #57

Re: Climate Change

02/04/2013 12:21 AM

You seem to have indiscriminately conflated science and politics.

You are welcome, of course, to hold whatever political views you want, but CR4 is not the place for political discussions.

The science you mention has little to do with "climate change" as the term is used in the news and scientific literature. The global warming that scientists speak of is a far longer process than the 11 year sunspot cycles. The contribution of that cycle would suggest that 2020 should be cooler than now... but that is not what scientists are worried about. They are concerned about long term effects.

Without an atmosphere, the earth's average temperature would be about 18 degrees below 0 C. That atmosphere and its greenhouse effect plays a major role in the earth's retention of heat from the sun. Insolation levels alone do not predict the sort of long term global warming we have been experiencing and are concerned about. The earth's temperature cannot be explained without taking into account the greenhouse effect and greenhouse gases such as CO2.

The greenhouse effect is very old, very well-proven science.

The OP has asked that this not be a debate about the causes of global warming, so I am posting this as off-topic.

__________________
Think big. Drive small.
Register to Reply
2
Power-User

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kentucky Lake
Posts: 396
Good Answers: 26
#59
In reply to #58

Re: Climate Change

02/04/2013 6:08 AM

I stand corrected on the politics. But conflated is not a good description of what I did. Science and politics are about as far apart and foreign to each other as I can possibly imagine. In fact their marked differences prohibit any possibility of conflation when you look at their mutually exclusive goals. Science is obtaining data to answer questions. Politics, well I guess I can't comment.

I also apologize if the science I mentioned has little to do with "climate change" as the term is used in the scientific literature here....

Air trapped in bubbles in polar ice cores constitutes an archive for the reconstruction of the global carbon cycle and the relation between greenhouse gases and climate in the past. High-resolution records from Antarctic ice cores show that carbon dioxide concentrations increased by 80 to 100 parts per million by volume 600 ± 400 years after the warming of the last three deglaciations. Despite strongly decreasing temperatures, high carbon dioxide concentrations can be sustained for thousands of years during glaciations; the size of this phase lag is probably connected to the duration of the preceding warm period, which controls the change in land ice coverage and the buildup of the terrestrial biosphere.

Ice Core Records of Atmospheric CO2 Around the Last Three Glacial Terminations

and here.....

The timing of the Maunder Minimum corresponded to what's called the Little Ice Age in Europe-a time of colder weather, heavier snowfall and the freezing of unusually large bodies of water such as the Thames and even the Baltic Sea. The Little Ice Age lasted longer than the Maunder Minimum, and there are other potential causes. Nevertheless it is believed by many scientists that the prolonged solar minima and its corresponding decrease in solar energy cooled Earth. Mapping out the details of how much the change in solar energy could have produced such an effect remains an unresolved area of research.

Solar Cycle Primer - NASA

I'm not really sure what I was thinking there. These articles talk about carbon dioxide levels increasing after global warming and the solar insolation levels affecting the temperature of the earth. I'm positive now that these have absolutely nothing to do with "climate change" as the term is used today.

I also apologize for the news media if the science I mentioned has little to do with "climate change" as the term is used in the news. True science would kill ratings. All they need is a catchy byline to get people to sit through a commercial. The "story", when it comes, is told at the 4th grade level.

"The global warming that scientists speak of is a far longer process than the 11 year sunspot cycles."

Glacial - interglacial periods of 25,000, 40,000 to 100,000 years, solar cycles of 11 years, the Milanković orbital forcing periods, albedo, the earth moving in and out of known dust bands, greenhouse gas feedback cycles, the rise of the Himalayas, the position of the continents, and many more factors have to be taken into consideration if one is to discuss CO2 levels as they relate to glaciological periods. In fact there are so many factors, that I have little confidence in their "models" ability to predict these long term effects. And even less confidence in their ability to determine causality. Supposedly, their models indicate CO2 causes interglacial periods, which directly contradicts the physical evidence, and that the human generated portion of this CO2 will be the cause of catastrophic climate change. Yes, this has me concerned. Pair that, with what we are experiencing now, during the peak of a solar cycle, mix in the media's fourth grade interpretation of the weather and finally (that thing we are not suppose to discuss) and it causes me a great deal of concern.

Obviously, "The greenhouse effect is very old, very well-proven science." But you never hear that water vapor is a far more powerful and influential greenhouse gas than CO2. This doesn't fit the agenda and therefor has 'little to do with "climate change" as the term is used'....... right? But it is in the scientific literature! Are there other things that we are not suppose to discuss in reference to climate change?

I guess if I said it was 71 degrees F on the 29th of Jan. last week that would be ok, and in the spirit of the OP's request, finally. That's some freaky weather for Jan. If I had an agenda, I would omit that it was 71 degrees F that same day in 1947 and also fail to mention the hundreds other days we have had, that the temperature was well within the means. People remember the outliers and attribute far more weight to them than they statistically deserve. This is human nature. And politics.

Register to Reply Good Answer (Score 2)
Guru
Safety - Hazmat - New Member United States - US - Statue of Liberty - New Member Engineering Fields - Chemical Engineering - Old Hand

Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Lubbock, Texas
Posts: 13882
Good Answers: 155
#61
In reply to #58

Re: Climate Change

02/04/2013 9:25 AM

Until such time as it is a proven fact (and it is not) that carbon dioxide build up is the primary cause of warming, then what you have is emotion, and not science.

The basic premise of science is too seek the truth, without any contravening politics. Re: Galileo's telescopic discoveries represent science, whilst his writings where he portayed the church as a simpleton represent emotion (politics). It was the writings that (while they were based on fact, i.e. Copernicanism) the emotional dynamite results in Galileo standing before the Inquisition.

Now we seem to be on the verge of a time where if one purports truth, he best be careful not to face the Inquisition (made up of the religion of greenhouse effect).

Can you indeed literally prove (or even support) anything about global warming without resorting to cookbooked data, pencil titrations, or other contrivances of falsification? If so, then let's see the data.

__________________
If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Just build a better one.
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1858
Good Answers: 42
#69
In reply to #61

Re: Climate Change

02/04/2013 12:50 PM

One would never be able to prove that Carbon Dioxide has the effects that one side of the fence wants to see unless one could completely remove CO from the equation and check the effects.

What we can do is model the earth's environment based on certain assumptions and work forward by looking at similar systems and evaluating the outcome based on the original assumptions and facts gathered. For example...why does it sometimes reach into the 60's (F) on Mars when it is so much further from the sun? CO levels are the most likely culprit since it appears to be such a huge greenhouse gas here on earth as well, and the Martian atmosphere is made up of 95% CO, determined by direct sampling.

What makes earth so warm? That's a great question which we have great answers for and requires no politics whatsoever.

There seems to be another factor here aside from scientists and politicians: those who question the obvious without fact or intelligent thought, making pure rhetoric and confusing the masses.

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1057
Good Answers: 111
#74
In reply to #61

Re: Climate Change

02/04/2013 5:34 PM

Until such time as it is a proven fact (and it is not) that carbon dioxide build up is the primary cause of warming, then what you have is emotion, and not science.

You are not using the word "science" as scientists use it. Very little of science has to do with facts. Although Newton's law of gravity works well for approximations, it says nothing about how gravity works. (The theory of general relativity provides some insights re space time curvature, but no theory of gravitation reconciles with the Standard Model.) Although we do not know the mechanism responsible for gravity, we can treat Newton's Law as "good enough" for most purposes: we act like it is a "fact".

The effects of CO2 as a greenhouse gas have been observed for more than 100 years, and Arhenius was essentially correct in his understanding -- there have been many replications, demonstrations of of the principals, and measurements taken from satellites to prove that he was correct. When I was taught about the greenhouse effect in the 1950's, the number of studies even back then was large enough that the greenhouse effect was taken as "fact" (as you seem to be using the term). In other words, just as an apple falls from a tree when its stem yields (a fact), so too greenhouse effect increases with increasing levels of CO2 in the atmosphere (a fact). (Obviously we are assuming that other gasses and particulates are held constant).

Arnhenius was the father of physical chemistry and his ideas about greenhouse gases are just as valid and fundamental to scientific understanding as his ideas about acids and bases.

Can you indeed literally prove (or even support) anything about global warming without resorting to cookbooked data, pencil titrations, or other contrivances of falsification? If so, then let's see the data.

Start here with the Wikipedia article, which seems to be in agreement with most of the science on the subject. If you have studies that show that key aspects of the Wikipedia article are incorrect, or if you have a study that shows that Arnhenius was wrong, then feel free to present them.

Next read about the feedback loops that come into play. If you hope to find some simplistic "It's the sunspots cycle!" or "It's the earth's distance from the sun!" or any of the other gross oversimplifications that the anti-science folks come up with, this article may be disappointing. Faux News is a great source for that drivel, however.

Now we seem to be on the verge of a time where if one purports truth, he best be careful not to face the Inquisition (made up of the religion of greenhouse effect).

Do you have evidence of this Inquisition? I cannot find any evidence that oil company CEOs are receiving death threats because of their views on climate change, but it is easy to find evidence that climatologists are.

__________________
Think big. Drive small.
Register to Reply Score 1 for Off Topic
Guru
Hobbies - Target Shooting - New Member Hobbies - Fishing - New Member

Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1066
Good Answers: 12
#114
In reply to #57

Re: Climate Change

02/08/2013 8:10 AM

Thanks for your contribution. I totally agree that generalized pollution is much more important than CO2 levels. There is no comparison. People complain about fracking even though there are many greater concerns that go by without much thought: pesticides, coal pollution with particulates, ash, mercury, siltation and nitrogen from farming, untreated sewage, pharmaceuticals etc.

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1057
Good Answers: 111
#119
In reply to #114

Re: Climate Change

02/08/2013 4:06 PM

I totally agree that generalized pollution is much more important than CO2 levels. There is no comparison. People complain about fracking even though there are many greater concerns...


The issue with fracking is not CO2 -- in fact, power generation using natural gas causes about half the CO2 emissions per kWh as caused by using coal. The issue with fracking is closer to the "greater concerns" you mention, such as pollution of local drinking water supplies.


... that go by without much thought: pesticides, coal pollution with particulates, ash, mercury, siltation and nitrogen from farming, untreated sewage, pharmaceuticals etc.


There is not one issue in the list that is news to anyone vaguely aware of environmental issues. Local environmental groups have railed against all these and many more for decades. The fundamental difference with CO2 is that (for example) China's CO2 emissions affect everyone in the world: the effect is global rather than local.

__________________
Think big. Drive small.
Register to Reply
Guru
Hobbies - Target Shooting - New Member Hobbies - Fishing - New Member

Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1066
Good Answers: 12
#124
In reply to #119

Re: Climate Change

02/08/2013 7:19 PM

So we agree that displacing coal use with natural gas is a good thing, though not as disirable with a perfectly green solution? I support best practices in fracking, but it is what is making replacing coal possible, for now. Wind and solar etc. cannot do it alone.

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1057
Good Answers: 111
#131
In reply to #124

Re: Climate Change

02/09/2013 10:36 AM

I agree entirely.

__________________
Think big. Drive small.
Register to Reply
Guru
United Kingdom - Member - Not a New Member Hobbies - Musician - New Member Hobbies - Fishing - New Member

Join Date: May 2006
Location: Reading, Berkshire, UK. Going under cover.
Posts: 9580
Good Answers: 457
#60

Re: Climate Change

02/04/2013 6:35 AM

2000 was the wettest year on record in England, with 2012 second-wettest (6.6mm short of the 2000 figure).

2006 was the warmest year on record, with 2011 the runner-up.

__________________
"Love justice, you who rule the world" - Dante Alighieri
Register to Reply
Power-User

Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 260
Good Answers: 7
#62

Re: Climate Change

02/04/2013 10:05 AM

I think the climatologists do more than look at the last 100 years to determine the climate is changing. I believe they drill core samples in ice and study other things to look at the climate over tens of thousands of years, if not more. They understand the natural cycles, and they know when the Earth is not following a natural cycle. I'll put my money with them.

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: South of Minot North Dakota
Posts: 8399
Good Answers: 771
#63
In reply to #62

Re: Climate Change

02/04/2013 11:28 AM

Would that be the same climatologists that now want the mid evil warming period and the little ice age reclassified as long term weather anomalies opposed to natural climatic variations even though they encompassed 300 - 400 years each from the points where they went above or below the statistical average mean temps yet want the lat 40 - 50 years or so of variances to be labeled climatic change?

Just asking?

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1858
Good Answers: 42
#70
In reply to #63

Re: Climate Change

02/04/2013 12:52 PM

"Mid evil"...

Your Freudian slip is showing.

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: South of Minot North Dakota
Posts: 8399
Good Answers: 771
#73
In reply to #70

Re: Climate Change

02/04/2013 3:52 PM

Nah. The spell check here insisted and I was too lazy and didn't double check it in proper reading context.

Register to Reply
Power-User

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kentucky Lake
Posts: 396
Good Answers: 26
#64
In reply to #62

Re: Climate Change

02/04/2013 11:29 AM

We have dust, CO2, and temperature data from Vostock for the last 400,000 years, indicating global warming precedes higher CO2 levels.

We have additional ice core data from Concordia station, and Kohnen station. This is where they keep all the data from those ice cores. Yes, I know. 404 not found. Anyone know where to find the data on Concordia and Kohnen ice cores?

We have sediment records showing the fluctuating sequences of glacials and interglacials during the last five million years. The fluctuations have been of an increasingly greater amplitude for the last few million years.

And we have "climatologist" models.

Register to Reply
2
Guru
Hobbies - DIY Welding - Wannabeabettawelda

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Annapolis, Maryland
Posts: 4207
Good Answers: 237
#65

Re: Climate Change

02/04/2013 12:07 PM

The problem with this is that when you ask if someone has odd weather, chances are they have experienced it. But what is 'odd'? Since people have become hyper-sensitized to climate change, they are more inclined to jump to all kinds of conclusions when the weather happens to swing. For instance, the drought the U.S. experienced last year was a whole bunch of fodder for the AGW folks. But in reality it had very little to do with the 0.01 degree warming of the earth from the previous year, and very much to do with the vagaries of the jet streams. Jet stream patterns cause all kinds of havoc or lack thereof for the U.S. and other nations as well.

The chicken littles love to run around spouting about how severe the weather events have become, but in reality, there is little statistical evidence to support it. When I reviewed hurricane data the number of severe storms experienced per year on the U.S. has not changed significantly over the last hundred years or so.

We have just been made hyper-aware of the weather. Are we warming? Absolutely. I've seen the reduction in snowfall over the northeast U.S. over my lifetime. Are we worse off because of it? I'm not sure. I do know that people are burning less oil/natural gas/electricity to keep warm. Growing seasons are getting longer. I know I forward a view that is very unpopular with those on the tip of the AGW movement and will certainly get my share of criticism but I will retain a healthy dose of skepticism in the face of all of it. Yeah, I'm a denier, flat-earther, whatever. There's many of us out there, we're just not as vocal.

This really boils down to politics. That is the ability to exert power over people.

Register to Reply Good Answer (Score 2)
Guru
Popular Science - Cosmology - Let's keep knowledge expanding Engineering Fields - Instrumentation Engineering - New Member Engineering Fields - Software Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Colorado, USA
Posts: 3317
Good Answers: 82
#71
In reply to #65

Re: Climate Change

02/04/2013 2:15 PM

Where did you get the figure of 0.01 deg warming? The news media here reported that it increased nearly 1 deg in 2012. Can you refute that with a non biased site?

Register to Reply
Guru
Safety - Hazmat - New Member United States - US - Statue of Liberty - New Member Engineering Fields - Chemical Engineering - Old Hand

Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Lubbock, Texas
Posts: 13882
Good Answers: 155
#72
In reply to #71

Re: Climate Change

02/04/2013 3:12 PM

Which news media? I don't trust anyone, especially if their mouth is moving...

__________________
If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Just build a better one.
Register to Reply
Guru
Hobbies - DIY Welding - Wannabeabettawelda

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Annapolis, Maryland
Posts: 4207
Good Answers: 237
#78
In reply to #71

Re: Climate Change

02/04/2013 11:17 PM

I was wrong. The figure, properly rounded should have been 0.02 degrees C. The news media cherry picks their data to suit their agendas. In Colorado, the bias from the media will be particularly acute. Would you consider NOAA to be an unbiased site??

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/2012/6

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cmb-faq/temperature-monitoring.html

Since 1880 the average temperature has risen at different rates, but the worst-case slope is about 1.6 degrees C per CENTURY.

The information is out there. It takes all of 15 minutes to find it. (Or less if you're really good.) I've often wondered how long it will take the general public (if ever) to get really angry at the intelligentsia who have been selectively reporting data on the whole climate change business.

Those who dare to challenge the party line are summarily shouted down and called all manner of names. Again, I will point out that the earth has been warming. To what extent is actually caused by man is of course subject to much debate.

It is with great hubris that people believe they understand unequivocally a massively large system with many thousands of degrees of freedom. As engineers, we have trouble with system analysis with four or five degrees of freedom.

I am no way disparaging the research by many hundreds or thousands of scientists, as they have been working very hard to understand this beast we call our Earth, but it is at best an estimate based upon a necessarily truncated model.

My concern is that many wish to run head-long into rather draconian measures to 'fix' our climate. We are not on a precipice, ready to go off the edge. We have time, time to continue to study, time to make incremental changes, time to adjust to our world as it changes, as it has been changing for all known time.

Cheers !

Register to Reply
Guru
Popular Science - Cosmology - Let's keep knowledge expanding Engineering Fields - Instrumentation Engineering - New Member Engineering Fields - Software Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Colorado, USA
Posts: 3317
Good Answers: 82
#95
In reply to #78

Re: Climate Change

02/06/2013 11:07 AM

Thanks for the links. I wasn't criticising your data. From the first link:

  • The average combined global land and ocean surface temperature for June 2012 was 0.63°C (1.13°F) above the 20th century average of 15.5°C (59.9°F). This is the fourth warmest June since records began in 1880.
  • The Northern Hemisphere land surface temperature for June 2012 was the all-time warmest June on record, at 1.30°C (2.34°F) above average.
  • The globally-averaged land surface temperature for June 2012 was also the all-time warmest June on record, at 1.07°C (1.93°F) above average.
  • ENSO-neutral conditions continued in the eastern equatorial Pacific Ocean during June 2012 as sea surface temperature anomalies continued to rise. The June worldwide ocean surface temperatures ranked as the 10thwarmest June on record.
  • The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for January-June 2012 was the 11th warmest on record, at 0.52°C (0.94°F) above the 20th century average.

It seems that the news media took the June data and applied it to the entire year. One has to wonder who paid them to do that. The data shows how different it can be (normally) from one year to another.

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1057
Good Answers: 111
#96
In reply to #95

Re: Climate Change

02/06/2013 12:11 PM

One has to wonder who paid them to do that.


Let me think. Exxon is one of several very large energy companies which benefit dramatically from increasing the use of fuels that accelerate global warming. They take in as much revenue in 24 minutes as The Union of Concerned Scientists does in a year. (In a year, Exxon Mobil takes in about 22,000 times as much money as the Union of Concerned scientists.)


Looked at in another way, Exxon Mobil had $486.4 billion in revenue in 2011. Had they completely funded The Union of Concerned Scientists from that revenue, their remaining revenue would have been $486.4 billion... no visible change. To them, the Union's budget is a rounding error. (If only this were an exaggeration... but it is not.)


The loudest mouthpiece for the oil industry interests is Fox news. Several studies have shown that prolonged viewing of Fox news actually makes people dumber (less able to answer simple questions about current events and science). Small wonder that misinformation is so broadly and easily spread.

__________________
Think big. Drive small.
Register to Reply
Guru
Popular Science - Evolution - New Member Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member

Join Date: May 2006
Location: The 'Space Coast', USA
Posts: 11172
Good Answers: 921
#97
In reply to #96

Re: Climate Change

02/06/2013 12:34 PM

"Several studies have shown that prolonged viewing of Fox news actually makes people dumber"

What studies?

Not that I am a Fox fan or even watch or visit their web sites, that kind of rhetoric smacks of junk science.

However, if you want a real challenge, find a news organization that does not have their own agenda (left, right, up, or down) and bias their broadcasts to support it.

Register to Reply Score 1 for Good Answer
Guru

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1057
Good Answers: 111
#98
In reply to #97

Re: Climate Change

02/06/2013 3:13 PM

I like this lead in paragraph from a Rolling Stone article:

  • "It's not exactly a revelation that Fox News viewers are spectacularly ill informed about current events compared to people who watch other networks. But according to a recent report, the Fox audience knows less even than folks who don't watch any news at all."

The study they reference is this one from Fairleigh Dickinson.

It confirmed an earlier study for which a link is provided from the link above.

A yet earlier study from University of Maryland found that Fox viewers are at the bottom of the heap in understanding what's going on around them.

I agree that it is hard to find a news organization without an agenda. In TV news, I perceive the spread to have widened dramatically from the 60's until now. Then, all three networks were only slightly to the right of center. Now Fox is miles to the right, and there is no counterpart as far to the left.

In magazines, things have not changed as much, (in my perception). In 1960, there was a very slight spread between Time and Newsweek, with Time being just slightly more conservative. This slight spread still exists.

In TV, polarity helps drive up viewership, so we get sound bites that appeal mainly to emotion rather than to intellect. If we think (stereotypically) of the left favoring peace, love, communalism and compassion, and the right favoring war, hatred, competition, and self-reliance, then the left is at a disadvantage on TV: they can't say much that makes your blood boil. This means that the competitive, belligerent style of Limbaugh and O'Reilly wins more viewers. If it bleeds it leads.

The local and national news that many see on TV each night can be encapsulated into about three minutes of reading. The rest is dramatic fluff. Weather reporting (which could be done in about 20 seconds) has become mainly a show. The dreary facts of global warming require hours and hours of reading, so most people know only what can be delivered in a sound bite. If you watch Fox, anthropogenic global warming is all a hoax, perpetrated by commy pinko college professors. If there were a pro-science network which had (paradoxically) freedom from the constraints of integrity and freedom from the need for detailed discussions (that have to go along with scientific reporting) then they could be saying "The sky is warming! The sky is warming! Your children are going to be swept away by hurricanes!" Science reporting is at an incredible disadvantage, especially in a country so far down the list in basic science knowledge.

Unfortunately, anything repeated often enough starts to sound like the truth.

__________________
Think big. Drive small.
Register to Reply Off Topic (Score 5)
Guru
Popular Science - Evolution - New Member Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member

Join Date: May 2006
Location: The 'Space Coast', USA
Posts: 11172
Good Answers: 921
#99
In reply to #98

Re: Climate Change

02/06/2013 3:58 PM

"I perceive the spread to have widened dramatically from the 60's until now."

That is my perception, too. Part of my reason for ditching TV.

"Then, all three networks were only slightly to the right of center. Now Fox is miles to the right, and there is no counterpart as far to the left."

MSNBC comes to the top of the left list, but CNN, CBS, NBC, and just about any others you can think of are right along.

Register to Reply Off Topic (Score 5)
Guru

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1057
Good Answers: 111
#102
In reply to #99

Re: Climate Change

02/06/2013 11:59 PM

MSNBC comes to the top of the left list, but CNN, CBS, NBC, and just about any others you can think of are right along.


I think of CNN as being dead center and MSNBC somewhat left of center. But it is a matter of perspective, and yours is every bit as good as mine. In fact, I haven't watched either CNN or MSNBC for quite a while. The PBS news hour seems to offer greater depth and less shouting than the rest.

There are one or two drama shows on PBS that I try to catch, and some of the network sitcoms and cop shows can be entertaining, but by and large, it's a wasteland.


The Week is my favorite news magazine -- it packs a lot into a small package, and seems to make a real effort at presenting both sides of each issue.

__________________
Think big. Drive small.
Register to Reply Off Topic (Score 5)
Guru
Hobbies - Target Shooting - New Member Hobbies - Fishing - New Member

Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1066
Good Answers: 12
#160
In reply to #99

Re: Climate Change

02/11/2013 6:41 PM

There are left wing cable news channesl, they just don't draw many viewers. Try Current TV, Al Jazeera etc.

Register to Reply Off Topic (Score 5)
Guru
Popular Science - Cosmology - Let's keep knowledge expanding Engineering Fields - Instrumentation Engineering - New Member Engineering Fields - Software Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Colorado, USA
Posts: 3317
Good Answers: 82
#103
In reply to #98

Re: Climate Change

02/07/2013 12:03 PM

Is it only Fox news viewers that are uninformed? They all are cr*p. This morning on CBS, they had an Alzheimer's "expert". He said "If you can't remember what you have forgotten, that's when you need to be concerned." Well I can't remember forgetting anything. Should I be concerned?

Register to Reply Off Topic (Score 5)
Guru

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1057
Good Answers: 111
#106
In reply to #103

Re: Climate Change

02/07/2013 3:48 PM

I was going to reply, but I forgot what you wrote.

I've often thought I would like to relive parts of my life, but with my current perspective and knowledge base. I wonder if I am just more cynical than I was 40-45 years ago, but back then, News seemed more about delivering the facts and less about creating drama. One of our local stations has a "Wizometer" which rates upcoming weather on a 1-10 scale... as if the viewer is too stupid to figure out whether a given prediction is good or bad.

__________________
Think big. Drive small.
Register to Reply Off Topic (Score 5)
Guru
Hobbies - Target Shooting - New Member Hobbies - Fishing - New Member

Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1066
Good Answers: 12
#134
In reply to #97

Re: Climate Change

02/09/2013 12:54 PM

Let me know when you find one.

Register to Reply
Guru
Hobbies - Target Shooting - New Member Hobbies - Fishing - New Member

Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1066
Good Answers: 12
#113
In reply to #95

Re: Climate Change

02/08/2013 7:59 AM

Do you think that the heat island effect of cities where temps are taken could throw off these figures, or is that carefully controlled for? I have seen gauges on rooftops of large buildings, and next to asphalt roads. Didn't have so many of those in 1880. I trust sea level changes much more.

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: South of Minot North Dakota
Posts: 8399
Good Answers: 771
#75

Re: Climate Change

02/04/2013 6:32 PM

So does anyone want to discus how water vapor influences the greenhouse effects or how long term solar high and low cycles beyond the 11 year and 22 years cycles play in with all of this?

Long term solar cycle theories suggest ~200, ~500, ~2300 - 2500, 6000 year long term cycles as well.

--------------------

"Hypothesized cycles

Periodicity of solar activity with periods longer than the sunspot cycle has been proposed. Some of these proposed longer cycles include:

  • 87 years (70-100 years): Gleissberg cycle, named after Wolfgang Gleißberg, is thought to be an amplitude modulation of the 11-year Schwabe Cycle (Sonnett and Finney, 1990),[31] Braun, et al., (2005).[32]
  • 210 years: Suess cycle (a.k.a. "de Vries cycle"). Braun, et al., (2005).[32]
  • 2,300 years: Hallstatt cycle[33][34]
  • 6000 years (Xapsos and Burke, 2009).[35]

Other patterns have been detected:

  • In carbon-14: 105, 131, 232, 385, 504, 805, 2,241 years (Damon and Sonnett, 1991).
  • During the Upper Permian 240 million years ago, mineral layers created in the Castile Formation show cycles of 2,500 years.

The sensitivity of climate to cyclical variations in solar forcing will be higher for longer cycles due to the thermal inertia of the oceans, which acts to damp high frequencies. Using a phenomenological approach, Scafetta and West (2005) found that the climate is 1.5 times as sensitive to 22-year cyclical forcing relative to 11-year cyclical forcing, and that the thermal inertia of the oceans induces a lag of approximately 2.2 (± 2) years in cyclic climate response in the temperature data.[36] "

-----------------------

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_variation

The point is our sun is nowhere near perfectly stable and unchanging nor has it been or eve will be. If anything we should be thankful it is as stable as it is and has been for as long as it has and to think that it plus water vapor have no effect or far less influence than man made CO2.... Well whatever. .

Register to Reply
Power-User

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Kentucky Lake
Posts: 396
Good Answers: 26
#79
In reply to #75

Re: Climate Change

02/04/2013 11:31 PM

I'll discuss water vapor, if you will just let me tell you about my idea for the "Methane Initiative".

I propose a systematic reduction in the amount of refried beans on burritos, and a tax on broccoli kinda like they have on gasoline now.

By the way, what's up with you guys up there not sharing? According to the wikipedia page on global warming, you guys are gonna have these bountiful harvest, while the lower latitudes will be malnourished.

Tell me it's not true! Hopefully, this is just more disinformation. Or possibly their climate models don't have little trucks that move things from one place to another. No, that can't be it. What kind of climate model wouldn't have little virtual trucks driving around spewing out diesel fumes?

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: South of Minot North Dakota
Posts: 8399
Good Answers: 771
#80
In reply to #79

Re: Climate Change

02/05/2013 12:54 AM

Our plans are to keep the bountiful harvests to ourselves being that even with a 10 C gain year round we would still have 6 months out of the year thats frigging cold here and we need the extra food to keep our energy levels up while we collect all the frozen malnourished southerners that wander up here to burn for firewood.

Just remember that when all this climate change gobbledy gook hits the fan us mid westerners will still be calling it typical weather by our standards. -50 F to 125 F every year and winds under 100 MPH is still what we call day to day normal weather here!

Register to Reply
Guru
Safety - Hazmat - New Member United States - US - Statue of Liberty - New Member Engineering Fields - Chemical Engineering - Old Hand

Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Lubbock, Texas
Posts: 13882
Good Answers: 155
#83
In reply to #75

Re: Climate Change

02/05/2013 10:02 AM

For that matter, the earth's spin axis precesses at a slow rate, isn't that about 20K years?

__________________
If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Just build a better one.
Register to Reply
Guru
Popular Science - Cosmology - Let's keep knowledge expanding Engineering Fields - Instrumentation Engineering - New Member Engineering Fields - Software Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Colorado, USA
Posts: 3317
Good Answers: 82
#76

Re: Climate Change

02/04/2013 7:38 PM

JPool, did you really think you could bring this up again without causing a debate?

"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein

Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/a/alberteins133991.html#ctm4iDrIf3WakQ5J.99

Register to Reply
Register to Reply Page 1 of 2: « First 1 2 Next > Last »
Interested in this topic? By joining CR4 you can "subscribe" to
this discussion and receive notification when new comments are added.

Comments rated to be Good Answers:

These comments received enough positive ratings to make them "good answers".

Comments rated to be "almost" Good Answers:

Check out these comments that don't yet have enough votes to be "official" good answers and, if you agree with them, rate them!
Copy to Clipboard

Users who posted comments:

Anonymous Hero (8); Barchetta (13); Brave Sir Robin (2); cuba_pete (11); dhayanandhan (1); DogOfWar (1); Envelope Guy (4); europium (3); ffej (1); gmphadte (1); gringogreg (6); IdeaSmith (1); James Stewart (4); JohnDG (4); JPool (15); K_Fry (25); kramarat (15); lyn (1); marcot (1); MikeMack747 (1); MOBI (1); ozzb (1); phoenix911 (1); pnaban (3); RAMConsult (1); redfred (17); Rixter (1); ronwagn (22); snewkirk (1); SolarEagle (2); StandardsGuy (6); swanterky (1); tcmtech (9); Usbport (2); walt (1); WingNut (2)

Previous in Forum: Unknown Future   Next in Forum: Full Vacuum (FV) Design Pressure

Advertisement