[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by fdpaq0580

Don't know if it would be called a field trip, but they are definitely "trippin'".

You no longer can take a "field" trip, since the word field was banned by the USC social work college as "racist". You may however call it a "practicum trip"

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

Interesting. Totally wrong, but interesting.

From 21,000 BC to 11,000 BC the average global temperature rose 7 degrees F, much faster than recent weather records indicate for the last 120 years

In addition, during the same time period, ocean levels rose 432 feet. In the last 120 years those levels rose 8 inches. This is a current rate of 6.7 inches/century as opposed to 4.32 feet/century. So much for human activity causing warming or ocean levels to rise.

What's "unprecedented" is the media and government hype over a myth

???

From your numbers, the temperature rose approximately 0.07 degrees fahrenheit per century. The data I can find shows the temperature rising at about 1.4 degrees fahrenheit per century since 1880 (about 2 degrees total).

I searched on "temperature rise over last 120 years" to find the data I used, what did you use to find data that showed much less than a 0.07 degree increase?


Discussing sea level rise will take more time than I am willing to spend. Some data points I found:
- The 432ft rise was from 21,000 years ago to about 3,000 years ago
- At the end of the 432 ft rise the seas were at their current level which means there was a great deal more ice to melt in those 18,000 years than there is now
- While 8" over 120 years seems correct it is important to know that half of that was over the last 30 years indicating the rate of sea level rise is increasing
- The seas will not rise another 432 ft (not enough ice) but at a rate of more than one foot per century and increasing, sea level rise could be a big problem not too long from now

[fdpaq0580]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

You no longer can take a "field" trip, since the word field was banned by the USC social work college as "racist". You may however call it a "practicum trip"

"Practicum" sounds nasty to me. Like some body part one should not mention in polite company. I ban it in favor of "journey of investigation".

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

Not sure what your point is. From the article (you have to read past the headline to find this):

There is one caveat. Well-known changes in Earth's orbit caused warming during the early Holocene and Last Interglacial periods. Today, warming stems from man-made sources and is happening much faster than warming during those interglacial periods. That means there is a chance that Earth might not respond to current-day warming in the same way.

"Past climate is our best analog for future warming, and our results hint that land at these very high latitudes in the Arctic may warm even more than predicted in the coming century," Axford said. "But nothing in Earth's past is a perfect analog because what's happening today is totally unprecedented."

Great post......there IS more to an article than the headline, especially scientific articles. Seems that some people quote only what agrees with their point of view. And I would like to know the WHY behind the spreading of misinformation. One thing.....I notice is that the older demographics-types here in TV Land seem to respond well to propaganda that they are getting from SOME source. I also wonder WHAT source?

[fdpaq0580]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

Great post......there IS more to an article than the headline, especially scientific articles. Seems that some people quote only what agrees with their point of view. And I would like to know the WHY behind the spreading of misinformation. One thing.....I notice is that the older demographics-types here in TV Land seem to respond well to propaganda that they are getting from SOME source. I also wonder WHAT source?

I bet you could make a really good guess.

[sounding]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

???

From your numbers, the temperature rose approximately 0.07 degrees fahrenheit per century. The data I can find shows the temperature rising at about 1.4 degrees fahrenheit per century since 1880 (about 2 degrees total).

I searched on "temperature rise over last 120 years" to find the data I used, what did you use to find data that showed much less than a 0.07 degree increase?


Discussing sea level rise will take more time than I am willing to spend. Some data points I found:
- The 432ft rise was from 21,000 years ago to about 3,000 years ago
- At the end of the 432 ft rise the seas were at their current level which means there was a great deal more ice to melt in those 18,000 years than there is now
- While 8" over 120 years seems correct it is important to know that half of that was over the last 30 years indicating the rate of sea level rise is increasing
- The seas will not rise another 432 ft (not enough ice) but at a rate of more than one foot per century and increasing, sea level rise could be a big problem not too long from now

Sea level rise is not a problem for those who study past climates -- which shows seas naturally go up and down. History shows that those who choose to live in Mother Nature's sand box (the seashore) during sea level rise will eventually suffer. Here's more on climate history ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=folh5yyFyl8

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

???

From your numbers, the temperature rose approximately 0.07 degrees fahrenheit per century. The data I can find shows the temperature rising at about 1.4 degrees fahrenheit per century since 1880 (about 2 degrees total).

I searched on "temperature rise over last 120 years" to find the data I used, what did you use to find data that showed much less than a 0.07 degree increase?


Discussing sea level rise will take more time than I am willing to spend. Some data points I found:
- The 432ft rise was from 21,000 years ago to about 3,000 years ago
- At the end of the 432 ft rise the seas were at their current level which means there was a great deal more ice to melt in those 18,000 years than there is now
- While 8" over 120 years seems correct it is important to know that half of that was over the last 30 years indicating the rate of sea level rise is increasing
- The seas will not rise another 432 ft (not enough ice) but at a rate of more than one foot per century and increasing, sea level rise could be a big problem not too long from now

Well, whether it be a 10,000 or 18,000 year period to rise 432 feet, I'm sure in those 100-180 centuries there were periods where the rise was more in a 30 year period than the other 70, which of course means that an increase in the rate of rise was followed by a decrease. Again, we are talking hundreds of thousands of year cycles over the last 4 1/2 million years of the current ice age. The last 30 years is not reflective of anything---we simply don't have enough data over a long enough period to know.

[Two Bills]

Originally Posted by sounding

That's very true -- for those who believe the world began in 1884. For those who study legitimate climate change, there are numerous studies showing just the opposite. Here's just one ... Ancient Greenland was much warmer than previously thought

As you base your whole cooling argument on this thread on 7 years of 'DATA, 200+ years of records showing the opposite, would seem to me, to make your claim somewhat shaky.

[sounding]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

Great post......there IS more to an article than the headline, especially scientific articles. Seems that some people quote only what agrees with their point of view. And I would like to know the WHY behind the spreading of misinformation. One thing.....I notice is that the older demographics-types here in TV Land seem to respond well to propaganda that they are getting from SOME source. I also wonder WHAT source?

From "experts" of course ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6BjSkuYPQw

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by Two Bills

As you base your whole cooling argument on this thread on 7 years of 'DATA, 200+ years of records showing the opposite, would seem to me, to make your claim somewhat shaky.

Likewise, 200 years of records vs. 4 1/2 million years of the current ice age make that claim "shaky" as well.

[sounding]

Originally Posted by Two Bills

As you base your whole cooling argument on this thread on 7 years of 'DATA, 200+ years of records showing the opposite, would seem to me, to make your claim somewhat shaky.

What's to argue? The data shows the last 7 years of (atmospheric and oceanic) temperatures shows slight cooling. It's called data, which shows CO2 is NOT a control knob. So ... why the 7-year cooling trend?

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by sounding

What's to argue? The data shows the last 7 years of (atmospheric and oceanic) temperatures shows slight cooling. It's called data, which shows CO2 is NOT a control knob. So ... why the 7-year cooling trend?

Temperature graph misrepresented to deny climate change | AP News

And also post #67 on the other thread.

[Two Bills]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

Likewise, 200 years of records vs. 4 1/2 million years of the current ice age make that claim "shaky" as well.

4 1/2 million years?
Now we are going back before even my time!
200 years of records still beats 7 to show a trend in my book.
The planet is getting warmer without a doubt. Even in my short time in the world, the climate has changed.
Man made?
I lean on the 'not' side in that argument, but the jury is still out on that discussion, and none of the opinionated on TOTV will ever hear the official verdict.

[sounding]

Originally Posted by Two Bills

4 1/2 million years?
Now we are going back before even my time!
200 years of records still beats 7 to show a trend in my book.
The planet is getting warmer without a doubt. Even in my short time in the world, the climate has changed.
Man made?
I lean on the 'not' side in that argument, but the jury is still out on that discussion, and none of the opinionated on TOTV will ever hear the official verdict.

Why the 7-year cooling trend?

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by sounding

Why the 7-year cooling trend?

Originally Posted by Bill14564

Temperature graph misrepresented to deny climate change | AP News

And also post #67 on the other thread.

...