A Question of Weather Quiz - Weather Explanations | Environment | 10 Questions

A little introduction to science and weather from FunTrivia. Which probably has scientists writing some Quizzes.

Kool aid is for kids. My cup is glass and holds a total of 25 yo single malt.........when the mood strikes

Now you're making sense!:wine:

:blahblahblah: :blahblahblah: :blahblahblah: :sigh: :loco:

I knew I liked you!

Hey, anyone who likes 25 year old single malt scotch can’t be all that bad. Besides, it’s not like anyone on this thread will be around to see who wins the climate change debate. And if the flood waters come in the very near future, I’ll toast your win as we float in the SS Villages lifeboat

[QUOTE=golfing eagles;2243286][QUOTE=rustyp;2243277]:a20:



"To question whether human activity has anything to do with it". Well, there is a simple answer to that - 99% of Climate Scientists say that human activity IS causing Global Warming. That is enough for me. There are also observable reasons to believe this. One obvious thing that is hard to avoid is that the absolute temperature right here today is close to 100 deg F. July was officially determined to be the world's hottest since records were 1st kept. Living coral are down to 10% in recent years - they are 90% dead and next year will be warmer, and the next for at least 7 more years and the ocean CO2 content and the upper atmosphere WILL continue to INCREASE.
And WHY you may ask has this happened? World population has doubled in recent years. More people equals more Internal Combustion engines in cars and industrial use. Therefore, more fossil fuel use, therefore more CO2 released. Trees and plants absorb CO2, but the greater world population requires more and more trees to be cut down. Think about the Amazon rainforest becoming more like a desert. All these changes have INCREASED more rapidly than even Climate Scientists were predicting. Now, rapid changes have happened in the last 10 years.

The science seems fairly clear-cut with this matter. Cannot see why it would be even controversial.

[QUOTE=jimjamuser;2243748][QUOTE=golfing eagles;2243286]

Are we onto scotch now ? Pardon me while I light a fire in the fireplace tonight and take a sip to offset the chill. High today of 72 degrees F. I'll need to ponder on what a SS Village lifeboat is. Women and children first.

[QUOTE=Taltarzac725;2243749]The science seems fairly clear-cut with this matter. Cannot see why it would be even controversial.

[QUOTE=jimjamuser;2243748]Sorry. It's all alarmism ... just like the little ice age scare of the 1970s. We are still in a 9-year cooling trend ...

If we (the USA) could theoretically stop all greenhouse emissions, it would help the world a lot. maybe enough to save the coral reefs and decrease the heat reflection from the HEAT DOME of CO2 in the upper atmosphere. After all, we are the # 1 GNP country in the world with the most cars and trucks, not India and China.
I only hope for a 30% decrease in emissions from the US when (in about 4 years) new car sales of electric vehicles become 30% as predicted. Also, E-bike usage would increase. And in a more perfect world, the US government would encourage the purchase of Electric golf cars and buy back and dispose of ICE golf cars. A more perfect and quieter world.

[QUOTE=jimjamuser;2243748][QUOTE=golfing eagles;2243286]You can repeat that bogus 99% number over and over again until the cows come home, but it is still a lie

The money SAVED by climate change investment would be be greater than just the increased A/C usage as the planet warms increasingly in the next 7 years. The heat domes over the US medium and large cities COSTS citizens large amounts of money. Heat increases crime. Heat increases mental problems. Heat causes workers to be less efficient and take more breaks. Heat increases physical and medical problems for citizens.
Every time a US citizen buys an E-vehicle, they are being patriotic and helping the US with what is becoming its biggest problem.

The story about the University Climatologist is an N of one statistically, even if true. The latest statistics that I have read said that over 99% of Climatologists agree with Global Warming. That is amazing and total agreement that man-made warming is a FACT.

Do I have to start a count of how many times you repeat that 99% lie?

It is not nonsense that GM expects that 30% of their new vehicle sales to be ELECTRIC. The rest of the post can be disagreed with, but is not nonsense.

The 1930's was a whole different world. What was the population of the US.......maybe 60 million people. What was the world population.........not enough to cause global warming. Most Americans were farmers and had no mental problems caused by heat and overcrowding in cities.

The 99% was simply the last that I read on the subject. How about if I have an assignment to read up on the subject to verify the %? And others can read about the horrendous bleaching of the coral reefs caused by the CO2 increase in the oceans. And others can research the CO2 increases in recent years in the upper atmosphere.
Incidentally, the HEAT related increased mental problems in the US is written about in today's NY Times.

The coral reefs are at an all time high over the past 37 years -- thanks to increasing CO2 and global warming. They need CO2 to grow their protective reefs. Corals were much more diverse when the the climate was warmer with higher CO2 levels. Plus they love warm water -- which is why they live mostly along the equator.

It would be better if you cited a reputable review that disputed it.

But sure, 99% is probably not accurate. It could be 98.6% or 99.2% or 97.1% but it almost certainly is not exactly 99%. From a quick review of what google wanted to tell me tonight, I couldn't find anything in the last five years that found less than 97% and even results back to 2014 seemed to agree with >90%.

But you can show a different result?

Care to share the rest of the story? The part where the majority of the new coral is fast-growing coral that is particularly vulnerable to bleaching and other damage.

Yeah, we chopped all the old growth forest but look for yourself, with the pine and the grass the area is still green.

https://media.tenor.com/ytDtlG2gxLsA...ankenstein.gif

Where ya' been?

Here's he rest of the story. PS... bleaching is as normal as wardrobe changing. We change for seasons as corals corals do for many reasons. https://www.thegwpf.org/content/uplo...eid=2757d1864c

Here's a Forbes article explaining why that (often claimed) # is incorrect...

Fact Checking The Claim Of 97% Consensus On Anthropogenic Climate Change

"This public discussion was started by Oreskes’ brief 2004 article, which included an analysis of 928 papers containing the keywords “global climate change.” The article says “none of the papers disagreed with the consensus position” of anthropogenic global warming. Although this article makes no claim to a specific number, it is routinely described as indicating 100% agreement and used as support for the 97% figure."

No, they expect 30% of their LINE to be electric vehicles. They say nothing about sales #s...

123 Million in 1930...
127 Million in 1935...
132 Million in 1940...

But why let facts ruin a good argument?

The Forbes article I posted above...

... is consistent with what I wrote (it was one that I looked at earlier)

The article argues that there is a record high coverage - I did not dispute that.

I wrote that quality matters too - the article did not address that.

The last page of the article, the list of "climate change is bogus" articles, was quite enlightening. Not exactly an unbiased scientific organization.

Stick with weather - climatology is difficult and marine biology is an entirely different field

Attacking the person is a favorite tool of climate alarmists, which is not how science works. Science is based on data - not rhetoric. Here's the data. Notice there is no coral growing in the flaming hot polar oceans. They love warm water and CO2.

Ditto -- and the snow skiers are happily adapting this year ... Mammoth Mountain Finishes Second Longest Ski Season Ever - Cold Weather Report

Talk about laying on the scare factor.

UK Met office has just issued "Excessive heat warnings" for many parts of UK.
Temps of 80f+ are forecast.
Many elderly will be at risk!

Forecasters earlier this week predicted that a "pulse of heat" would ravage Britain with some predicting temperatures could reach a maximum of 30C. (86f)

Can't wait for winter if temp. drops below freezing! :ohdear:

86F "ravaging" Great Britain????
Looks like British media has joined the fake weather/climate party
Please send some of that 86F our way---I'm sure our media will find a way to blame a 10F drop in temp on global warming.

Ireland was unusually cold - for July ... Cold July Leaves Ireland Hoping Summer Returns - Cold Weather Report

https://www.msn.com/en-us/weather/to...1fe7e693&ei=62

You can find and regurgitate words from both sides of this debate. Was taught from youngest days to prepare for the worst and hope for the best. To say that nothing is happening when it clearly is, sticking your head in the sand and then whining when you need help. There are things that can be done to mitigate the impact on human suffering and we should do them.

But after all, isn't that due to global warming???? I mean, glaciers are melting due to global warming, glaciers are growing due to global warming. I didn't make one lousy birdie until the 15th hole yesterday---that must be due to global warming as well :1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

Of course, a standard deviation that is not significant supports the observation that temps are rising in our area.

Twilight Zone did a show about extreme cold then ended with extreme heat.

Yep---science fiction, just like the narrative the climate change alarmists and their acolytes are cramming down our throats.

just got back from Ireland, first time so not sure, but according to the locals june had visitors getting sun tans, which was totally unexpected. . . (clear skies, little rain, not heat!)

however, weather .com irish weather forecasts were only good for about a day ahead. two days ahead was 50/50, and farther than that was ignored as swags. .

humans have recently bias, the brain can't hold all that historical data, so the recent articles are apropos

:jester: