[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by sounding

And just wait till the chilling 2022 data is compiled. It supports the fact that hurricanes have dramatically decreased the past 2 years -- and yet the UN's IPCC temperature forecasts keep claiming soaring forecasts. I wonder if the GNP glaciers validate those forecasts?

The FREQUENCY of hurricanes HAS decreased, but the INTENSITY HAS increased. Thus KILLER hurricanes and more people die. Look at it this way..........logically the Gulf of Mexico had RECORD water temperatures this year and hurricane IAN did RECORD damage to Florida and KILLED many people.

And what happens next year?????? I will go out on a limb (a very sturdy limb) and predict that the Gulf water temperature will be even warmer next summer than it was this year. So, what do we-all think that THAT will do with respect to hurricane magnitude? ........stay tuned Florida and other Gulf states!

[sounding]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

To answer the question, "how much of the increasing CO2 is man-made, and how much is thawing-made?"........I could NOT answer. But, somewhere there MIGHT (?) be a Climate Scientist that has made that calculation. What I can determine IS that most scientists are WARNING that we have Global Warming and the natural CO2 balance has been thrown off by MAN starting in the Industrial Revolution. The oceans can NO LONGER absorb the excess CO2. And a tipping point may have been reached. This is OBSERVABLE in the VANISHING GLACIERS and DYING coral reefs. Part of the threat to the CO2 cycle is exemplified by the Tundra in Russia that NO LONGER is covered with ice and is self-combusting, which is throwing stored-up CO2 into the atmosphere.

All that I am saying is that scientists are concerned/worried and that concerns me!

If most scientists claim man-made warming is harming the climate, then they should be able to say how much of current warming is "man-made" and not from Little Ice Age thawing. That data does not exist -- their theory is invalid -- just scare-mongering -- and effective enough to get folks for pay more taxes for no verifiable reason. Michael Crichton, author of Jurassic Park and many other thrillers, said, "Social control is best managed through fear."

[sounding]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

OK cool ! We have that sorted out. Now we can work toward solving our differences concerning general Climate conclusions.

Please show source data for that 2 degree claim.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by blueash

another farcical attempt to deny what a huge majority of climate scientists and the data have clearly shown : The last few decades have had a significant increase in land temperature, sea temperature, glacial melting etc. And sounding using the last seven years to attempt to convince readers that we are in a cooling period is propagandist lying. We have had this before when the deniers used a particular hot year, 1997, to attempt to show there was no global warming. Seven years ago was a hot year. A very hot year.
global warming stopped 16 years ago, reveals met office report quietly released... And here is the chart to prove it | daily mail online

take a look at the graph. Notice the trend. Take a look at 1997 and how it was an outlier which all the deniers used as a baseline to try to tell us that nothing was happening because the temperature dropped from 1997 to 2011. See how they could bloviate about global cooling over the last 14 years by cherry picking?

And here we have more of that. Just look at the bigger picture. Air temperature is just one of the indicators of global temperature change. It is the one we best understand. But increased heat is not just in the air, it is in the soil, it is also in the water surface and deep ocean, it is used to melt glaciers. When you melt ice the energy of melting does not change the temperature of the material it is 32 ice then it is 32 water. But lots of energy get used. The amount of energy to melt a unit of ice, with no temperature change, just a phase change is the same as required to then heat that unit of water from 32 degrees to 176 degrees. A huge amount of energy.

The glaciers in the national park that have been there for nearly 10000 years have shrunk in recent years. The glaciers in greenland, alaska, and antarctica are melting. That is not a cooling trend.

Yes it is a fact that 2021 was cooler than seven years ago, a completely misleading fact the obfuscates the clear trend of higher temps, melting glaciers, sea level rise.

GREATER than GREAT post !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That is a "drop the mike" post !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by sounding

BELIEFS and CONSENSUS have NO value in science. Beliefs drive religion -- Consensus drives politics -- and DATA drives science.

That sounds cute, but does NOT even come CLOSE to being a solid, factual rebuttal of my post. I quoted Scientists, not merely some cute jingle!

[sounding]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

The FREQUENCY of hurricanes HAS decreased, but the INTENSITY HAS increased. Thus KILLER hurricanes and more people die. Look at it this way..........logically the Gulf of Mexico had RECORD water temperatures this year and hurricane IAN did RECORD damage to Florida and KILLED many people.

And what happens next year?????? I will go out on a limb (a very sturdy limb) and predict that the Gulf water temperature will be even warmer next summer than it was this year. So, what do we-all think that THAT will do with respect to hurricane magnitude? ........stay tuned Florida and other Gulf states!

Like frequency, hurricane intensity (or energy) is down ... https://climatlas.com/tropical/global_running_ace.png The image ups and downs reflect ENSO and AMO/PDO ocean temperature cycles -- driven by the sun. And still as CO2 skyrockets upwards -- hurricanes are on the decline. I guess CO2 is under-performing.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

Kerry Emanuel: A climate scientist and meteorologist in the eye of the storm | MIT News | Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Looks like this man would know what he is talking about.

About midway through the article, this EXPERT states that warming seas and atmospheric conditions will cause increasing MAGNITUDE hurricanes. But here in the Village forum many of the LAYMAN will disagree with him..........just because they CAN. And ignorance is bliss.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Byte1

Ahh, but that is the only point that you could disparage, since I used your side of the argument's own source to present my opinion. The question has been asked many, many times on here; can you prove that mankind had anything to do with climate change. The answer has always been, the climate has changed and man exists, therefore man caused it. Sorry, but I don't buy it and no evidence has proven that man has caused climate changes. If that means that I am not an alarmist, so be it. Interesting discussion, but I still don't care to make sacrifices that will have no effect.

Just in these several page of posts we have shown 2 reputable Scientists that HAVE SAID that Global Warming is CAUSED by MAN. And I would add that the overpopulation supported by the Industrial Revolution has generated( mainly through the use of the internal combustion engine) the EXCESS CO2, which formed a blanket to increase the earth's heat.

[sounding]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

About midway through the article, this EXPERT states that warming seas and atmospheric conditions will cause increasing MAGNITUDE hurricanes. But here in the Village forum many of the LAYMAN will disagree with him..........just because they CAN. And ignorance is bliss.

Nobel Prize winner, Richard Feynman, said, "Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts." You offer expert opinions and I offer data ... Global Tropical Cyclone Activity | Ryan Maue

[sounding]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

That sounds cute, but does NOT even come CLOSE to being a solid, factual rebuttal of my post. I quoted Scientists, not merely some cute jingle!

So why aren't those glacier status reports being provided?

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

Just in these several page of posts we have shown 2 reputable Scientists that HAVE SAID that Global Warming is CAUSED by MAN. And I would add that the overpopulation supported by the Industrial Revolution has generated( mainly through the use of the internal combustion engine) the EXCESS CO2, which formed a blanket to increase the earth's heat.

And who supports these "reputable scientists"???? Do they get grant money from the government????? How much grant money would they get if they stated man is NOT causing global warming???? Are they tenured professors??? Would they have got tenure by claiming all global warming is just a continuation of climate cycles than have been going on for 4 million years????? Would they get TV time from the MSM if they did not support anthropogenic climate change????? Would they even get published?????

Let me remind you of the movie "Contact" starring Jodi Foster. She was a brilliant radio astronomer who was left out in the cold because her field of interest was extraterrestrial contact, a topic that was "tantamount to professional suicide". There aren't too many climatologists willing to fall on their sword to tell the truth.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Byte1

We used to call such folks "Tree huggers." They are more concerned about saving the trees than those that might need the wood for said tree to build shelter for their families. Progress has it's cost and man is at the top of the ecology food chain.

Wow, this is actually VERY INSTRUCTIVE. Knocking "tree huggers". By saying that it is OK to EXCESSIVELY cut down trees (like in the Brazilian rain forest) we are DENYING the earth its oxygen and the ability to absorb CO2 - which is what is causing the dying glaciers and the increases in CO2 in the ocean. Ask yourself why are large cities HOTTER than farming areas? The answer is obviously that cities have fewer TREES than farming areas. Then the cities need more A/C than the farming areas, which means more electricity needs to be produced........and from where ------carbon sources like natural gas and coal, which produce POLLUTION. Currently, smart city planners are trying to plant MORE trees in the city to DROP the temperature down. Smart city planners are calling for a 3 or 4-day work week to have people NOT commuting into the warm city and NOT creating tailpipe exhaust HEAT and pollution.

The 1st world is currently trying to move AWAY from environmental destruction and toward recycling and home construction codes that included better insulation and preventing energy loss. The more trees around a house the cooler it is in the summer and if deciduous, the leaves drop and let in the sun for the winter - thus saving heating AND cooling energy. Trees also slow down winds from tornados and hurricanes.

Basically "tree huggers" are patriotic Americans!

[Byte1]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

Wow, this is actually VERY INSTRUCTIVE. Knocking "tree huggers". By saying that it is OK to EXCESSIVELY cut down trees (like in the Brazilian rain forest) we are DENYING the earth its oxygen and the ability to absorb CO2 - which is what is causing the dying glaciers and the increases in CO2 in the ocean. Ask yourself why are large cities HOTTER than farming areas? The answer is obviously that cities have fewer TREES than farming areas. Then the cities need more A/C than the farming areas, which means more electricity needs to be produced........and from where ------carbon sources like natural gas and coal, which produce POLLUTION. Currently, smart city planners are trying to plant MORE trees in the city to DROP the temperature down. Smart city planners are calling for a 3 or 4-day work week to have people NOT commuting into the warm city and NOT creating tailpipe exhaust HEAT and pollution.

The 1st world is currently trying to move AWAY from environmental destruction and toward recycling and home construction codes that included better insulation and preventing energy loss. The more trees around a house the cooler it is in the summer and if deciduous, the leaves drop and let in the sun for the winter - thus saving heating AND cooling energy. Trees also slow down winds from tornados and hurricanes.

Basically "tree huggers" are patriotic Americans!

You seem to be exaggerating a bit when you INTERPRET my comment. Is this anything like "taking artistic license?"

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by sounding

The best examples of man-made climate change are trash mountains -- you can see them, you can smell them, and they say they don't taste too good either. Plus the bigger they get the more they alter the local wind pattern -- and as they fester they create warming and release gases -- and eventually leach into the water supply. A great legacy for our kids.

An excellent example.

[Byte1]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

That was interesting. Basically, scientific evidence is QUOTED which explains how and why the earth is warming, and later on in the article, it explains that MAN's polluting activities have caused this warming.
......THEN later in the POST..........we get a LAYMAN'S reasons for NOT believing the scientists and their careful PROFESSIONAL measurements of the warming earth and the CONCLUSION that it is MAN CAUSED.

It seems to me that for many people it is easier to just say that the scientists are lying and Al Gore was a HOAX - than to deal in any way with ANY changes to their life. Some will grit their teeth and hold their breath and go to their graves saying, " I will never buy an electric car or ride an Ebike or trade in my old smelly, polluting golf cart, because I didn't give into any of those crazy, pinko-commies." Archie Bunker was funny because MANY like him exist even today!

Where do you see that? I did not see anywhere in there where man caused climate change. Please give me the words so I can see it YOUR way.
You are putting words in my mouth when you suggest that I called scientists liars. Al Gore is just a drunkin idiot so I discount him totally. I do not call scientists liars. I call those that interpret what scientists say totally different than what they actually say, purveyors of scare tactics. Besides, anyone that does research and experimentation can call themselves scientists so you can take that as you wish.
The quote that I supplied said that the Earth has been going through weather cycles and cold and warm trends for millions of years. It gave reasons for cold and warm periods. But, it did NOT say mankind caused any of it. But, some how you read it differently so I am interested in how you came to your conclusion.