![]() |
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. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
I heard a speaker at a seminar some time back, a self-styled "futurist", who opined that this continent can "sustainably" support only eleven million hunter-gatherers. He quoted some data to give credence to his point. I have little doubt that there are probably quite a few people who believe such rot, and even scarier--that there are some who are trying to bring such a scenario about. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
My opinion on just why this is the case corresponds with the rise and scope of the internet, and even more to the point, social media. Back in the day, if someone was doing research on any topic, it meant going to the local library, poring over books for hours on end, then crunching those numbers with (if you were lucky) a electrically-powered mechanical calculator. You then put your thoughts to paper, maybe several drafts on a manual typewriter (mine was an Underwood) before the finished result was ready for whatever it was being prepared for. Today? Well, today a few mouse clicks can reveal "data" on just about any subject. Not a bad thing if used correctly, but unfortunately one can find "data" to "prove" any hypothesis they might have, no matter how off-the-wall it might be: settlements on the far side of the moon--the Holocaust never happened--the Earth is flat--there are data out there to support those three, plus a whole lot more. That is why this discussion as well as just about all discussions come down to dueling data: one side digs up some numbers to support a point while the other side digs up some more to support the opposite. And usually those duels involve people with little to no knowledge of the subject. The complicating factor is that, more and more, it appears that all too many people aren't interested in INFORMATION at all, but in VALIDATION. They want to be right and will go through any length to "prove" that. When science becomes dogma--well, we are all in a lot of trouble. And unfortunately with social media, it is no problem to locate like-minded people who will validate your point of view, as well as the scoundrels who are experts at getting people to think what THEY want people to think. As Mark Twain once stated, there are three kinds of untruths: "lies, damned lies, and statistics". And of the three, statistics are the worst, because they can be made to "prove" any lie or damned lie out there. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Kerry Emanuel is, and has been, a well regarded researcher for over 40 years. He is pretty much the smartest guy in the room. I recall meeting him once at a conference and read his papers in graduate school and afterwards. Roy Spencer and John Christy are also researchers that are worth listening to. The fact that anthropogenic CO2 increases have caused some recent warming is not debated by anyone (who actually understands the science). The estimates are from 0.8 to 1.3C and are a perturbation on the longer term warming due to the fact that we have been in an interglacial period for about 12,000 years. We may continue to warm for the next 100,000 years (or so??) and sea levels, which have risen about 6 inches in the last 100 years or so, will continue to rise. The rate of sea level rise, however, appears to be accelerating. The concern is that anthropogenic CO2 increases will create several degrees of additional warming, over and above the warming from being in an interglacial period, over the next 100 years or so. The debate is whether we will be faced with a dire situation due to anthropogenic CO2 increases. Part of the problem is that the press and politicians have zoomed in on the 8.5 modeling scenario (the most dire modeling projection). I, and others such as Spencer and Christy, have doubts whether the 8.5 scenarios is the scenario that we should be focused on. That is a political issue. Spencer and Christy also point out that the models tend to run warm, particularly in the tropical troposphere. Back when I actually did productive work, I developed models for NASA and the NWS. It is a difficult problem. Model sensitivity to CO2 increases continues to be an area of research.
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
And there lies the debate. Since the models tend to run warm, focusing on the most dire scenario may be overkill. Regardless, it may not really matter since our ability to do anything if the dire projections are accurate, other than remediate coast regions and migrate people, is questionable. We really can't substantially reduce CO2 emissions anytime soon.
Quote:
|
Quote:
Also in that article, the NOAA scientist CLEARLY stated that this warming of the earth was DUE TO MAN'S activities (like the internal combustion engine) causing pollutants to act as a blanket in the upper atmosphere. If someone thinks that these statements are incorrect, they need NOT argue with ME. They should write to the NOAA scientist that wrote the article. Or if they think that they know more than him.......they should ask to be a paid consultant to the NOAA. I am sure that they will let them work from home if they are retired! The earth's warming that the NOAA scientists have measured is also CONFIRMED by the measurement of the ocean's water level rising over that same period (from 1880). Also CONFIRMED by the dying of coral reefs to the extent that the reefs will be 90% DEAD by 2090. And also confirmed by the increasingly large and strong killer hurricanes happening around the world. Also CONFIRMED by glaciers melting and disappearing worldwide. And here in Florida we are exceptionally susceptible to killer hurricanes like IAN. Which scientists expect to see continue for the next 30 years as the earth and oceans KEEP WARMING. The Industrial Revolution brought many advantages to the 1st world. Now the WHOLE WORLD must PAY the PRICE for those CO2 pollutants produced by the Industrial Revolution. The earth's climate (or Global Warming) now REQUIRES mankind to find a way to decrease CO2 pollutants. Which some scientists think is too late because of passing a tipping point. Our sons and daughters will live to see that and will be paying the price. |
Quote:
|
I assume you are calling CO2 a "pollutant"? I would be careful about that characterization. Also, CO2 is actually pretty well mixed (+/- a few PPM out of about 400 PPM) below about 14 kms. I'm not sure where you get this "blanket in the upper atmosphere" terminology.
Quote:
|
Quote:
......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! |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
All that I am saying is that scientists are concerned/worried and that concerns me! |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
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! |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
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. |
Quote:
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! |
Quote:
You seem to be exaggerating a bit when you INTERPRET my comment. Is this anything like "taking artistic license?" |
Quote:
|
Quote:
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. |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:56 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by
DragonByte SEO v2.0.32 (Pro) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2025 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.