Well the IPCC gave an update and it does not look good for us humans, especially those of us living in areas that are low and/or hot already.
IPCC Summary for Policy Makers
CNN IPCC Report
VOX IPCC Report
And if you are still denying that humans are accelerating Climate Change, who still believes that the severe floods, fires, drought, heat waves, etc that we have been experiencing more frequently are natural... Here is a link for you.
WUWT IPCC Denial
Here is a link to some of our past discussions of this topic.
And here is why I think humans are a primary driver... Can anyone imagine such a huge change not having some consequence? Please remember that though the atmosphere looks HUGE when one looks up. It is only a thin layer of gas covering this big rock we live on. (~5 miles up)
The good news is that this big rock and it's atmosphere can adjust... It is just that us humans may not like / survive that adjustment. :-)
IPCC Summary for Policy Makers
CNN IPCC Report
VOX IPCC Report
And if you are still denying that humans are accelerating Climate Change, who still believes that the severe floods, fires, drought, heat waves, etc that we have been experiencing more frequently are natural... Here is a link for you.
WUWT IPCC Denial
Here is a link to some of our past discussions of this topic.
And here is why I think humans are a primary driver... Can anyone imagine such a huge change not having some consequence? Please remember that though the atmosphere looks HUGE when one looks up. It is only a thin layer of gas covering this big rock we live on. (~5 miles up)
The good news is that this big rock and it's atmosphere can adjust... It is just that us humans may not like / survive that adjustment. :-)
24 comments:
it's a dead issue. We just have to hope that the climate change denialists are right. It's more a problem for the next generation than this generation.
--Hiram
Oh don't be such a cynic, they are still building wind turbines at a rapid rate back home.
In fact, the folks where my Parent's lake home is are quite up in arms about some new proposed BIG turbines. So much so that they made our news.
Remember that wind turbines and land fills are great and needed, until they show up next door. :-)
For folks have not seen what the wind turbines look like en masse, this has a good picture.
It's an argument we lost. And for all I know maybe we were right to lose it. The environment is not my thing. Quite frankly, on that issue I do what I often rail against others for doing, I rely on authority. It makes me feel just like a Republican.
--Hiram
You really need to drive West more often...
Solar and wind farms are multiply like bunnies...
Here is a wind map for those who are curious.
Yellow Medicine is the long skinny one with the purple on it's west / SD edge. Lincoln county is the one below it. That is where our farms are a towers are coming up ~100 at a time.
Here is a map of solar projects
It's not my thing. But experts are wrong about lots of things. Maybe they are wrong about climate change. I have flown over the west. It seems both big and empty.
--Hiram
That "big change" you worry so much about amounts to roughly 4 parts per million of the atmosphere, when the natural seasonal change is roughly 5 times greater and we live easily with that. If you want to say that another 4ppm of variation is destroying the planet, feel free to be hoaxed, scammed, and have your eye teeth stolen. But it ain't science.
Whatever the substantive merits on each side, the argument is over and denialists have won. It really is time to move on.
--Hiram
Hi Jerry,
Happy to hear you are still with us on this mortal plane. :-)
Comments with no sources are just comments. Kind of like me saying the sky is green today...
Hiram,
Turn that frown upside down. Like the abortion argument, I am sure the climate change war will go on for a long time. Though you may want to sell any low lying ocean front property that you may own. :-)
Welcome back, Jerry,
When you take a break from John's blog I'd be curious to know the reason. Do you get tired of too many liberal comments?
Laurie,
Probably my requests for sources... :-)
Laurie, I just get tired of being constantly insulted, having my motivations impugned, being essentially called a liar because easily verifiable facts that I post require "sources," and that conclusive proof gets dismissed as "opinion." Like what I just posted, proving conclusively (in my and any reasonable assessment) that anthropogenic CO2 is a negligible contributor to global climate.
I enjoy your comments greatly, and it's almost a surprise to me how often our "disagreements" are simply saying the same thing in different terms.
Jerry,
Considering the Red / Blue Exercise...
How do perceive your denial of other commenter's thoughts, beliefs, truths, facts, etc as any different?
Here is a good example, many here believe the science behind IPCC's conclusions... And you in essence call them naive /gullible. Isn't this you insulting them and their intelligence?
"If you want to say that another 4 ppm of variation is destroying the planet, feel free to be hoaxed, scammed, and have your eye teeth stolen. "
I am sorry that you are frustrated that people disagree with you and your thoughts, beliefs, truths, facts, etc.
Personally I do not see you as a liar, I think that you truly believe your thoughts, beliefs, truths, facts, etc. I simply disagree with many of them and can not find rationale or proof to make the leap to your position.
Hopefully you find the energy to join us once in awhile. :-)
Climate scientists disagree. I’ll trust them.
Moose
Moose,
My advice as always when dealing with academics is to trust but verify to your best extent.
These folks are human also and are often funded / rewarded based on how exciting their research is... In other words, they are not immune to finding what they are looking for. :-)
"Climate scientists disagree. I’ll trust them."-- Moose
WHICH scientists do you believe? The few hundred who profit from the scam and doctor the numbers (see "Climategate"), then state the completely unfounded conclusion that manmade CO2 controls climate (provably false, as I just stateed) or the 30,000+ who testify that manmade CO2 does NOT control climate, and have the un-fudged data to prove it?
John, you are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts. You can agree with me and with the facts, or you can be wrong.
"How do perceive your denial of other commenter's thoughts, beliefs, truths, facts, etc as any different?"
I don't deny anybody's opinion, or certainly do not intend to. I don't even deny others' provable facts. I try or at least tend to state the facts as I know them and as I see them applicable to the issue at hand. In this case simple math is the undeniable FACT here, which is that manmade CO2 is not the "global thermostat." My (opinion/)conclusion from that is that those who say it is are hoaxers and scammers, or simply misled by them.
Except that their predictions have come true. And jerry's conspiracy theory is easily dismissible, as is the vast majority of conspiracy theories.
Moose
Jerry,
It is statements like this that puzzle me. It takes so much hubris to say it that I can not wrap my mind around it.
"John, you are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts. You can agree with me and with the facts, or you can be wrong."
By the way, I am used to hearing this kind of statement from my Parents and Others on the Far Left and Right... So it does not surprise me. I mean look at Moose's response and you will see a similar but opposite view.
Over here we discussing Partisan and I summarized it as this...
Partisan: a firm adherent to a cause exhibiting unreasoning allegiance and only seeing one side of the problem.
Why is it so hard for people to question their beliefs and truly evaluate / explain them?
I assume it has a lot to do with human self confidence and the ego. It must be scary to say that the other side may be correct or partially correct...
And worse yet... One needs to be able to acknowledge that they may be wrong...
John, the climate deniers are those who cannot accept the simple fact that the only real EVIDENCE for manmade global warming is the computer models, and they have been proven wrong (high) time and time again. It is simple: If humans control only 4 parts per million of the atmosphere, how is it possible that we control 100% of the climate? The assertion simply fails all rational explanation. Why can you not "wrap your mind around" that? Would it require you to abandon a cherished belief?
And Moose, essentially NONE of the predictions of the Warmists have come true, and even if those predictions were correct (which they are not), Global Warming and Manmade Global Warming are indistinguishable, one from the other, and it is this fundamental deceit driving the political hysteria.
Jerry,
Still need a source for this 4 ppm statement.
Then I am going to draw and post a picture explaining again how a balance works... And what happens when something small changes on one side. :-)
Jerry I moved your comment over here.
Post a Comment