Sophisticated Skeptic
-
Posts
2,713 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Blogs
Forums
American Weather
Media Demo
Store
Gallery
Posts posted by Sophisticated Skeptic
-
-
things being different 20 years ago to now :
Every spring and summer : there'd be warm spells for 3 to 5 days ...followed a cold front (and thunderstorms) to cool things down for a few days...along with lower humidity. Things are just more erratic these days...across the whole globe. The observations by Weatherguy (or whatever his name is now) of weather currents slowing down is an interesting one. As the amount of training of storms , and slower moving bigger storms seems to be increasing. Bigger winter storms even. (for the snow geese out there)
Even with the arctic, getting these very warm pushes at times aren't the norm.
-
the statistical part takes more importance over the opinionated aspect. Coming from the feds, it's obviously going to be dampened a bit to prevent hysteria. nothing new there.
-
lets see how the deniers spin it.
all that ice melt (and increased ocean heat) has to unload somewhere..
Feeling soggy? Last month was the wettest on record for the contiguous United States, according to federal meteorologists. -
There's no empirical evidence for your claim. That is actually how science works. The actual research done (rather than just a belief) on this has shown there has been no detectable link between floods and AGW.
Read the literature for yourself. the IPCC SREX reports conlcuded based on the literature:
“In summary, there continues to be a lack of evidence and thus low confidence regarding the sign of trend in the magnitude and/or frequency of floods on a global scale”
There are times when you need to throw out whatever your college professor has taught you over the years, and look at things full scope.
Or whoever (or whatever) sources you allow yourself to be guided by.
You can read a recent study that is centered on the U.S. and flooding:
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02626667.2011.621895
A site nobody's heard of before. I wonder if they've accepted donations over the years.
-
We have no way to verify this.
typical denier talk.
It's ok, most here already know how the place operates..
-
chubbs, student, orh...there are way too many environmental variables to strain your brains on such nonsense equations. (without even mentioning space / solar / or even magnetic variables... Yeah, it temporarily makes you look like a rocket scientist to the public...but to no avail.
And you know this from what study? How do you know that land use changes, and poor engineering in cities is not the cause??? That is what we have found in our local flood studies. Has nothing to do with climate change. Man put a lot of cities and towns on drained swamps in the flood plains back in the 50s and 60s and now we are paying the price as the infrastructure wears down.
How about record crests that frequently continue to be not only broken by a foot or so....but smashed by 10 feet or more. The weekend storms in Texas / Ok were just a sample.
-
right....
Because floods are a new thing,
The types and severity of them are..
-
3 things we could pretty much confirm are occurring , with no real known endgame :
1) Co2 increasing every year... ( I won't even go into the causes or future effects....since it'll automatically cause arguments / flame / spam )
2) An enormous amount of more moisture in the environment over the years, due to more freshwater / icemelting every year. (arctic) Which is surely already to blame for massive flooding outbreaks all across the globe.
3) Clouds lowering, with no known explanation. Could also be contributing to massive amounts of rainfall in short periods of time. http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?feature=3285
Lead researcher Roger Davies said that while the record is too short to be definitive, it provides a hint that something quite important might be going on. Longer-term monitoring will be required to determine the significance of the observation for global temperatures.and I didn't even mention the Methane / Aerosols ...
-
from 0 to 40 feet in 24 hours..
nothing to see here folks...everything's normal.
-
Nobody else besides him and say Skier has contributed more in this forum with scientific and factual information over the years.
old trees with deep roots are hard to move as well.
-
good post , Polar Vortex 2014 .
I've many times here called out the 'political' evidence of the deniers.
It's very ez to see who is what.
-
Now I understand why they wanted to shut this section down in the past..
When will they get a clue.
Hard to have a decent conversation...for sure.
-
Do you realize in every single one of your replies so far you have not answered or acknowledged any of the criticisms that highlight your lack of scientific evidence for your ramblings?
nice job with your creative wording.
I don't waste my time showing cards to people not worth the time...and that can't listen. Or live in another world, like everything's fine and dandy. (temps/ice)
the other guys here already post the images of scientific significance that I normally would be. Maybe you missed my post yesterday...and yes, were currently falling off the cliff ice cover wise. But it's all ok and normal for 'the other side' .
Why don't you keep your posts to the banter thread if you are insistent on making declarations with no scientific basis.sounds like someone needs their pacifier again. The same thing you say to everyone that upsets you a touch.
grow up.
-
"We talk the truth"...
Question: how would one go about defining objective truth when there isn't a known solution to the question(s)? Would we define truth as taking the mean ECS/TCR values across the spectrum of scientific literature? Would you define truth as the range of possibilities postulated by the IPCC? Or would you only define truth as your own opinion and nothing else? When there's such a variance in opinions on a particular topic (specifically, one that isn't settled), it seems inappropriate to apply the word "truth" to a subject which the specifics are still being debated heavily. For some subjects, there can be truth, as an answer is known. For this topic, I think probabilities are more applicable, I.e. "this is more likely to occur than that," etc. +3c temp increase would be more likely than a +7c temp increase in the next 100 years. You cannot claim to be talking the "truth" unless you possess some incredible foreknowledge that your opinion is the correct one.
lol. Looks like someone's been creeping this thread a bit too long....popping up out of the blue...with long ramblings speak for itself.
When there's such a variance in opinions on a particular topic (specifically, one that isn't settled), it seems inappropriate to apply the word "truth" to a subject which the specifics are still being debated heavily.
Sounds pretty 2010'ish. We're over the past now and the evidence is overwhelming.
-
No, the troll tag applies to your post above....you posted unsolicited about another poster's intents which is both irrelevant to the topic and pure conjecture. You seem pretty confused on what constitutes "facts about global warming"....
sounds ridiculous / anal-lytic / and borderline crazyhouse talk.
Me and Weatherguy pretty much already expect to be banned , just because we talk the truth and generaly go against the grain here. And also knowing the way this place operates.. (ban happy...for anyone that disagrees with a guy that has a Mod / Met tag )
-
I'm guessing that discussing facts about global warming entitles us to a Troll tag.
At the same time, it is a bit early to go gung ho on the warming. If things continue looking dire the next several months... then I could see it becoming more of a so-called troll-fest around here. (possibly)
Seems like a lot are still hanging on the sidelines and unsure.
-
waiting for ORH_wxman to chime in, on the cooling aspect of things..
-
It is no wonder that a lot of the general public has a very tepid attitude toward it. Their attitude toward climate change starts to mirror their attitude and dissatisfaction toward the state of American politics.
Good point, but what caused it. Right wing media swung on it the hardest...making it seem like climate change was a joke, and anybody who believes in it is nuts. Will be interesting in the years ahead to see how they change their attitudes on it being such a "joke".
Just having the arctic melt more ice every year = guarantees more moisture and extreme flooding episodes worldwide...along with warmer oceans to assist ? foggettabouddit. And I didn't even mention the countless of other variables being discussed here by others. Co2 through the roof being 1.
This could be the most interesting thread in history. Such fierce debates, while everybody's 'mostly' civil about it. I enjoy even the conversations that I don't agree with.
-
That's a good point. When resources get scarce in Country A, but are still plentiful in nearby Country B, Country A will invade Country B to get access to those resources.
The news will report it as "unrest in central Albania," and won't link the cause directly as climate change, but climate change will be an underlying factor in situations like this.
notice how I didn't use the "t" word. Our media likes to focus on these incidents as 1 or 2 bad groups out there. When a lot of times it's more about the needs of the community. There's probably a lot of communities in Iraq that assist and make things easier for ISIS to take over their towns...knowing they'll get more aid from them...then their own government.
Just look at how easy it was for ISIS to take all our military equipment over..that was stationed there...it basically had no protection (and no money to protect) from the Iraqi government.
As long as global economies continue to suffer, more of these types of rogue groups will probably continue to grow and flourish. (and many of them, not even "T" groups....even though our Gov might still decide to label them as such)
One of the rare instances where loose gun laws are good for the country....groups would think twice before doing silly crap like that here in the u.s. Where many homeowners have guns...where as almost none do in strict gun law countries...and are ez pickins for these 'rogue' groups.
back to topic...climate -
"Rare spring storm sweeps into southern California, Arizona" ]
global warming already here? more convincing if they get rains in the summer. The Cali mountains could get some nice amounts the next week or so.
-
Our current economic systems (global) are doomed. The reason won't be climate change, however. It will be technology. Soon, as in less than 100 years, there will be no jobs for humans.
I think it'll be at-least part of it.
technology (taking jobs) / climate change / pollution / overcrowding (population) / diseases / worldwide crisis's of different sorts will have a bigger hand.
Bad economies across the globe (currently) are another reason why governments in other countries don't have enough money to protect their own people....and how 'rogue' groups pop-up and control parts of a country with their own weapons and money. When the public is desperate for food / water / money...they go where it's at.
as for people panicking over technology taking all our jobs... there will always be jobs that require human involvement / interaction. Currently software creation / mobile app development are good areas to get into.
-
MINNEAPOLIS (The Borowitz Report) – Scientists have discovered a powerful new strain of fact-resistant humans who are threatening the ability of Earth to sustain life, a sobering new study reports. The research, conducted by the University of Minnesota, identifies a virulent strain of humans who are virtually immune to any form of verifiable knowledge, leaving scientists at a loss as to how to combat them.---------More worryingly, Logsdon said, “As facts have multiplied, their defenses against those facts have only grown more powerful.”
Republicans slander things everyday to favor their agenda's. Their saying the reason they cut amtrack funding (a day after that fatal accident) was to implement another tax deduction for the rich.
Believing in global warming, is bad for the rich. thus, the reason why most Republicans don't believe in it.
Not that I favor mixing politics in with global warming...it's just the truth.
-
^ there are too many variables in climate change to jump from 1 image to the next.
you guys can 'slander' your reasonings with an image or 2 that favor the 'factual' data to be on your side....and so can we.
But as time goes by, the evidence is becoming overwhelming. Yet, you continue holding on to the smallest bit of hope that everythings normal.. (when it's not even close) I'm just wondering at what point will u guys give in.
-
he's fine....just needs a break.
chill..
-
I'm getting the feeling you are mistakenly taking this forum as an activist lair and not the ''Science" forum that it is. You guys complain about the same stuff over and over again.. Why not just sit back and appreciate the opinions of others? That's what forums are for...to discuss / have different opinions on things.
It's people like him that think outside the box, with factual material (not always, but most of the time) that make things worthwhile reading here. Who cares if he goes into left field at times...even if it does seem far-fetched , he at-least brings up points that could be looked into.
Typical Republican-like behaviour here...the ones against him. Where people extremely over-exaggerate the smallest of matters. I feel like i'm watching Megyn Kelly on FoxNews... where she'll have some news piece to start her show off with. With that look in her eye like it's the end of the world....all while talking about Hillary Clinton's funding issues. (or some other comical news piece...that would of been laughed at if it were mentioned as 'Breaking News' 10 years ago)
Climate Change Banter
in Climate Change
Posted
how come Obama just said, in his little climate change speech that :
"we've already driven carbon pollution levels down, to the lowest levels they've been in over 2 decades".
what's he lookin at...