News
news China's Chilling 'Social Credit System' Is Straight Out of Dystopian Sci-Fi
news UFO 'death ray' made Korean War GIs sick
news The Haunted States of America
news When the Supernatural Feeds on Us
news Russian space agency says space station hole was deliberate sabotage
news Biblical end of days prophecy COMES TRUE as fish swim again in Dead Sea
news 1950s Science Kit Had Real Uranium
news We're Probably Living in a Simulation, Elon Musk Says
news It’s Now Possible To Telepathically Communicate with a Drone Swarm
news New material to 'speed spacecraft to 134,000,000 mph'
news The future of food: what we’ll eat in 2028


Username:
Password: or Register
 
Thread Rating:
  • 11 Vote(s) - 2.45 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Let’s have a worthy debate about sea level rise
spɹɐʍoɔ snoɯʎuouɐ
☇☇Vocem sine nomine audivit!☇☇
User ID: 350320
06-14-2018 05:14 AM

Posts: 13,504



Post: #106
RE: Let’s have a worthy debate about sea level rise
Advertisement
LoP Guest  Wrote: (06-14-2018 05:06 AM)
spɹɐʍoɔ snoɯʎuouɐ  Wrote: (06-14-2018 04:53 AM)
GL and NN and the rest of bonehead deniers will never admit humans caused it.. crazy religious nuts and other vicious partisan morons totally consumed by subjective linear circular logic are trapped in a guilt-apologetic cycle. This why all we see in these threads is angst and piddling existential absurdist nonsense and fallacious repetitive strangulation of the subject.... they are on auto-pilot

Nice abuse of your thesaurus.
It deserves a vacation.

hehe.. touche


mystery
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 442041
06-14-2018 05:43 AM

 



Post: #107
RE: Let’s have a worthy debate about sea level rise
spɹɐʍoɔ snoɯʎuouɐ  Wrote: (06-14-2018 04:53 AM)
He Man  Wrote: (06-13-2018 11:42 PM)
Even GL and NN will eventually state they were wrong about global warming and sea level rise and mass extinctions, I wish it didn't take the death of the world to get that but it will be interesting to see if they have the brains and emotional where with all to admit defeat.

GL and NN and the rest of bonehead deniers will never admit humans caused it.. crazy religious nuts and other vicious partisan morons totally consumed by subjective linear circular logic are trapped in a guilt-apologetic cycle. This why all we see in these threads is angst and piddling existential absurdist nonsense and fallacious repetitive strangulation of the subject.... they are on auto-pilot

Well...

The problem is the warmunists make unprovable or untrue claims.

There is a kernel of truth to their claims - but if you exaggerate the facts enough it becomes a lie.

Sea level rise has been flat for a couple of years.

Ocean heat uptake (0-700 meters) seems to be following a linear trend.

Greenland has had 2 years of 0 ice loss.

Zwally uses sensible numbers for fern compaction and vertical displacement in the Antarctic and comes up with ice mass gains instead of losses. What you assume about the snowfall history and viscosity of the magma underneath determines what numbers you get.

If they drilled down to the surface in a couple hundred spots and established solid numbers for the rate of vertical displacement and fern compaction all the estimates would collapse to a fairly narrow range. The surface location is measured very accurately. They then guess about everything else.

Also: 1/3 of the Antarctic mass loss is by sublimation. So the higher snow fall during the interglacial means we probably are gaining ice mass. And the east antarctic ice sheet is being cooled by the combination of more CO2 and a permanent temperature inversion which reduces sublimation.

The peninsula only has about 1% of the Antarctic ice so we really don't give a damn about the peninsula.

There is no evidence the recovery from the little ice age stopped at 1940 so claiming all the post mid century warming is from fossil CO2 emissions is just laughable.

Does CO2 make it a little warmer? Sure.

But deforestation, urbanization, and natural forces are factors in the warming.

Plus there are many sinusoid and logarithmic influences - so the linear and exponential predictions seem silly.

The rate of CO2 injection into the atmosphere is slowing, the percent of emissions staying in the atmosphere is constantly decreasing. The forcing from CO2 is logarithmic. The claims of "runaway warming" don't seem rational.

From the ESRL website
May 2018: 411.25 ppm
May 2017: 409.65 ppm
Last updated: June 5, 2018

We are on track for a 1.6 PPM CO2 increase this year. In a year of record emissions.

It is now predicted there will be an oil bubble in 2035 when supply permanently exceeds demand and the price crashes.

460 or less PPM as peak CO2 isn't terribly scary.

The sea level rise for the 21st century looks to be 7-9 inches.
Quote this message in a reply
spɹɐʍoɔ snoɯʎuouɐ
☇☇Vocem sine nomine audivit!☇☇
User ID: 350320
06-14-2018 07:03 AM

Posts: 13,504



Post: #108
RE: Let’s have a worthy debate about sea level rise
Meanwhile somewhere in the real world:

Quote:In the last quarter century, the southern-most continent’s ice sheet — a key indicator of climate change — melted into enough water to cover Texas to a depth of nearly 13 feet (4 meters), scientists calculated. All that water made global oceans rise about three-tenths of an inch (7.6 millimeters).

From 1992 to 2011, Antarctica lost nearly 84 billion tons of ice a year (76 billion metric tons). From 2012 to 2017, the melt rate increased to more than 241 billion tons a year (219 billion metric tons), according to the study Wednesday in the journal Nature .

“I think we should be worried. That doesn’t mean we should be desperate,” said University of California Irvine’s Isabella Velicogna, one of 88 co-authors. “Things are happening. They are happening faster than we expected.”

Part of West Antarctica, where most of the melting occurred, “is in a state of collapse,” said co-author Ian Joughin of the University of Washington.

https://www.apnews.com/547d9ca2c5524b558356d5b2a75449cc
Quote this message in a reply
Lord DunLOP
Registered User
User ID: 325055
06-14-2018 07:30 AM

Posts: 329



Post: #109
RE: Let’s have a worthy debate about sea level rise
[ ]How do you get Greenland has had zero ice loss during the last two years?[/size]

In Greenland, the great melt is on. The decline of Greenland's ice sheet is a familiar story, but until recently, massive calving glaciers that carry ice from the interior and crumble into the sea got most of the attention. Between 2000 and 2008, such "dynamic" changes accounted for about as much mass loss as surface melting and shifts in snowfall. But the balance tipped dramatically between 2011 and 2014, when satellite data and modeling suggested that 70% of the annual 269 billion tons of snow and ice shed by Greenland was lost through surface melt, not calving. The accelerating surface melt has doubled Greenland's contribution to global sea level rise since 1992–2011, to 0.74 mm per year. "Nobody expected the ice sheet to lose so much mass so quickly," says geophysicist Isabella Velicogna of the University of California, Irvine. "Things are happening a lot faster than we expected."

The great Greenland meltdown

It's the Environment, stupid.
______________________________________

The finish-line of the Rat Race lays in
Oblivion.
______________________________________

I Stink Therefore I Am.

[Image: 2t3VmEL.png]

(This post was last modified: 06-14-2018 07:31 AM by Lord DunLOP.) Quote this message in a reply
spɹɐʍoɔ snoɯʎuouɐ
☇☇Vocem sine nomine audivit!☇☇
User ID: 350320
06-14-2018 07:59 AM

Posts: 13,504



Post: #110
RE: Let’s have a worthy debate about sea level rise
[Image: we-scientists-dont-know-how-to-do-that-i...976987.png]
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 442041
06-14-2018 08:39 AM

 



Post: #111
RE: Let’s have a worthy debate about sea level rise
spɹɐʍoɔ snoɯʎuouɐ  Wrote: (06-14-2018 07:03 AM)
Meanwhile somewhere in the real world:

Quote:In the last quarter century, the southern-most continent’s ice sheet — a key indicator of climate change — melted into enough water to cover Texas to a depth of nearly 13 feet (4 meters), scientists calculated. All that water made global oceans rise about three-tenths of an inch (7.6 millimeters).

From 1992 to 2011, Antarctica lost nearly 84 billion tons of ice a year (76 billion metric tons). From 2012 to 2017, the melt rate increased to more than 241 billion tons a year (219 billion metric tons), according to the study Wednesday in the journal Nature .

“I think we should be worried. That doesn’t mean we should be desperate,” said University of California Irvine’s Isabella Velicogna, one of 88 co-authors. “Things are happening. They are happening faster than we expected.”

Part of West Antarctica, where most of the melting occurred, “is in a state of collapse,” said co-author Ian Joughin of the University of Washington.

https://www.apnews.com/547d9ca2c5524b558356d5b2a75449cc

Saw that.

The group excluded Zwally.

http://imbie.org/about-the-project/

This is an Imbie team exercise and since they support the IPCC they are going to report melting whether it is happening or not. This is a joint ESA/NASA project to support the IPCC.

They have been around since 2012.

They were reporting about a 100-120 GT/Y loss when Zwally was reporting a 83 GT/Y gain.

They pretty clearly are associated with the IPCC since the term "accelerating" is used in all their papers.

You can tell how deep their bullshit is when they come out with their Greenland assessment. Greenland had zero mass loss in 2015 and 2016. IMBIE will claim the Greenland melt is "accelerating".

It is simple. If you assume Antarctica is melting and GIA is positive (the continent is rising) Antarctica is losing ice mass.

This a team that was specifically formed to produce lies for the IPCC and they are doing a fine job.
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 442041
06-14-2018 08:51 AM

 



Post: #112
RE: Let’s have a worthy debate about sea level rise
Lord DunLOP  Wrote: (06-14-2018 07:30 AM)
[ ]How do you get Greenland has had zero ice loss during the last two years?[/size]

In Greenland, the great melt is on. The decline of Greenland's ice sheet is a familiar story, but until recently, massive calving glaciers that carry ice from the interior and crumble into the sea got most of the attention. Between 2000 and 2008, such "dynamic" changes accounted for about as much mass loss as surface melting and shifts in snowfall. But the balance tipped dramatically between 2011 and 2014, when satellite data and modeling suggested that 70% of the annual 269 billion tons of snow and ice shed by Greenland was lost through surface melt, not calving. The accelerating surface melt has doubled Greenland's contribution to global sea level rise since 1992–2011, to 0.74 mm per year. "Nobody expected the ice sheet to lose so much mass so quickly," says geophysicist Isabella Velicogna of the University of California, Irvine. "Things are happening a lot faster than we expected."

The great Greenland meltdown


More bullshit.

link to image: https://www.climate.gov/sites/default/fi...k=8IOJucW0

The last 4 years the Greenland ice mass hasn't changed a lot.

When IMBIE reports later this year that the loss is "accelerating" that will be a damned lie.

What is interesting is that the melting is leveling off. Haven't seen a good explanation for why.
Quote this message in a reply
spɹɐʍoɔ snoɯʎuouɐ
☇☇Vocem sine nomine audivit!☇☇
User ID: 350320
06-14-2018 12:47 PM

Posts: 13,504



Post: #113
RE: Let’s have a worthy debate about sea level rise
[Image: tglobal_giss_verification1-dbf71b78fef67...00-c85.jpg]

Quote:In a piece back in April at RealClimate, guest bloggers Geert Jan van Oldenborgh and Rein Haarsma of the Dutch Meterological Institute (KNMI) look at back at a 1981 paper by the now famous James Hansen and others. At the time, of course, neither Hansen or global warming were household names. Still the paper got noticed. As the Oldenborgh and Haarsma explain:

"They got 10 pages in Science, which is a lot, but in it they cover radiation balance, 1D and 3D modelling, climate sensitivity, the main feedbacks (water vapour, lapse rate, clouds, ice- and vegetation albedo); solar and volcanic forcing; the uncertainties of aerosol forcings; and ocean heat uptake."

The Hansen et al paper includes (among other things) a plot of predicted global temperatures as a function of time. Oldenborgh and Haarsem take this figure and overplot the actual real world data gathered since the paper appeared. The fit between the Hansen et al predictions and the behavior of the Earth's climate is remarkably good. This is even more remarkable when you realize your iPhone now might have comparable computing power to the machines they were running their simulations on.

https://www.npr.org/sections/13.7/2012/0...-years-ago
Quote this message in a reply
spɹɐʍoɔ snoɯʎuouɐ
☇☇Vocem sine nomine audivit!☇☇
User ID: 350320
06-14-2018 01:40 PM

Posts: 13,504



Post: #114
RE: Let’s have a worthy debate about sea level rise
[Image: DflJAmRU8AA-dmQ.jpg]


_____________________
New extreme weather research furthers case for action on CO2 emissions

Quote:“This important research will add to the body of evidence that could drive litigation against businesses and governments that are failing to include climate risk as part of their decision-making.

“Future litigation may depend on important science, just like this new research, and how it can inform our understanding of what effects or weather events can be totally or partially attributed to climate change and therefore what is reasonably foreseeable.”

Much of the focus of climate change mitigation has been on the goal of limiting warming to 1.5°C, agreed at the 2015 United Nations climate summit in Paris.

However, scientific attention has now turned to analysing in more depth the climate response to the atmospheric CO2 concentrations required to limit warming to 1.5°C. Researchers from Oxford and other institutions participating in the HAPPI (Half a degree Additional warming, Prognosis and Projected Impacts) project simulated future climate under the range of all CO2 concentrations that might be consistent with 1.5°C of global warming.

In the models, CO2 levels at the higher end of this range were shown to directly increase Northern Hemisphere summer temperature, heat stress, and tropical precipitation extremes.

The research points to the need to set explicit CO2 concentration goals to limit high-impact weather extremes.

The research was carried out in collaboration with researchers at the University of Melbourne, ETH Zurich, the University of Bristol and the National Institute for Environmental Studies in Tsukuba, Japan. The research paper can be viewed here.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-018-0190-1
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 442041
06-14-2018 03:54 PM

 



Post: #115
RE: Let’s have a worthy debate about sea level rise
spɹɐʍoɔ snoɯʎuouɐ  Wrote: (06-14-2018 12:47 PM)
[img=500x400]https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2012/07/17/tglobal_giss_verification1-dbf71b78fef675f57c561ba3803dff917af97afa-s1600-c85.jpg

Quote:In a piece back in April at RealClimate, guest bloggers Geert Jan van Oldenborgh and Rein Haarsma of the Dutch Meterological Institute (KNMI) look at back at a 1981 paper by the now famous James Hansen and others. At the time, of course, neither Hansen or global warming were household names. Still the paper got noticed. As the Oldenborgh and Haarsma explain:

"They got 10 pages in Science, which is a lot, but in it they cover radiation balance, 1D and 3D modelling, climate sensitivity, the main feedbacks (water vapour, lapse rate, clouds, ice- and vegetation albedo); solar and volcanic forcing; the uncertainties of aerosol forcings; and ocean heat uptake."

The Hansen et al paper includes (among other things) a plot of predicted global temperatures as a function of time. Oldenborgh and Haarsem take this figure and overplot the actual real world data gathered since the paper appeared. The fit between the Hansen et al predictions and the behavior of the Earth's climate is remarkably good. This is even more remarkable when you realize your iPhone now might have comparable computing power to the machines they were running their simulations on.

https://www.npr.org/sections/13.7/2012/0...-years-ago

link to image: https://okbloggerdotnet.files.wordpress....1_2015.gif

If GISS hadn't added 0.24°C to modern temperatures the GISS temperature plot would have intersected the "Nonfossil replacement fuels" (the lowest curve) and be going below it.

So by the standard of Hansen's paper - we have already won and can move on to other things.
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 442041
06-14-2018 03:54 PM

 



Post: #116
RE: Let’s have a worthy debate about sea level rise
spɹɐʍoɔ snoɯʎuouɐ  Wrote: (06-14-2018 12:47 PM)
[img=500x400]https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2012/07/17/tglobal_giss_verification1-dbf71b78fef675f57c561ba3803dff917af97afa-s1600-c85.jpg

Quote:In a piece back in April at RealClimate, guest bloggers Geert Jan van Oldenborgh and Rein Haarsma of the Dutch Meterological Institute (KNMI) look at back at a 1981 paper by the now famous James Hansen and others. At the time, of course, neither Hansen or global warming were household names. Still the paper got noticed. As the Oldenborgh and Haarsma explain:

"They got 10 pages in Science, which is a lot, but in it they cover radiation balance, 1D and 3D modelling, climate sensitivity, the main feedbacks (water vapour, lapse rate, clouds, ice- and vegetation albedo); solar and volcanic forcing; the uncertainties of aerosol forcings; and ocean heat uptake."

The Hansen et al paper includes (among other things) a plot of predicted global temperatures as a function of time. Oldenborgh and Haarsem take this figure and overplot the actual real world data gathered since the paper appeared. The fit between the Hansen et al predictions and the behavior of the Earth's climate is remarkably good. This is even more remarkable when you realize your iPhone now might have comparable computing power to the machines they were running their simulations on.

https://www.npr.org/sections/13.7/2012/0...-years-ago

link to image: https://okbloggerdotnet.files.wordpress....1_2015.gif

If GISS hadn't added 0.24°C to modern temperatures the GISS temperature plot would have intersected the "Nonfossil replacement fuels" (the lowest curve) and be going below it.

So by the standard of Hansen's paper - we have already won and can move on to other things.
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 443224
06-14-2018 04:10 PM

 



Post: #117
RE: Let’s have a worthy debate about sea level rise
Let me know when the environmentalists want to sell their beach houses, I'll buy em on the cheap. Sea levels are not significantly rising. Stop trying to sell man made climate change she-ra.
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 442041
06-14-2018 04:17 PM

 



Post: #118
RE: Let’s have a worthy debate about sea level rise
LoP Guest  Wrote: (06-14-2018 04:10 PM)
Let me know when the environmentalists want to sell their beach houses, I'll buy em on the cheap. Sea levels are not significantly rising. Stop trying to sell man made climate change she-ra.

The elites (like ALGORE of "man-bear-pig" fame) are promoting this so they can buy beach front property cheaper.
Quote this message in a reply
thewhiterose
lop guest
User ID: 441553
06-14-2018 09:52 PM

 



Post: #119
RE: Let’s have a worthy debate about sea level rise
Unless you can get more water from outer space the sea level can not rise any appreciable amount.

Man made global warming is a globalist scheme to try and charge you for breathing!Do not fall for it.
There is however poisoning of the planet brought about Lies and false beliefs,promulgated by the globalist elite.There is also Darpa and H.A.A.R.P do not forget!
http://www.thewhiterose.simplesite.com
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 446039
06-14-2018 10:20 PM

 



Post: #120
RE: Let’s have a worthy debate about sea level rise
LoP Guest  Wrote: (06-14-2018 04:17 PM)
LoP Guest  Wrote: (06-14-2018 04:10 PM)
Let me know when the environmentalists want to sell their beach houses, I'll buy em on the cheap. Sea levels are not significantly rising. Stop trying to sell man made climate change she-ra.

The elites (like ALGORE of "man-bear-pig" fame) are promoting this so they can buy beach front property cheaper.

I think big oil companies are promoting the carbon credit ideas. They eat from both ends of the trough
Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement









Contact UsConspiracy Forum. No reg. required! Return to TopReturn to ContentRSS Syndication