Climate Impacts 'Overwhelming'

[work in progress]

I think the hysterical tones issuing from the latest IPPC report are indicative of how desperate this agenda driven meme is getting. It's too late to walk the dog back without looking like utter fools. A desperate gamble, to be sure, but not one that is likely to gain much traction.

Well, guess what - the real truth is they are not hysterical enough in yours and the right wing media's buzzword of the day.

If you want to know if manmade carbon emissions are forcing this world towards a hotter climate, all you need to know is two things:
1.As this world's atmosphere rises above 400ppm CO2 for the first time in at 3 million years, the decadal average of annual CO2 increase has doubled since the 1960's: ESRL Global Monitoring Division - Global Greenhouse Gas Reference Network

2. There are many other GHG's besides carbon dioxide in the atmosphere...there are even some manmade gases from industrial production that we didn't even realize had heat-trapping effects until recently. But likely the most serious risk of rapid climate change in the coming decades is methane. And, although much of the rising levels of methane in the atmosphere is likely coming from fugitive natural gas emissions (pipeline leaks and more recently - fracking), the rapid warming in the Arctic that is happening right now, is likely a result of melting permafrost and methane clathrates in shallow waters of the Arctic Ocean, and it appears that rate of methane release is increasing, indicating that future global warming will be out of our control...even if there is a last gasp real effort made to stop it:
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-XyJ5ywUBZ...U5e5c4BTN4/s1600/IASI_CH4_2008.11-2011.11.jpg

 

[work in progress]

No, I am saying that AGW climate scientists have a bad track record in predicting the future climate of the planet...their authority relies on the efficacy of their predictions and in this so far the GCMs are failing to correlate predicted temperature increase with CO2 increase. Otoh, skeptical scientists predicted that the human CO2 contribution would not cause the warming predicted and so far they have a better record. Btw, are you saying that skeptical climate scientists who dispute the effectiveness of GCMs used by the UN IPCC to predict the future climate have no authority or expertise in climate science?

a. Does it matter to you that what the official draft reports from the IPCC have been wrong about is that the rates of: ocean acidification, seal level rise, GHG levels, increases in ocean temperatures etc. have been much higher than predicted?

b. Does "failing to correlate predicted temperature increase with CO2 increase" mean that you deny basic fundamental physics and the properties of certain gases to block or trap some of the heat energy passing through the atmosphere?
If so - no point talking to you further! Your argument is similar to the creationists on an another thread arguing for a global flood 4000 years ago, even though the geologic evidence lines up against it.

FWIW, the hoax claim by some highly motivated deadenders to deny the reality of global warming has been hanging by a thread in recent years - that thread is the claim that atmospheric temperatures are either leveling off or declining. Well that claim is a fraud, based on manipulating data as explained here: blog.chron.com/climateabyss/2012/04/about-the-lack-of-warming/
But, even if we took a so called pause in global warming at face value, there is another fundamental fact of physics that has to be recognized here: the warming we experience is atmospheric, while more than 90% of the Sun's heat energy is absorbed by the world's oceans, and is released back to the atmosphere in irregular amounts because of ocean recirculation (look up El Nino, La Nina oscillations). Atmospheric temperatures fluctuate more than the oceans, so every time there's a major snowstorm, we can count on Foxnews to proclaim it as an end to global warming!

But, in the oceans...where most of the Sun's energy is absorbed, ocean circulation patterns cause more gradual fluctuations in temperatures than on land; and just as on land the temperatures are gradually increasing, so goes for the oceans, as measured by global ocean heat content - Does ocean cooling prove global warming has ended?

 

[Ben Dhyan]

a. Does it matter to you that what the official draft reports from the IPCC have been wrong about is that the rates of: ocean acidification, seal level rise, GHG levels, increases in ocean temperatures etc. have been much higher than predicted?

b. Does "failing to correlate predicted temperature increase with CO2 increase" mean that you deny basic fundamental physics and the properties of certain gases to block or trap some of the heat energy passing through the atmosphere?
If so - no point talking to you further! Your argument is similar to the creationists on an another thread arguing for a global flood 4000 years ago, even though the geologic evidence lines up against it.

FWIW, the hoax claim by some highly motivated deadenders to deny the reality of global warming has been hanging by a thread in recent years - that thread is the claim that atmospheric temperatures are either leveling off or declining. Well that claim is a fraud, based on manipulating data as explained here: blog.chron.com/climateabyss/2012/04/about-the-lack-of-warming/
But, even if we took a so called pause in global warming at face value, there is another fundamental fact of physics that has to be recognized here: the warming we experience is atmospheric, while more than 90% of the Sun's heat energy is absorbed by the world's oceans, and is released back to the atmosphere in irregular amounts because of ocean recirculation (look up El Nino, La Nina oscillations). Atmospheric temperatures fluctuate more than the oceans, so every time there's a major snowstorm, we can count on Foxnews to proclaim it as an end to global warming!

But, in the oceans...where most of the Sun's energy is absorbed, ocean circulation patterns cause more gradual fluctuations in temperatures than on land; and just as on land the temperatures are gradually increasing, so goes for the oceans, as measured by global ocean heat content - Does ocean cooling prove global warming has ended?

a. The UN IPCC is the last word on what propaganda on AGW is provided to world governments, and therefore must meet the scientifically minimum standards of scientific credibility among climate scientists....you can't expect them to take seriously the wacko stuff that exaggerates even further.

b. Haha..that's the point I was making...of course the GHG factor is real, but ever increasing record amounts of human derived CO2 has been pumped into the atmosphere over the last 17 years while the average global temperature has remained virtually steady...what does that tell us?...that the UN IPCC GCM GHG forcing factor has been set too high and thus the ever increasing disparity between predicted temperature and actual temperatures.

Regarding the oceans, and the link to the wacko alarmist SkS site, what's the point...no one is saying that global warming has stopped, everyone except the deniers are saying it is in a hiatus, a pause that has been 15 years plus in duration. When the pause finally comes to an end, global temperature will either be cooler or warmer...we will have to wait and see.

So to recap...we can both agree that the world has warmed about 0.7C since temperature measurements began to be recorded.

We can both agree that global temperature have been relatively steady over the last 15 to 17 years.

We can both agree that climate scientists using their GCMs did not predict a pause this long.

So what do we disagree on apart from the 'A' in AGW?

Now so you know where I'm coming from, I am a realist, I don't do predictions so don't ask me to take as gospel the predictions of the IPCC aligned AGW climate scientists on global temperature yonks from now. I don't mind that they have a go, just like I don't mind meteorologists having a go at predicting the temperature yonks ahead...they are still learning so for now don't ask me to stake my life on it..or pay for prophecy mitigation efforts.

 

[YmirGF]

Well, guess what - the real truth is they are not hysterical enough in yours and the right wing media's buzzword of the day.

That's right, we need more hysteria. THE END IS NIGH!

 

[Sunstone]

Climate change: The case of the missing heat : Nature News & Comment

So far as I can see, there's nothing in that article that supports your speculation global warming is not significantly caused by man-made activities.

 

[work in progress]

a. The UN IPCC is the last word on what propaganda on AGW is provided to world governments, and therefore must meet the scientifically minimum standards of scientific credibility among climate scientists....you can't expect them to take seriously the wacko stuff that exaggerates even further.

b. Haha..that's the point I was making...of course the GHG factor is real, but ever increasing record amounts of human derived CO2 has been pumped into the atmosphere over the last 17 years while the average global temperature has remained virtually steady...what does that tell us?...that the UN IPCC GCM GHG forcing factor has been set too high and thus the ever increasing disparity between predicted temperature and actual temperatures.

Regarding the oceans, and the link to the wacko alarmist SkS site, what's the point...no one is saying that global warming has stopped, everyone except the deniers are saying it is in a hiatus, a pause that has been 15 years plus in duration. When the pause finally comes to an end, global temperature will either be cooler or warmer...we will have to wait and see.

So to recap...we can both agree that the world has warmed about 0.7C since temperature measurements began to be recorded.

We can both agree that global temperature have been relatively steady over the last 15 to 17 years.

We can both agree that climate scientists using their GCMs did not predict a pause this long.

So what do we disagree on apart from the 'A' in AGW?

Now so you know where I'm coming from, I am a realist, I don't do predictions so don't ask me to take as gospel the predictions of the IPCC aligned AGW climate scientists on global temperature yonks from now. I don't mind that they have a go, just like I don't mind meteorologists having a go at predicting the temperature yonks ahead...they are still learning so for now don't ask me to stake my life on it..or pay for prophecy mitigation efforts.

One thing I forgot to mention in my previous post was the lagging effect of thermal inertia in the world's oceans. A quick explanation of how the vast expanse of oceans release heat gradually, so that there is an estimated 25 to 100 year lag between the additions of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, and the time the oceans release the extra heat back to the atmosphere. Most scientists go with a 40 year average for this lag effect. The article doesn't mention a disturbing aspect of the lag - approximately 65% of manmade carbon added to the atmosphere has occurred during the last 40 years! That is why, when these clowns like Pielke, Spencer and Christie make claims of low sensitivity to carbon dioxide based on present day atmospheric temperatures, they reveal themselves as charlatans trying to deceive their audience.
http://www.climatechangeanswers.org/science/thermalinertia.htm

When we look into paleohistory at previous times when atmospheric CO2 has been at 400, there has been no/or almost no ice in the Arctic. It was simply a much different kind of world when planetary systems adjusted to 400 ppm CO2 in the atmosphere. Today it is likely that we are headed to 550 and above...and what's worse, there is growing evidence that large scale methane release has already begun in the Arctic.
Arctic News: Global Extinction within one Human Lifetime as a Result of a Spreading Atmospheric Arctic Methane Heat wave and Surface Firestorm

We are warming the climate at a much more rapid rate than during past extinctions, and the growing rate of animal extinctions show that we have already started the extinction process and most people are not even aware of it! At the present pace, it will just be a matter of decades before a number of exponentially increasing GHG's crash civilization and continue on to exterminate the human race, and possibly the rest of non-microbial life as well.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26923214
http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/programs/biodiversity/elements_of_biodiversity/extinction_crisis/

What a legacy for our species and its civilization of the last 6000 years to leave for any space-faring travellers that might happen by in the next million years or so!

 

[Ben Dhyan]

So far as I can see, there's nothing in that article that supports your speculation global warming is not significantly caused by man-made activities.

Not explicitly. but implicit in the article is the fact that the 17 year pause has occurred during a period of record increases in CO2 emissions...in fact one third of all human derived CO2 emissions have occurred since 1998...

..while the global average temperature has remained relatively unchanged..

The above is for the record, so please don't come back with comments about AGW climate model projections wrt the pause..I deal with facts...this pause will cease some time and the global temperature will either be seen to go down or up and then only will it become fact...for now the pause continues so please accept thar I prefer facts over predictions.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

fThe article doesn't mention a disturbing aspect of the lag - approximately 65% of manmade carbon added to the atmosphere has occurred during the last 40 years! That is why, when these clowns like Pielke, Spencer and Christie make claims of low sensitivity to carbon dioxide based on present day atmospheric temperatures, they reveal themselves as charlatans trying to deceive their audience.
Climate Change Answers: Thermal Inertia

When we look into paleohistory at previous times when atmospheric CO2 has been at 400, there has been no/or almost no ice in the Arctic. It was simply a much different kind of world when planetary systems adjusted to 400 ppm CO2 in the atmosphere. Today it is likely that we are headed to 550 and above...and what's worse, there is growing evidence that large scale methane release has already begun in the Arctic.
Arctic News: Global Extinction within one Human Lifetime as a Result of a Spreading Atmospheric Arctic Methane Heat wave and Surface Firestorm

We are warming the climate at a much more rapid rate than during past extinctions, and the growing rate of animal extinctions show that we have already started the extinction process and most people are not even aware of it! At the present pace, it will just be a matter of decades before a number of exponentially increasing GHG's crash civilization and continue on to exterminate the human race, and possibly the rest of non-microbial life as well.
BBC News - Northern Europe hit by most bee deaths - EU study
The Extinction Crisis

What a legacy for our species and its civilization of the last 6000 years to leave for any space-faring travellers that might happen by in the next million years or so!

The only real game in town of importance wrt the current reality or no of AGW is the UN IPCC....it is the instrument and primary driving force behind all the world's governments, educational institutions, main stream media, etc. in pushing the AGW alarmism propaganda..it would be a thankless task to try and respond to it all the secondary, tertiary, etc., claims being made, regardless of merit, as I actually have a life free from worries of AGW...for example, here is a list of current AGW claims, including extinctions, doing the rounds....

A Complete List Of Things Supposedly Caused By Global Warming

:namaste

 

[esmith]

In a just released report global temperature has not increased in the past 17 years and 8 months. So,if global temperature is not increasing or decreasing why are reports saying that the climate is changing. If the latest figures are correct then it is the temperature.
Global Temperature Update: No global warming at all for 17 years 8 months – No Warming Since August 1996 | Climate Depot

 

[Jake1001]

New UN report warns the impending impacts of climate change are going to be 'severe, pervasive and irreversible'...

BBC News - Climate impacts 'overwhelming' - UN

Almost a year since this report came out. What changes to your lifestyle have you made which benefit the environment ?

 

[metis]

Almost a year since this report came out. What changes to your lifestyle have you made which benefit the environment ?

I fart less.

 

[Valjean]

Our New England friends might find this hard to believe, but 2014 was the warmest year ever recorded.
Feel free to Google.
Now it appears Antarctica is melting faster than previously thought and is due to add ~11 feet (3.35 m) to Northern latitude sea level (this in addition to glacial and arctic ice melt elsewhere in the world).The melting of Antarctica was already really bad. It just got worse. - The Washington Post

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Our New England friends might find this hard to believe, but 2014 was the warmest year ever recorded.
Feel free to Google.
Now it appears Antarctica is melting faster than previously thought and is due to add ~11 feet (3.35 m) to Northern latitude sea level (this in addition to glacial and arctic ice melt elsewhere in the world).The melting of Antarctica was already really bad. It just got worse. - The Washington Post

Two things Seyorni...first, your reading skills are really quite poor, but then the agw alarmist WaPo banks on its readers being like that, and secondly, apparently you know nothing about the present state of the Antarctic, Antarctic sea ice coverage has increased every decade for the last 35 years...

Ref..Cryosphere Today – Arctic Climate Research at the University of Illinois...

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Btw, when the IPCC calculated average global temperature increase over the last 135 years since records began in 1880, is plotted, it looks like this....scary yes?

Who would have ever thought it could have caused all this..... warmlist



Btw, agw alarmists generally don't believe this graph when they first see it, the typical hype they hear about agw causes them to imagine global temperatures rapidly climbing out of control....

 

[Valjean]

Where are you getting these data?
Why are 99% of climate scientists apparently unaware of them?

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Where are you getting these data?
Why are 99% of climate scientists apparently unaware of them?

I gave it above as the University of Illinois Arctic Climate Research...here is a link.... Polar Sea Ice Cap and Snow - Cryosphere Today

As for the graph, it also was given at the top of the graph.... GISS..... GISS stands for Goddard Institute of Space Studies and is one of the global temperature data sets used by the IPCC in their reports to the UN and member governments concerning agw. Fyi, the increase in average global temperature since records began is about 0.7 degree C.

100% of all climate scientists are aware, but those scientists whose research funding depends on their supporting the political agenda of the United Nations who are in the process of organizing trillions of dollars in funding to combat agw, to be paid for by the world's tax payers, only publish pro agw research findings. The vast majority of the msm is in lock step with the UN agw agenda, and misinform the masses of the world with the agw hype and spin that is exemplified in the WaPo article.

But I can't understand why you were not aware of these things, it's been going on for the last couple of decades,,,,but most people are still skeptical....something about God given intuition I guess...

 

[Bunyip]

I gave it above as the University of Illinois Arctic Climate Research...here is a link.... Polar Sea Ice Cap and Snow - Cryosphere Today

As for the graph, it also was given at the top of the graph.... GISS..... GISS stands for Goddard Institute of Space Studies and is one of the global temperature data sets used by the IPCC in their reports to the UN and member governments concerning agw. Fyi, the increase in average global temperature since records began is about 0.7 degree C.

100% of all climate scientists are aware, but those scientists whose research funding depends on their supporting the political agenda of the United Nations who are in the process of organizing trillions of dollars in funding to combat agw, to be paid for by the world's tax payers, only publish pro agw research findings. The vast majority of the msm is in lock step with the UN agw agenda, and misinform the masses of the world with the agw hype and spin that is exemplified in the WaPo article.

But I can't understand why you were not aware of these things, it's been going on for the last couple of decades,,,,but most people are still skeptical....something about God given intuition I guess...

A 0.7 degree increase is actually a lot. Two or three percent would change the map of the world forever.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

A 0.7 degree increase is actually a lot. Two or three percent would change the map of the world forever.

0.7 is a far cry from 2 or 3 degrees...and the 0.7 C figure occurred over a 135 year period...and has stood at 0.7 for the last 18 years. The agw computer models diverge further from reality with each passing year. I provide you with factual temperature change, and you give us agw computer models...

And how well as humanity and the plant kingdom done with the 0.7 C increase...very well, both are doing better than before thank you...

 

[Bunyip]

0.7 is a far cry from 2 or 3 degrees.

Yes Ben, about a third.

..and the 0.7 C figure occurred over a 135 year period...and has stood at 0.7 for the last 18 years. The agw computer models diverge further from reality with each passing year.

Well of course, they are models - that is how modelling works.

And how well as humanity and the plant kingdom done with the 0.7 C increase...very well, both are doing better than before thank you...[/QUOTE]The plant kingdom will be fine Ben, it is the billions who will be left homeless that we are worried about.

Anyway, given your apparent expertise (you clearly think you know more than climatologists do) so what sort of increase would be a problem?

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Yes Ben, about a third. Well of course, they are models - that is how modelling works.

"And how well as humanity and the plant kingdom done with the 0.7 C increase...very well, both are doing better than before thank you..".

The plant kingdom will be fine Ben, it is the billions who will be left homeless that we are worried about.

Anyway, given your apparent expertise (you clearly think you know more than climatologists do) so what sort of increase would be a problem?

I deal with reality...the planet's temperature regulation is working fine...the observed temperatures are good for humanity as well as the plants. The agw alarmist propaganda is failing....such statements like "the billions who will be left homeless" are b/s....the models are not tracking the observations...therefore they are scientifically wrong and are destined to be sent to the scrap heap.

So don't pull some number out of a computer simulation of future temperature and deal with it as though it is as real as the observed numbers I provide...which is all I can do.