[johnu]

 Daniel1960, on 2018-August-09, 06:40, said:

Everything is a risk. While it may just be an inconvenience for some, it is a necessity for others. How much resources are people willing to divert from present day needs (food, shelter, energy, health, etc.) to mitigate a potential future problem? For the wealthy or elite, this is not a problem. For those living on the edge, this has major consequences. The voters may not have cared about character. But they certainly cared about their livelihood, and the effects it may have on their children and grandchildren.

We're worried about the poor are we Since the wealthy and elite have the most to lose (eventually), I'm sure they have no problem picking up the slack by paying more

[johnu]

 ldrews, on 2018-August-08, 11:06, said:

This is just a form of Pascal's Wager: It is rational to believe in God because if God does not exist then no harm is done but if God does exist then you have gotten on the right side.

Nice try and thanks for playing. I'm going to award you the Putin soccer ball that he gave to Dennison in Helsinki.

Of course, people worship countless gods around the world, and nobody has positive proof that any of them exist. Scientists know the results of climate change in the past, they have a good but not perfect understanding of the science, and they (and anybody who wishes to see) can see the effects of climate change on today's environment. Planning to contain global warming is more akin to insurance. You pay a smaller amount now to protect yourself from a catastrophic event that could ruin you in the future.

[johnu]

 Al_U_Card, on 2018-August-08, 13:58, said:

Hmmmnnn. Climate science . consensus . nonsense.

Real science, theory,, hypothesis, measurement, analysis, conclusion.

CO2 at anywhere from 200 to 6000 ppm has been seen (based on the paleontology) to be mostly a source of greening when the planetary temperatures are not in icehouse conditions. Commercial greenhouses run around 1000 to 1500 ppm. Nuclear subs around 8000. A lot of the CO2 back in the distant past was converted into plant matter. The planet is now greening as CO2 increases. If the planet were to cool by, say, 0.8 deg. C over the next 30 years (the same as the rise over the last 120 years), and CO2 were to increase to 500 ppm. what would the sensible action be?

What do "real" scientists think about increased growth of plants in response to more CO2?

Global 'greening' has slowed rise of CO2 in the atmosphere, study finds

and the conclusion by "real" scientists is that plants can't reduce the amount of CO2 enough to slow down the global warming train.

[ldrews]

 johnu, on 2018-August-09, 08:36, said:

Nice try and thanks for playing. I'm going to award you the Putin soccer ball that he gave to Dennison in Helsinki.

Of course, people worship countless gods around the world, and nobody has positive proof that any of them exist. Scientists know the results of climate change in the past, they have a good but not perfect understanding of the science, and they (and anybody who wishes to see) can see the effects of climate change on today's environment. Planning to contain global warming is more akin to insurance. You pay a smaller amount now to protect yourself from a catastrophic event that could ruin you in the future.

I can usually tell when my post touches a sensitive point, the response is usually snarky. But carry on.

[Daniel1960]

 johnu, on 2018-August-09, 08:49, said:

What do "real" scientists think about increased growth of plants in response to more CO2?

Global 'greening' has slowed rise of CO2 in the atmosphere, study finds

and the conclusion by "real" scientists is that plants can't reduce the amount of CO2 enough to slow down the global warming train.

Yes, most scientists admit that increased atmospheric levels of CO2 results in increased plant growth. Greenhouse farmers have know this for years. Considering that 15% of the CO2 rise can be attributed to deforestation, and current plant levels removed 25% of the CO2 from the atmosphere, imagine how much CO2 could be removed in a reforested planet.

https://www.livescie...orestation.html

[Al_U_Card]

What is a global-warming train and how much CO2 does it take per rate of speed increase?
Seriously, other than computer models that are parameterized to use [CO2] as a control knob, nature, fortunately, has not been in thrall to [CO2] over the existence of the planet.
What is needed is a sensible approach to energy use efficiency, density and availability. The BRIC nations will be a major concern in this century while our governments argue about carbon taxes, plastic straws and tenths of a degree of global temperature.

[Al_U_Card]

 Daniel1960, on 2018-August-09, 12:04, said:

Yes, most scientists admit that increased atmospheric levels of CO2 results in increased plant growth. Greenhouse farmers have know this for years. Considering that 15% of the CO2 rise can be attributed to deforestation, and current plant levels removed 25% of the CO2 from the atmosphere, imagine how much CO2 could be removed in a reforested planet.

https://www.livescie...orestation.html

Is not the human part of the global CO2 concentration on the order of 5% of the total amount present in the atmosphere?

[johnu]

 Daniel1960, on 2018-August-09, 12:04, said:

Considering that 15% of the CO2 rise can be attributed to deforestation, and current plant levels removed 25% of the CO2 from the atmosphere, imagine how much CO2 could be removed in a reforested planet.

Reforesting the planet is probably a bigger longshot than lowering CO2. Illegal logging on a vast scale, worldwide urban sprawl, water rationing in many parts of the world. I can imagine reforesting, but I don't think it is many times less realistic than reducing CO2 emissions.

And by your numbers, CO2 levels would still have risen 85% as much without deforestation.

[johnu]

 ldrews, on 2018-August-09, 10:07, said:

I can usually tell when my post touches a sensitive point, the response is usually snarky. But carry on.

Give yourself more credit. Almost everything you post offends somebody

[Daniel1960]

 johnu, on 2018-August-10, 00:42, said:

Reforesting the planet is probably a bigger longshot than lowering CO2. Illegal logging on a vast scale, worldwide urban sprawl, water rationing in many parts of the world. I can imagine reforesting, but I don't think it is many times less realistic than reducing CO2 emissions.

And by your numbers, CO2 levels would still have risen 85% as much without deforestation.

Possibly. But think of the greater benefit; better water resource management, cooler temperatures, less species loss, and greater aesthetics. The 15% is based on the increase from 290 ppm levels. Imagine how much larger that would be in todays 400+ ppm, which plants absorbing higher levels.

[Al_U_Card]

 Daniel1960, on 2018-August-10, 05:44, said:

Possibly. But think of the greater benefit; better water resource management, cooler temperatures, less species loss, and greater aesthetics. The 15% is based on the increase from 290 ppm levels. Imagine how much larger that would be in todays 400+ ppm, which plants absorbing higher levels.

Yup, facts and scientific study sure do offend "someone" ...

[johnu]

'It can’t get much hotter ... can it?' How heat became a national US problem

So hot, it could make some people's heads explode. Or maybe just reading the article will be enough

[Al_U_Card]

As hot as the 1930's or the 1880's? Here, on the local weather segment of the news, attention was drawn to new records since the 1950's at the local airport. Now, given that this airport has tripled in size since the 50's and handles all sizes of jet planes, is it any surprise that temperatures there are higher now? Gotta look behind the curtain...

[Daniel1960]

 johnu, on 2018-August-14, 08:49, said:

'It can’t get much hotter ... can it?' How heat became a national US problem

So hot, it could make some people's heads explode. Or maybe just reading the article will be enough

What the article failed to mention is that fewer people are dying from the heat than in the past. The deadliest heat wave in the U.S. occurred in 1901, killing almost 10,000 people. The 2015 heat wave in India and Pakistan killed less than 5000, considerably less not even taking into account the huge population difference. The devastating 2003 heat wave killed more, but most of those deaths were attributed to the accumulation of pollution and toxins in the stagnant air. The article also failed to mention that maximum temperatures are on the decline. In the U.S., maximum temperature have declined 0.8F from the early 20th century to the early 21th century.

According to NOAA, 15 new maximum temperatures were set so far this summer. Consider that there are over 100,000 reporting stations, this amount to less than 0.1%. That would be an average summer, if we had 1000 years of temperature data for all the reporting stations. By comparison, 1936 saw the most all-time maximum temperature records set with 793, over fewer stations.

https://www.ncdc.noa...tatools/records

[Al_U_Card]

 johnu, on 2018-August-14, 08:49, said:

'It can’t get much hotter ... can it?' How heat became a national US problem

So hot, it could make some people's heads explode. Or maybe just reading the article will be enough

Likely just people who read the "Grauniad" regularly as that would explain why they appear to be brainless... the Guardian, definitely an unbiased source of propaganda...errr alarmism...errr speculation?

[johnu]

 Al_U_Card, on 2018-August-14, 13:30, said:

As hot as the 1930's or the 1880's? Here, on the local weather segment of the news, attention was drawn to new records since the 1950's at the local airport. Now, given that this airport has tripled in size since the 50's and handles all sizes of jet planes, is it any surprise that temperatures there are higher now? Gotta look behind the curtain...

Hmmm,you need to check for moths. Your curtain seems to be riddled with holes.

Most airports have been physically mature for 30 or 40 plus years.

Climate Central

The five warmest years in the global record have all come in the 2010s
The 10 warmest years on record have all come since 1998
The 20 warmest years on record have all come since 1995

But, I'm sure that airports now are bigger than they were in the 1880's

[johnu]

 Daniel1960, on 2018-August-15, 12:11, said:

What the article failed to mention is that fewer people are dying from the heat than in the past. The deadliest heat wave in the U.S. occurred in 1901, killing almost 10,000 people. The 2015 heat wave in India and Pakistan killed less than 5000, considerably less not even taking into account the huge population difference. The devastating 2003 heat wave killed more, but most of those deaths were attributed to the accumulation of pollution and toxins in the stagnant air.

That would be a perfectly excellent statement for a Dennison climate change denier who doesn't believe in climate change because Dennison told them it was fake news.

Anybody else would look to see what else changed in the world since 1901.

Let's see:

1. Medical care in this century is basically a century better than it was in the 1900's. I could try to be more precise but I think that is accurate enough.

2. There is something called air conditioning now. Not everybody has it, but I've heard that those who do says it makes things cooler.

3. There are electric fans. Not everybody has one, but I've heard that those who do says it makes things feel cooler.

4. There are things called coolers. I'll let you know what they do after I do some research on them.

5. Governments actually put out warnings to people to avoid strenuous outdoor activity when temperatures become dangerously high (I guess some people think they should keep out of people's business).

6. Public water systems are much more widespread now. Many people have been educated to keep hydrated in hot weather.

 Daniel1960, on 2018-August-15, 12:11, said:

The article also failed to mention that maximum temperatures are on the decline. In the U.S., maximum temperature have declined 0.8F from the early 20th century to the early 21th century.

According to NOAA, 15 new maximum temperatures were set so far this summer. Consider that there are over 100,000 reporting stations, this amount to less than 0.1%. That would be an average summer, if we had 1000 years of temperature data for all the reporting stations. By comparison, 1936 saw the most all-time maximum temperature records set with 793, over fewer stations.

https://www.ncdc.noa...tatools/records

Well, 2018 is only shaping up to be the 4th hottest year on record, and the 3 hottest years on record, 2015, 2016, and 2017 were the hottest years by a substantial margin. It's hard to stand out when there is so much "excellence" around you.

Climate Central

The five warmest years in the global record have all come in the 2010s
The 10 warmest years on record have all come since 1998
The 20 warmest years on record have all come since 1995

[Daniel1960]

 johnu, on 2018-August-16, 08:29, said:

That would be a perfectly excellent statement for a Dennison climate change denier who doesn't believe in climate change because Dennison told them it was fake news.

Anybody else would look to see what else changed in the world since 1901.

Let's see:

1. Medical care in this century is basically a century better than it was in the 1900's. I could try to be more precise but I think that is accurate enough.

2. There is something called air conditioning now. Not everybody has it, but I've heard that those who do says it makes things cooler.

3. There are electric fans. Not everybody has one, but I've heard that those who do says it makes things feel cooler.

4. There are things called coolers. I'll let you know what they do after I do some research on them.

5. Governments actually put out warnings to people to avoid strenuous outdoor activity when temperatures become dangerously high (I guess some people think they should keep out of people's business).

6. Public water systems are much more widespread now. Many people have been educated to keep hydrated in hot weather.





Well, 2018 is only shaping up to be the 4th hottest year on record, and the 3 hottest years on record, 2015, 2016, and 2017 were the hottest years by a substantial margin. It's hard to stand out when there is so much "excellence" around you.

Climate Central

The five warmest years in the global record have all come in the 2010s
The 10 warmest years on record have all come since 1998
The 20 warmest years on record have all come since 1995

You are correct in that they are the warmest years. Why? Because the average temperatures are the highest. But these are just averages, and do not mean that all temperatures are increasing similarly. Temperatures are rising fastest during the coldest times, particularly in the winter and at night. As an example, the average temperature in the U.S. has risen 1.25F from the first half of the 20th century to present day; highest in Alaska and the northern plain states, and lowest in the Southern states. However, the coldest temperatures of the year have increased by a much larger amount, averaging 3.33F, highest in the north, and lowest in the south. Conversely, the hottest temperatures of the year have decreased in every region, except the southwest, averaging -0.78F.

https://science2017.....gov/chapter/6/

Consequently, heat waves have decreased over this time frame, as summertime high temperatures have decreased.

https://www.epa.gov/...ow-temperatures

[Al_U_Card]

 johnu, on 2018-August-16, 08:08, said:

Hmmm,you need to check for moths. Your curtain seems to be riddled with holes.

Most airports have been physically mature for 30 or 40 plus years.

Climate Central

The five warmest years in the global record have all come in the 2010s
The 10 warmest years on record have all come since 1998
The 20 warmest years on record have all come since 1995

But, I'm sure that airports now are bigger than they were in the 1880's

Plastic straws are now almost as undesirable as strawmen... I have used Dorval airport for most of these last 60 years and IT has grown significantly over that time, as have the airplanes in use at ALL airports, n'est-ce pas? Avoiding the questions doesn't change the reality of the issue at hand.

[Winstonm]

 johnu, on 2018-August-16, 08:29, said:

That would be a perfectly excellent statement for a Dennison climate change denier who doesn't believe in climate change because Dennison told them it was fake news.

Anybody else would look to see what else changed in the world since 1901.

Let's see:

1. Medical care in this century is basically a century better than it was in the 1900's. I could try to be more precise but I think that is accurate enough.

2. There is something called air conditioning now. Not everybody has it, but I've heard that those who do says it makes things cooler.

3. There are electric fans. Not everybody has one, but I've heard that those who do says it makes things feel cooler.

4. There are things called coolers. I'll let you know what they do after I do some research on them.

5. Governments actually put out warnings to people to avoid strenuous outdoor activity when temperatures become dangerously high (I guess some people think they should keep out of people's business).

6. Public water systems are much more widespread now. Many people have been educated to keep hydrated in hot weather.





Well, 2018 is only shaping up to be the 4th hottest year on record, and the 3 hottest years on record, 2015, 2016, and 2017 were the hottest years by a substantial margin. It's hard to stand out when there is so much "excellence" around you.

Climate Central

The five warmest years in the global record have all come in the 2010s
The 10 warmest years on record have all come since 1998
The 20 warmest years on record have all come since 1995

Don't worry. As soon as it gets hot enough to be uncomfortable in the board room, the free market will fix it.