Page 5 of 20 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 198
Thanks Tree108Thanks

Thread: World Shatters Heat Records in 2016

  1. #41
    RNG
    RNG is offline
    Member RNG's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    2,665
    Thanks
    2380

    From
    Canada, West Coast
    Quote Originally Posted by BigLeRoy View Post
    I'm sorry, but what a STUPID post. For one thing, who is 'they'?? They were a TINY group of FRINGE scientists in the 1970's who thought the world was headed for another Ice Age, and they managed to get their ruminations printed up in such 'scientific' publications as Time and Newsweek. There was NO scientific consensus on global cooling in the 1970's, in STARK and SHARP contrast to the scientific consensus that exists today.

    And, my GOD, it's as if you are BLISSFULLY unaware that we have FAR more powerful computers today than we did in, say, 1974, when that global cooling FAD was making the rounds.

    Astonishing. Have you ever even HEARD of computers???? Aren't you using one, RIGHT NOW??????
    There actually was some reason to fear a global cooling in the 60s. I wasn't aware that it went into the 70s. It was due to the rapid increase in particulate emissions from vehicles, including the, by today's standards crude gasoline engines, the diesels you probably remember belching black smoke out the stacks and totally unscrubbed coal burning factories and power plants of the day.

    Think about the documented short term world cooling seen following massive volcanic eruptions.

    And this was the target of the first round of air pollution regulations.

  2. #42
    RNG
    RNG is offline
    Member RNG's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    2,665
    Thanks
    2380

    From
    Canada, West Coast
    Quote Originally Posted by bmanmcfly View Post
    You know, things like lossless feedback loops... as opposed to logarithmic feedback.

    I've not run the numbers, but that would be more consistent with other natural phenomenon I've looked at... but hockey stick curves are sexier and scarier.
    What a meaningless statement. There are several positive feedback mechanisms in global warming. Warming lessens the extent of ice and snow cover, thus decreasing the earth's albedo. The increase of clathrate decomposition with increasing temperatures in the polar regions and the oceans increasing the atmospheric CH4.

    What feedback loops do you refer to? Those are not loops.

    And I have only ever run into the use of the term logarithmic feedback in describing some analog amplifiers. How does it relate to climate science at all?

    Edit: Sorry BigLeRoy, I posted before seeing your post. I didn't mean to "Leroy" you. So now with your nic, I have to explain that term.

    On a forum I visited long ago, a member with the user name Leroy used to consistently paraphrase a post that impressed him and post it in a vain attempt at stolen glory. So it became known as Leroying a post when it was done accidentally.
    Last edited by RNG; 10th January 2017 at 10:06 AM.
    Thanks from BigLeRoy

  3. #43
    Established Member
    Joined
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    5,559
    Thanks
    1029

    From
    Banned
    Quote Originally Posted by RNG View Post
    There actually was some reason to fear a global cooling in the 60s. I wasn't aware that it went into the 70s. It was due to the rapid increase in particulate emissions from vehicles, including the, by today's standards crude gasoline engines, the diesels you probably remember belching black smoke out the stacks and totally unscrubbed coal burning factories and power plants of the day.

    Think about the documented short term world cooling seen following massive volcanic eruptions.

    And this was the target of the first round of air pollution regulations.
    The climate can't stay the same, everything changes, so between global warming and global cooling, warming is much better.

  4. #44
    Veteran Member Isalexi's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    28,638
    Thanks
    18192

    From
    Maryland
    What I cannot understand is why the uneducated don't want this studied since it could affect the future of their families and the world. It would be great if we found out that it was not true and that 92% of the scientists are all wrong

  5. #45
    Senior Member bmanmcfly's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    9,479
    Thanks
    1698

    From
    C-A-N-A-D-A-Eh
    Loving it...

    Quote Originally Posted by StanStill View Post
    No it doesn't, but that's yet another irrelevant tangent that you are bringing up. Logic? Now you want to discuss logic too? How many things unrelated to the topic do you intend on introducing to the conversation?
    See, this is why playing dumb just makes you look dumb...

    You see, when you accept a prospect like a hockey stick curve, then you are saying that every atom of co2 holds a constant value of heat... much like how those of us who live in reality as opposed to delusion know that perpetual motion is not possible because you have to consider the mitigating factors, like friction in that case.

    I'll bring up as many scientific concepts as necessary to illustrate the points that refute your opinions.


    I guess you weren't done with irrelevant tangents. Now you want to dazzle us your electrical knowledge? Could you tell us about treatments for ADD while you're at it?
    It's the same reason your car will accelerate faster from 0-60 than from 61-120.... again, these are just analogies so that if you apply your implied scientific knowledge you would be forced to concede reality.


    There you go again pretending this has anything to do with logic. You claimed that global warming theory defies the laws of thermodynamics, but when asked to explain such a bold and ludicrous claim, you disappear behind ever changing smoke and mirror type responses.

    Why not simply explain yourself? I have a guess as to why you won't.
    I know, clearly, logic does not enter the consideration before you post, otherwise you would realize that playing dumb is not a method to look smart... you don't join mensa by intentionally failing their test.

    Anyway, that's not QUITE what I said, but that's the type of reaction you expect when the beliefs of a religious zealot is challenged... I had intentionally framed things in such a way that if you actually knew what you were talking about, then you would realize what I was referring to, even going so far as to provide multiple analogous examples to illustrate it...

    You see, I like to win. So, how was the best way to win? (Even though you have yet to realize it) I went through the process of first demonstrating that I've got a clue what I'm talking about, while simultaneously showing that you both understand little to nothing of the topics you are speaking and cannot be trusted to provide accurate knowledge... I wish I could see your face next week when you realize it.

  6. #46
    Anarquistador StanStill's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    7,847
    Thanks
    7644

    From
    Home
    Quote Originally Posted by TNVolunteer73 View Post

    Excellent graph that shows the correlation between CO2 in the atmosphere and the temperature. So according the the sine wave type rhythm you mentioned, we should be beginning a cooling phase, not warming. Of course, to know what's going on now, you'd need to zoom in quite a bit more. Your "LITTLE ICE AGE" doesn't even show up on that graph because it's effect on the is too small. Because it wasn't really an ice age. The Thames river froze a few times over a 400 year period. Glaciers never covered the continent. The average temperature of the earth barely changed, because it wasn't a REAL ICE AGE.
    Thanks from tnbskts

  7. #47
    Radical Centrist BigLeRoy's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    19,392
    Thanks
    17008

    From
    Colorado
    Quote Originally Posted by TNVolunteer73 View Post
    Michael mann Hockey Stick is only a Hockey stick if you start your data during the LITTLE ICE AGE. (Between 1300-1900).

    if you start you data 1000 Ad it is not a hockey stick it is a U if you go back 150,000 the hockey stick turns into a "UU" 400,000 that hockey stick becomes a "UUUU"

    Climates move in cycles.. that match a rhythm .. you know what a Sine wave is don't you?




    now notice the rhythmic cycles of our climate warming and cooling like a sine wave not a hockey stick.


    It is frankly ASTONISHING that you can look at those two graphs and see them as being identical. What you see in that bottom graph is NOT a sine wave. And again, how can you come up with records of climate going back 400,000 years while simultaneously claiming that such records ONLY go back 150 years?!?!?????

    Picture LeRoy shaking his head in wonderment. In wonderment that a great country like America would tolerate schools so AWFUL that they produce citizens like TNVolunteer, who would not be able to reason his way out of a paper bag.
    Thanks from StanStill and RNG

  8. #48
    Radical Centrist BigLeRoy's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    19,392
    Thanks
    17008

    From
    Colorado
    Quote Originally Posted by StanStill View Post
    Excellent graph that shows the correlation between CO2 in the atmosphere and the temperature. So according the the sine wave type rhythm you mentioned, we should be beginning a cooling phase, not warming. Of course, to know what's going on now, you'd need to zoom in quite a bit more. Your "LITTLE ICE AGE" doesn't even show up on that graph because it's effect on the is too small. Because it wasn't really an ice age. The Thames river froze a few times over a 400 year period. Glaciers never covered the continent. The average temperature of the earth barely changed, because it wasn't a REAL ICE AGE.
    Moreover, the so-called Little Ice Age seems to have affected only the North Atlantic region, a rather small part of the Earth. [Though perhaps not to folks with a thoroughly Euro-centric worldview; they look at those distorted Mercator maps of the world and get the impression that Europe is as big as Africa, when it is actually only a FRACTION of the size....]

  9. #49
    Radical Centrist BigLeRoy's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    19,392
    Thanks
    17008

    From
    Colorado
    Quote Originally Posted by TNVolunteer73 View Post
    if you had read my link, ICE CORE SAMPLES..... and Tree Rings, and Sea Bed Samples.

    But then again, you choose to make Fake News Strories to post about Trump and his Supporters than to educate yourself. FYI Oak Ridge National Laboratories climate Record only covers the last 150,000 years not 400,000 it was GSS that has gathered 400,000 years of Data Just so you don't sound stupid again.
    Yes. Yes, we can learn a LOT about past climates by analyzing ice core samples, tree rings, sea bed samples, and such things. Yes, that is where we get these records of climate change going back 400,000 years.

    So WHY do you keep falsely claiming we only know about climate for the last 150 years?????????

  10. #50
    Veteran Member TNVolunteer73's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    26,290
    Thanks
    6945

    From
    TN
    Quote Originally Posted by BigLeRoy View Post
    It is frankly ASTONISHING that you can look at those two graphs and see them as being identical. What you see in that bottom graph is NOT a sine wave. And again, how can you come up with records of climate going back 400,000 years while simultaneously claiming that such records ONLY go back 150 years?!?!?????

    Picture LeRoy shaking his head in wonderment. In wonderment that a great country like America would tolerate schools so AWFUL that they produce citizens like TNVolunteer, who would not be able to reason his way out of a paper bag.
    @BigLeRoy


    Hmmm I provided data showing my statements to be factual..

    what did you provide to show your data to be correct. OH Wait NOT ONE DARN THING.

Page 5 of 20 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Trump shatters GOP records with small donors
    By excalibur in forum Current Events
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 19th September 2016, 01:38 PM
  2. Why the World Will End Surely on 29 July 2016 ? Shocking Facts
    By DemoWhip in forum Philosophy and Religion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 1st August 2016, 11:37 AM
  3. Will 2016 be the year the Muslim world makes contact?
    By sam I am in forum World Politics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 1st January 2016, 03:31 PM
  4. Replies: 79
    Last Post: 17th February 2013, 10:07 AM
  5. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 15th February 2013, 05:12 AM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed