• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

AGW and rising sea levels (3 Viewers)

Thanks "fugl" for all of the interesting links. It's good of you to take the time. The trouble is that those with their heads in the sand won't notice until the tide comes in ....
 
Thanks "fugl" for all of the interesting links. It's good of you to take the time. The trouble is that those with their heads in the sand won't notice until the tide comes in ....

You're welcome. All too true, I'm afraid, particularly in the US under the soon-to-be administration.
 
Not surprising, sadly - the whole Arctic has been crazy hot for the last 2-3 months.

The sea temperature off Svalbard was 18°C at the end of August and 17°C at the end of October; should be max 3°C in the summer.

Just as bad in the Southern Hemisphere oceans too, with record low sea ice for the time of year.

Combined, the total sea ice is seriously frightening now - see last 3 months on the graphs below. This has never happened before. I suspect this means we've passed the tipping point.
 

Attachments

  • Sea ice.jpg
    Sea ice.jpg
    215.6 KB · Views: 101
  • Sea ice 2.jpg
    Sea ice 2.jpg
    81.3 KB · Views: 87
Not surprising, sadly - the whole Arctic has been crazy hot for the last 2-3 months.

The sea temperature off Svalbard was 18°C at the end of August and 17°C at the end of October; should be max 3°C in the summer.

Just as bad in the Southern Hemisphere oceans too, with record low sea ice for the time of year.

Combined, the total sea ice is seriously frightening now - see last 3 months on the graphs below. This has never happened before. I suspect this means we've passed the tipping point.

Oh my, hope you're wrong. . .
 
...The study, by scientists working as part of a group called World Weather Attribution, looked at the influence of climate change on the temperatures, using models of the atmosphere as it exists and of a hypothetical atmosphere with no greenhouse gas emissions and thus no human-driven climate change. They found that a warm February like the one just experienced is about four times more likely in the current climate than it would have been in 1900, before significant emissions began to change the climate.

In other words, even using unsubstantiated climate models the probability is .25 (1 in 4) that it would have happened in pre-industrial times anyway. Sorry, this is pseudo-scientific alarmism.

We could go into the foolishness and misuse of statistics, but I'll restrain myself.

Ed
 
In other words, even using unsubstantiated climate models the probability is .25 (1 in 4) that it would have happened in pre-industrial times anyway. Sorry, this is pseudo-scientific alarmism.

Way too strong a condemnation. The probability cited, while certainly not in itself "proving" anything, is congruent with the masses of other evidence for AGW, and there's nothing in the article to suggest a stronger claim is being made for it.

The world is heating up, a phenomenon to which a growing consensus of scientists ascribes in part, at least, to human activities. A few skeptics dispute human involvement. So, given this state of affairs and what appears to be the extreme urgency of the problem, what do you suggest we do with respect to carbon emissions? Nothing at all, just merrily continue to pollute away in hopes that the mavericks are right and the scientific consensus is wrong? I recall asking this question of you in another thread long ago. You didn't answer it then but I'm hoping you will now.
 
... So, given this state of affairs and what appears to be the extreme urgency of the problem, what do you suggest we do with respect to carbon [dioxide] emissions? ...

Absolutely nothing at all! What appears be an urgent problem to you does not appear that way to me from a scientific perspective. I'm on the record for that.

An inconvenient truth, however, is that I've got to get on with my taxes. :-C

Ed
 
Absolutely nothing at all! What appears be an urgent problem to you does not appear that way to me from a scientific perspective. I'm on the record for that.

I know your attitude toward AGW but are you saying that GW as such is not a serious problem? Surely, whatever the causes, ice is melting and sea levels are rising?
 
Warning! This thread is more than 4 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top