Is global warming real? (Split from The First Climate Model Turns 50, and ...)

[Sensei]

Just now, Huckleberry of Yore said:

I examined the graph but I didn't watch a video, do you mean the one about arctic ice?  Sorry I didn't watch the video.  Anyway, I saw the "alleged" temperature increase but this just leads to more questions.

This is timelapse video made from photos taken by satellites for forty years. Snow and ice, white surface generally , is reflecting sun light. Water absorbs light and gets hotter. So the less snow during winter on poles and land (mostly Northern Hemisphere) the higher increase of temperatures and the Sun is start adding its brick to human made global warming.. There is many such correlations accelerating global warming.

Just now, Huckleberry of Yore said:

Anyway, I saw the "alleged" temperature increase but this just leads to more questions.

..sounds like you don't want to ask questions and learn..

[StringJunky]

2 minutes ago, Sensei said:

This is timelapse video made from photos taken by satellites for forty years. Snow and ice, white surface generally , is reflecting sun light. Water absorbs light and gets hotter. So the less snow during winter on poles and land (mostly Northern Hemisphere) the higher increase of temperatures and the Sun is start adding its brick to human made global warming.. There is many such correlations accelerating global warming.

..sounds like you don't want to ask questions and learn..

He's made his mind up methinks.

Edited January 16, 2020 by StringJunky

[Huckleberry of Yore]

3 minutes ago, Sensei said:

.sounds like you don't want to ask questions and learn..

I have stated that I have questions, but also been discouraged to ask as the general attitude is IMO abusive.  But I'll formulate a question, post it later, and see if that is the case.

[Dagl1]

Just now, Huckleberry of Yore said:

I have stated that I have questions, but also been discouraged to ask as the general attitude is IMO abusive.  But I'll formulate a question, post it later, and see if that is the case.

I think it is because you are given sources, but then do not watch them, while still talking about 'alleged' temperature changes, as if that's not kind of shown at this point?

Questions are fine, but it may be good to first fully consider the answers given.

[Strange]

37 minutes ago, Huckleberry of Yore said:

I understand what's going on now.  You and moth et al are assigning a negative outcome to global warming, I tend to disagree that it would be negative,

Your disagreement is not based on evidence, though.  (I have no idea what it is based on: religion, politics, voodoo, Fox News, rolling dice, tarot cards ... who knows. Definitely not evidence, though.)

37 minutes ago, Huckleberry of Yore said:

I understand what's going on now.  You and moth et al are assigning a negative outcome to global warming, I tend to disagree that it would be negative,

That is even more true for evolution than for climate change. Climate is measured over decades; evolution typically requires centuries or millennia.

37 minutes ago, Huckleberry of Yore said:

To be honest, I suspect the other side is considerably more than 3%, but that is my opinion

And, again, you have provided no evidence to support your beliefs, so there is no reason for anyone to take them seriously. You might as well say that you suspect Santa Claus is real.

37 minutes ago, Huckleberry of Yore said:

Of course I suspect I'll be accused of being the flat earther in this discussion so why bring it up.

You are. And you have exactly as much evidence on your side as flat-earthers do. (And it is pretty much a myth that it was ever generally believed that the world was flat.)

11 minutes ago, Huckleberry of Yore said:

I have stated that I have questions, but also been discouraged to ask as the general attitude is IMO abusive.  But I'll formulate a question, post it later, and see if that is the case.

But you don't just have questions. You have an "opinion" and you are not interested in the answers to the questions. Because, inevitably, they disagree with your baseless opinion.

Having clearly stated your beliefs, and having made it obvious that you are not interested in evidence, it is dishonest to keep claiming you are "just asking".

[Huckleberry of Yore]

2 minutes ago, Dagl1 said:

I think it is because you are given sources, but then do not watch them, while still talking about 'alleged' temperature changes

I haven't asked a question yet other than for a consensus reference.  I'm sure that video is very interesting but sorry, I tend to value people's responses.  (I don't currently have sound hooked up to my PC so watching a video is a hassle - I'd assume it has narration.)

[Sensei]

39 minutes ago, Huckleberry of Yore said:

  You and moth et al are assigning a negative outcome to global warming, I tend to disagree that it would be negative, and believe the "solutions" proposed would be disastrous.

Consequences of global warming will be massive starvation, wars for water and food, increase of food and water prices, massive emigration of billions of people living on lands affected by increased temperatures to more moderate temperature regions (Europe, North America and North East Asia). Death of sea wild fishes and sea living organisms (plankton does not like higher temperatures and it is primary food source of the all sea living higher level organisms). Oxygen dissolves less efficiently at higher temperatures of water. Sea living organisms have no time to adjust for lower concentration of Oxygen, so many species will extinct. People relying on sea living organisms will be starving or will have to switch to other food sources even further increasing their prices. And so on, so on..

Edited January 16, 2020 by Sensei

[Bufofrog]

9 minutes ago, Huckleberry of Yore said:

general attitude is IMO abusive.

I think many members are probably tired of hearing for the umpteenth time someone saying that they don't believe in climate change because they want to.

[Strange]

14 minutes ago, Huckleberry of Yore said:

I have stated that I have questions, but also been discouraged to ask as the general attitude is IMO abusive. 

To be honest, I think people have been incredibly patient and fair when dealing with someone who thinks their personal beliefs trump scientific evidence. But people like that also tend to think that any disagreement is some sort of personal insult.

As we are now clearly well into the realms of "sea-lioning", and you have no science to support your beliefs, I am going to suggest that this thread is closed.

[CharonY]

!

Moderator Note

Since we got already several threads discussing/debunking common arguments of climate change denial, this thread is closed for now.