Topic: Reddit’s science forum banned climate deniers. - page 67. (Read 636446 times)

When it comes to climate change, I feel like Michael Corleone in Godfather III: Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in. I already noted here earlier my latest rumble with some climatistas in Boulder on Monday, and today I see the news that the temperature “pause” is back on again.

Last fall, conveniently just before the Paris climate summit, the government announced to great fanfare that a re-analysis of the temperature data showed that there had been no pause in global temperature since 1998—that the planet has been getting steadily hotter all along. There was a lot of criticism of potential data manipulation, but as I was busy working on other projects I didn’t look into and left it to John to cover, which he did in several posts.

Earlier this week “a prominent group of researchers,” as Nature magazine describes them, has contested the previous “no pause” finding, and conclude that there was indeed a pause that the climate models can’t account for very well:

    The latest salvo in an ongoing row over global-warming trends claims that warming has indeed slowed down this century.

    An apparent slowing in the rise of global temperatures at the beginning of the twenty-first century, which is not explained by climate models, was referred to as a “hiatus” or a “pause” when first observed several years ago. Climate-change sceptics have used this as evidence that global warming has stopped. But in June last year, a study in Science claimed that the hiatus was just an artefact which vanishes when biases in temperature data are corrected.

    Now a prominent group of researchers is countering that claim, arguing in Nature Climate Change that even after correcting these biases the slowdown was real.

    “There is this mismatch between what the climate models are producing and what the observations are showing,” says lead author John Fyfe, a climate modeller at the Canadian Centre for Climate Modelling and Analysis in Victoria, British Columbia. “We can’t ignore it.”

Amazingly, one of the authors of the new paper is Michael Mann of hockey stick fame. Maybe we should say the “pause” has been “Mann-splained”?

Here’s Scientific American on the story yesterday:

    The disagreement may seem esoteric, but it underpins the biggest climate disagreement of the past decades. Climate models, which are virtual representations of our planet, project that temperatures were much higher in the early 2000s than was the case in reality. Scientists have been trying to understand why.

But remember: everything is settled, shut up, and hand over your car keys. Because we can ignore it, unless you’re the moral equivalent of Holocaust denier.

And from the Global Warming Policy Foundation:

Or yet just one more illustration of natural variability.

The engine of global warming has ran out of gas.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2016/02/mann-splaining-the-pause.php

Ice sheets more sensitive to climate change than thought

A team of scientists from New Zealand, the United States, Italy, and Germany has determined that Antarctica’s large land-based ice sheets may be more vulnerable to increasing global temperatures than previously thought.

The research, led by Richard Levy of GNS Science, Edward Gasson of the University of Massachusetts, David Harwood of the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, and Fabio Florindo of the Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia, confirms that Antarctica’s marine-based ice sheets (those connected to the ocean) are vulnerable to climatic warming.

It also shows that land-based ice will melt if these warm temperatures are maintained into the future. This would have significant consequences for future sea level rise.

“This research gives us a look into Earth’s potential future if greenhouse gas levels continue to rise and temperatures continue to climb,” says Dr Levy.

“Basically, large parts of Antarctica, particularly around the coast, will become ice-free. Melting of Antarctica’s massive land-based ice sheets will likely take thousands of years, but observations certainly suggest ice sheet melt is well underway.”

“I would like to think that we can slow down this glacial retreat or even stop it. I certainly find it hard to imagine Antarctica without its majestic ice sheets.”

How the research was conducted Scientists examined a one-kilometre-long drill core that contained layers of rock and sediment deposited during an interval in Earth’s past when atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) concentrations reached 500 parts per million, levels similar to those projected for the next several decades.

This amount of atmospheric carbon dioxide last occurred over 15 million years ago during an episode of global warmth known as the Miocene Climatic Optimum, a period when global average temperatures were at times up to 3 to 4 °C
higher than today.

What the researchers found "We found plenty of evidence for relatively warm conditions in Antarctica. Shellfish that today are unable to live south of our sub-Antarctic Islands flourished along the shorelines at the foot of the Transantarctic Mountains.

“Trees, shrubs, and grasses that are similar to those that grow in New Zealand’s alpine tundra regions were able to thrive in Antarctica’s Dry Valley’s, an area that is presently devoid of higher plant life. We also found evidence that the glaciers retreated far from the coast.”

Importantly, these intervals of past warmth occurred when atmospheric CO2 concentrations were similar to levels projected to occur within the next several decades in all but the most aggressive greenhouse gas mitigation scenario.

“We were able to link the environmental data from Antarctica to information gathered from other locations around the world. Our analysis showed that the episodes of peak warmth and ice sheet melt occurred when CO2 was at about 500ppm, only slightly higher than today.”

The researchers also found that Antarctica’s ice sheets grew larger when climate cooled and CO2 dropped to pre-industrial levels.

“Clearly the ice sheets are highly sensitive to relatively small changes in CO2 and temperature,” says Dr Levy.

At the same time, Dr Levy’s colleagues at the University of Massachusetts used computer models to simulate Antarctic ice sheet response to climate change. Led by Dr Edward Gasson, the research examined how the ice sheet changed in response to different levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide and incoming energy from the sun.

When CO2 concentrations were held at 500 parts per million, regions of the ice sheet that sit in the ocean disappeared.

This result was similar to previous modelling studies. However, Dr Gasson’s new simulations showed that large portions of land-based ice also retreated a great distance inland contributing tens of meters to sea level rise during episodes of peak warmth in the Miocene.

“Fifteen million years ago West Antarctica had a lot more area sitting above sea level, so it held much more land-based ice than it does today. Therefore we would not expect the same amount of sea level rise from land-based
ice melt under similar temperature increase in the future. But the outcome certainly suggests that land-based ice in Antarctica is more susceptible to melt than we previously thought,” says Dr Levy.

Details of their studies will be published this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Yep, climate change on the move.

An international team of scientists dug into two dozen locations across the globe, including a salt marsh and coastal wetland in Newfoundland, to chart gently rising and falling seas over centuries and millennia. Until the 1880s and the world's industrialization, the fastest seas rose was about three to four centimetres (1 to 1.5 inches) a century, plus or minus a bit. During that time global sea level really didn't get much higher or lower than eight centimetres (three inches)  above or below the 2,000-year average.

But in the 20th century the world's seas rose 14 centimetres (5.5 inches). Since 1993 the rate has soared to 30 centimetres (a foot) per century. And two different studies published Monday in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, said by 2100 that the world's oceans will rise between 28 to 131 centimetres (11 to 52 inches), depending on how much heat-trapping gas Earth's industries and vehicles expel.

"There's no question that the 20th century is the fastest," said Rutgers earth and planetary sciences professor Bob Kopp, lead author of the study that looked back at sea levels over the past 3,000 years. "It's because of the temperature increase in the 20th century which has been driven by fossil fuel use."

To figure out past sea levels and rates of rise and fall, scientists engaged in a "geological detective story," said study co-author Ben Horton, a Rutgers marine scientist. They went around the world looking at salt marshes and other coastal locations and used different clues to figure out what the sea level was at different times. They used single cell organisms that are sensitive to salinity, mangroves, coral, sediments and other clues in cores, Horton said. On top of that they checked their figures by easy markers such as the rise of lead with the start of the industrial age and isotopes only seen in the atomic age.

When Kopp and colleagues charted the sea level rise over the centuries — they went back 3,000 years, but aren't confident in the most distant 200 years — they saw Earth's sea level was on a downward trend until the industrial age.

Mostly man-made

Sea level rise in the 20th century is mostly man-made, the study authors said. A separate, not-yet-published study by Kopp and others found since 1950, about two-thirds of the U.S. nuisance coastal floods in 27 locales have the fingerprints of man-made warming.

And if seas continue to rise, as projected, another 45 centimetres (18 inches) of sea level rise is going to cause lots of problems and expense, especially with surge during storms, said study co-author Stefan Rahmstorf of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany.

"There is such a tight relationship between sea level and temperature," Horton said. "I wish there wasn't, then we wouldn't be as worried."

The link to temperature is basic science, the study's authors said. Warm water expands. Cold water contracts. The scientists pointed to specific past eras when temperatures and sea rose and fell together.

The Kopp study and a separate one published by another team projected future sea level rise based on various techniques. They came to the same general estimates, despite using different methods, said Anders Levermann, a co-author of the second paper and a researcher at the Potsdam Institute.

If greenhouse gas pollution continues at the current pace, both studies project increases of about 57 to 131 centimetres (22 to 52 inches). If countries fulfil the treaty agreed upon last year in Paris and limit further warming to another 1 C (2 degrees Fahrenheit), sea level rise would be in the 28 to 56 centimetres (11 to 22 inch range).

Jonathan Overpeck at the University of Arizona, who wasn't part of the studies, praised them, saying they show a clear cause and effect between warming and sea level rise.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/sea-level-rise-1.2951884

Snow and cold in Canada shatters records back to the 1800s.

Record one-day-snow total of 51.3 cm in Ottawa, Canada as well as hundreds – hundreds! – of cold records and snow records shattered in North America.Lake Erie 60% frozen in a single weekend,

https://youtu.be/WCDvRB3WxBs

Nothing on it in garbage media but apparently The Pakistan Meteorological Bureau put out a lengthy 80 page report warning that Global cooling will begin in 2019.

“coming inactive sunspots are going to shut down global warming and thus triggering a mini ice age”!

I´ll try to locate it.

Yep.

It seems changing the subject to "Dude! Why are you blaming the children's song1!!11!1" won't work here. This is bitcointalk.org after all, not "operation obfuscate!" on reddit.

 

The systematic indoctrination of children to further political programs is a big deal.  In part because we've seen it before and it often ends poorly.

Nearly All Scientific Papers Controlled By Same Six Corporations

Just six corporations control the flow of scientific information, a new study in Canada reveals. Since the 1970’s scientific journals have been controlled by the same few companies.
 
Researchers looked at scientific literature published between 1973 – 2013 and found that companies ACS, Reed Elsevier, Sage, Taylor & Francis, Springer, Wiley-Blackwell controlled nearly every single one....more

http://yournewswire.com/nearly-all-scientific-papers-controlled-by-same-six-corporations/

No, 150,000 Penguins Were Not Killed By Global Warming

by JAMES DELINGPOLE 23 Feb 2016

Were you moved recently by the tragic tale of 150,000 penguins killed by global warming?

Of course you were. The story was almost inescapable – we even ran a wires version of it here at Breitbart – because it was so irresistible. We like penguins (well, unless perhaps, you’re like me and you happen to consider Happy Feet to be the most satanically evil film ever made, barring Love Actually), we like stories about the frozen majesty of Antarctica (setting for so many heroic, epic adventures from Scott’s and Shackleton’s through to Henry Worsley’s) and there’s always a market for tales of climate disaster prompted by man-made global warming.

That’s why the ‘150,000 penguins killed by global warming’ story went viral. But it is, we now know, complete and utter bollocks. Yet another of those desperate, fabricated bad-things-are-happening-to-nature-and-it’s-all-our-fault yarns foisted on a credulous public by climate scientists to try to justify their increasingly unjustifiable grant funding.

The story was seized on by the usual left-wing suspects, notably Grist which gave it the emotionally charged headline 150,000 penguins have disappeared in Antartica. Thanks, climate change! to imply that somehow man was to blame for the penguins’ plight.

This is because, as the Guardian solemnly told us, an iceberg the “size of Rome” called B09B and somehow created by ‘climate change’ had blocked the route to the feeding area of a colony of Adelie penguins in Commonwealth Bay, forcing them to make a hitherto unnecessary 90 mile round trip to the coast which had caused many of them to die of exhaustion or starvation.

The Guardian article drew 19,000 shares and 1,400 comments, many from tearful Guardian readers lamenting yet another tragic story emblematic of man’s selfishness, greed and unwillingness to change his lifestyle despite the ravages this is clearly wreaking on the world’s vulnerable waddling birdlife.

But as at least one penguin researcher has pleaded from the start, there was never any evidence that these birds were killed by that iceberg. Maybe they just did what wildlife tends to do in situations like this when its habitat is disrupted: move.

“Maybe these birds moved. Maybe they died. There’s multiple scenarios that could’ve happened here,” Dr. Michelle LaRue, a research ecologist at the University of Minnesota, told The Daily Beast. “But nowhere in the paper said there was death and destruction.”

LaRue would know. She did the initial census on the Adélie penguins two years prior to the study done by University of New South Wales researchers that came out early this month.

“I doubt [widespread death and destruction], and the reason I doubt that is that the behavior of Adélie penguins has already been observed in similar circumstances,” she said.

Their migratory patterns were recorded in 2001 after the iceberg B-15 caused them to move, she said.

So whence, pray, did the environmental “penguins-died-and-it’s-all-our-fault” spin on this story emanate?

Step forward Australian climate scientist Professor Chris Turney.

As Paul Homewood has noticed, Turney is the guy who provided the quotes in all the newspapers which led gullible journalists to assume that this was a man-made environmental disaster rather than an unexceptional natural event.

Here’s how he was quoted in the Sydney Morning Herald and other newspapers.

“It’s eerily silent now,” Professor Turney said. “The ones that we saw at Cape Denison were incredibly docile, lethargic, almost unaware of your existence. The ones that are surviving are clearly struggling. They can barely survive themselves, let alone hatch the next generation. We saw lots of dead birds on the ground … it’s just heartbreaking to see.”

As the planet warms you’re going to get more ice melting. The reality is, more icebergs will be released from Antarctica and just embed themselves along the coastline, and make the travelling distances for some of these colonies even further than they have been.”

Adélie penguins usually return to the colony where they hatched and try to return to the same mate and nest. Professor Turney said the Cape Denison penguins could face a grim future. “They don’t migrate,” he said. “They’re stuck there. They’re dying.”

If Professor Chris Turney sounds familiar that’s because you’ve met him before. He was the guy in charge of the infamous 2014 Ship of Fools expedition to Antarctica – the one where a research boat full of tourists, climate scientists and Guardian journalists set sail to the Antarctic to prove the existence of “global warming” and ended up getting stranded in unexpectedly thick ice.

Amazingly this man is still in post as Professor of Climate Change and Earth Sciences at the University of New South Wales where his job is to help us “better understand the causes and impacts of future environmental change.”

Does he not know the meaning of the phrase “dignified silence”? Or indeed: “Study; bottle of whisky; service pistol”?

http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2016/02/23/no-150000-penguins-were-not-killed-by-global-warming/

Well, I doubt that the aforementioned moron will find more co-dependents. The supply is limited fortunately.

Pff...
Problem is that people like you actually vote :-/

Nobody´s criticizing those children. It´s about people that put this nonsense into their brains and the brains of morons like you. You´ve been desperately busy announcing that you´re fucking retarded so don´t blame me.

Dudes are you seriously criticizing a children song saying too much CO2 is bad for the Earth? --'

Get a life seriously...

So what all this amounts to is a huge number of people have been lied to and soaked with propaganda such that they cannot even understand the basics of the carbon cycle?  That's the cycle of life amoung other things.

And this is due to a combination of bad science and bad politics, merging together into bad pseudoscience.

How about that.

Not only it means a very little number of humans needed to stay alive to help save the planet, but ME (first)... and... you (maybe)...

Don't be fooled, this you doesn't rhyme with CO2

Poor little children. Already damned by that karaoke lying fairy...

 

We don't need no CO2
What we need is me and you

Let this develop and in due course they won´t need too many people.

Well, since co2 is a natural gas, then it cannot be a pollutant, except to the extent that someone decides they can differentiate between co2 give off by man as a pollutant, but that occurring naturally to not be.

The problem with is in an effort to define a naturally occurring material as something good, below a certain level, and bad, a pollutant, above a certain level, and only when above that level through the acts of man.

Anyone who does not see the problem with that is crazy.

Cute ^^

Not gonna say it's a bad thing here? :p