Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 67

Thread: Climate Change

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    right here
    Posts
    17,046

    Climate Change

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...ation-climate/

    Rick Perry calls for ‘intellectual conversation’ on climate change
    During an hourlong press conference at the White House Tuesday, Energy Secretary Rick Perry called for an “intellectual conversation” on climate change, arguing that the issue has become far too political and divisive.

    Mr. Perry, the former Texas governor and two-time presidential candidate, acknowledged man’s impact on the climate but also rejected the idea that the science is completely settled on the matter.

    “The climate is changing. Man is having an impact on it. I’ve said that time after time — the idea that we can’t have an intellectual conversation about just what are the actual impacts?” he said. “Why not have a conversation about that? What is the other side, the people who say the science is settled, it’s done? If you don’t believe that, you’re a skeptic … I don’t buy that. This is America. Have a conversation. Let’s come out of the shadows of hiding behind your political statements and let’s talk bout it. What’s wrong with that? I can be convinced, but why not let’s talk about it?”

    Mr. Perry also said he has not spoken with President Trump — who has referred to climate change as a “hoax” — about the issue and could not say whether the president believes the climate is changing, or if man is having an impact.

    The secretary’s appearance at the White House Tuesday coincided with the administration’s “Energy Week,” in which officials focus on American energy production, innovation, and technological advances in clean coal technology, oil drilling and renewable energy.
    talk about climate change.
    I've posted different links (in the 100 days thread) and nobody bothered to reply.



  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    19,579
    Fortunately for mankind scientists have been having an intellectual conversation on climate change for the past 40 years.

    I'm just glad all those who were denying climate change at all have finally hedged their bets and switched to believing it is happening, even if they're stubbornly trying to say man has little to no impact on it.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    North Shore
    Posts
    7,324
    Climate change is real

    /thread

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    75,473
    I really want Rick Perry to focus his attention more on the state of our nuclear system, as is more the job of the Energy Secretary.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    right here
    Posts
    17,046
    the issue with the Paris climate accord was about the deal and not just rejecting climate change. it was the opinion that it was bad for America.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017...ican-jobs.html

    Vice President Mike Pence praised President Trump's decision to withdraw from the Paris climate accord, telling Fox News' "Hannity" Thursday that the president was "fighting for American jobs."

    Pence spoke to Fox News' Sean Hannity hours after Trump announced the U.S. was "getting out" of the deal, which the president described as "very unfair at the highest level to the United States."

    Pence described the 2015 agreement "a bad deal from the moment it was signed by the [Obama] administration."

    "This is an agreement that puts an enormous burden on American consumers [and] on the American economy while allowing countries like India and China to virtually get off scot-free for a decade or more," Pence said.

    The vice president also noted that the agreement amounted to "an international treaty that was never submitted to the Senate, probably because it never would have had a chance there."

    Trump's decision to withdraw from the agreement was greeted with dismay by many world leaders, including French President Emmanuel Macron, who reportedly called Trump to tell the president that the deal could not be renegotiated.

    However, Pence insisted that the United States could re-enter the accord "under terms that will put the American economy and the American people first."

    The vice president stressed that Trump had decided to withdraw from the deal after "after listening to all sides," including European leaders who had pressed the president to stay in the agreement during Trump's foreign trip last week.

    "The president has demonstrated his commitment not just to keep his word, but to put American workers, American consumers, American energy, and the American people first," Pence said. "The American people get it ... This is a President who is fighting for the American people, fighting for American jobs ... America is back because they have a President in President Donald Trump who is fighting every day for them."





    the climate is changing, but is it really entirely all on what man has done?


    https://phys.org/news/2017-05-atmosp...aign=item-menu

    Atmospheric carbon dioxide causing global greening making some areas warmer and some colder
    (Phys.org)—A small team of researchers with the Directorate for Sustainable Resources in Italy and Ghent University in Belgium has found evidence that shows some parts of the planet are becoming cooler and others warmer due to an increase in localized greening. As the team notes in their paper published in the journal Science, much of the increase in greening is due to an increase of atmospheric carbon dioxide.

    In addition to causing the atmosphere to heat up in general, the increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide is also causing many parts of the planet that were already green to become greener, the researchers report. That greening, they suggest, causes some regional areas to become slightly warmer and others cooler. But it is not just atmospheric carbon that is contributing to the greening. Nitrogen used in fertilizers makes its way into natural ecosystems, causing changes. The land is also changed by human activities.

    In an area that is generally warm, an increase in leaf cover can lead to localized cooling due to plant transpiration (water evaporating) which condenses in the air, the researchers report. In cooler places, the impact can be the opposite—in boreal regions (tree covered) and colder places, local temperatures can rise slightly due to less sunlight being reflected back from the surface.

    To come to these conclusions, the researchers studied satellite data for the period 1982 to 2011, which allowed them to assign a leaf area index (LAI) to various parts of the Earth's surface. In mapping the entire planet, the group found that for approximately 60 percent of all plant areas, an increase in greening has mitigated global warming by approximately 14 percent. For colder areas, greening has led to a rise in air temperatures of approximately 10 percent. They also found that the impact could be more dramatic during extreme weather conditions—by up to five times, for example, during warm and dry periods or cold and wet periods.

    The researchers suggest their findings indicate that changes to vegetation clearly have an impact on local climate, and thus should be taken into consideration as mitigation and adaptation strategies are developed to deal with a warming planet.
    Abstract
    Changes in vegetation cover associated to the observed greening may affect several biophysical processes, whose net effects on climate are unclear. Here, we analyze remotely sensed dynamics in leaf area index (LAI) and energy fluxes to explore the associated variation in local climate. We show that the increasing trend in LAI contributed to the warming of boreal zones through a reduction of surface albedo, and to an evaporation-driven cooling in arid regions. The interplay between LAI and surface biophysics is amplified up to five times under extreme warm-dry and cold-wet years. Altogether, these signals reveal that the recent dynamics in global vegetation have had relevant biophysical impacts on the local climates and should be considered in the design of local mitigation and adaptation plans.
    nobody can deny that the climate is changing, but to conclude that everything is entirely because of man is ignorant. there are many things around the planet that contribute to the climate changing.



  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    19,579
    Quote Originally Posted by SpecialFNK View Post
    the issue with the Paris climate accord was about the deal and not just rejecting climate change. it was the opinion that it was bad for America.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017...ican-jobs.html

    the climate is changing, but is it really entirely all on what man has done?

    https://phys.org/news/2017-05-atmosp...aign=item-menu

    nobody can deny that the climate is changing, but to conclude that everything is entirely because of man is ignorant. there are many things around the planet that contribute to the climate changing.
    Saying the Paris Climate Accord is bad for America is a very ignorant take to have, under the provision of the accord each country sets their own standards for CO2 reduction. So we were free to choose literally any standards for reduction we wanted. If you are free to choose your entire policy and you complain it's bad for us, it's because of us and not the accord.

    As for the Bolded: literally no reputable scientist is saying that.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    75,473
    Not a lot of jobs in an underwater world unless we can all grow gills in the next 100 years.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    North Shore
    Posts
    7,324
    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncos78087 View Post
    Not a lot of jobs in an underwater world unless we can all grow gills in the next 100 years.
    Kevin Costner will be safe

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    75,473
    But I guess biologists will be in high demand. Someone will have to catalog all the creatures going extinct thanks to climate change.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    173
    The thought of Rick Perry and an "intellectual conversation" about anything is highly amusing.

    He blamed climate change on "ocean waters". Enough said.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    right here
    Posts
    17,046
    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncos78087 View Post
    Not a lot of jobs in an underwater world unless we can all grow gills in the next 100 years.
    OK Al Gore. were we not supposed to be under water by now?



    I have never said or believed climate change was a complete hoax. obvious the climate is changing, and has been changing through earth's entire existence. there are parts of the earth right now that are deserts that used to be the bottom of oceans.
    I believe there are factors other than humans that have been a factor in climate change.
    how can anyone say science is "settled" as if nobody needs to do anymore research we are all done with research and have our conclusion. science should continue to research and gather information.


    I don't know where to find this information. there was a show on TV about satellite images called "What on Earth?". they had one show where there was somewhere covered by a lot of white. it turned out to be something like white tarps on top of greenhouses (I think). whatever this mass amount of white was, because it was such a large area of white it was reflecting the sun's rays back up and this part of the earth was actually cooling down.



  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    23,944
    Quote Originally Posted by SpecialFNK View Post
    OK Al Gore. were we not supposed to be under water by now?
    According to the properly vetted and documented scientific findings, no....No we weren't.

    Next question.
    Last edited by Timmmahhh; 06-29-2017 at 09:46 AM.
    Come Be The Apple Of The PWW Owner's Eye!






    *PSD Wrestling Wars Link* http://forums.prosportsdaily.com/sho...restling-Wars!

  13. #13
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    right here
    Posts
    17,046
    Quote Originally Posted by Timmmahhh View Post
    According to the properly vetted and documented scientific findings, no....No we weren't.

    Next question.

    not exactly the same thing, but I see this from Al Gore.

    http://www.snopes.com/ice-caps-melt-gore-2014/

    Did Al Gore Predict That The Ice Caps Will Melt by 2014?

    In the late 2000s, the former U.S. Vice President sometimes inaccurately represented studies that predicted the timeline for an ice-free Arctic.
    CLAIM

    Al Gore predicted that Earth’s “ice caps” will melt away by 2014.
    RATING
    MIXTURE

    WHAT'S TRUE

    In the late 2000s, Al Gore made a series of high-profile statements suggesting the possibility that Arctic sea ice could be completely gone during the summer by around 2013 or 2014.

    WHAT'S FALSE

    Gore did not himself make these predictions but said (in some cases erroneously) that others had; Gore never referred to a year-long lack of ice for both poles, but instead largely referenced Arctic sea ice in the summer.

    ORIGIN

    In the years 2007, 2008, and 2009, Al Gore made statements about the possibility of a complete lack of summer sea ice in the Arctic by as early as 2013. While Gore attributed these predictions to scientists, they stemmed from a selective reading of aggressive estimates regarding future melting. The comments became a popular talking point for human-caused climate change deniers in 2014 and onward when the predictions, which in some cases were overstated, did not pan out.

    Last September 21, as the Northern Hemisphere tilted away from the sun, scientists reported with unprecedented distress that the North Polar ice cap is “falling off a cliff.” One study estimated that it could be completely gone during summer in less than 22 years. Another new study, to be presented by U.S. Navy researchers later this week, warns it could happen in as little as 7 years.

    Here, Gore refers to a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association (NOAA) announcement and two different climate studies, one of which became the source for his most aggressive statements. On 21 September, NOAA did announce that sea ice had hit its lowest recorded point in history.

    The second, more aggressive estimate for when summer sea ice will disappear in the Arctic comes from a conference talk at the 2007 American Geophysical Fall Meeting — which was done by researchers associated with the Naval Postgraduate School, and was presented later that week. The BBC reported that the study did make the prediction that Gore claimed:

    Scientists in the US have presented one of the most dramatic forecasts yet for the disappearance of Arctic sea ice.

    Their latest modelling studies indicate northern polar waters could be ice-free in summers within just 5-6 years. Professor Wieslaw Maslowski told an American Geophysical Union meeting that previous projections had underestimated the processes now driving ice loss.

    The article also noted that Maslowski’s group, frequently cited by Gore, often makes predictions that are more aggressive than their peers:

    Professor Maslowski’s group, which includes co-workers at NASA and the Institute of Oceanology, Polish Academy of Sciences (PAS), is well known for producing modelled dates that are in advance of other teams.

    On 13 December 2008, Gore appears to have made a similarly flawed statement while speaking at the opening of a German natural history museum. Though transcripts and clear audio are hard to find, one video of the event documents Gore saying that “The entire North polar ice cap may well be completely gone in 5 years.” Given the dates presented, it is likely that Gore was once again referring to Maslowski’s data. Unless he preceded his statement with some qualification not captured by the video, his statement either intentionally or accidentally neglected to mention that this prediction, aggressive as it was, concerned only summer sea ice.

    On 14 December 2009, during a speech at the Copenhagen Climate Conference, Gore cited newer research from the same group:

    These figures are fresh. Some of the models suggest to Dr [Wieslav] Maslowski that there is a 75 per cent chance that the entire north polar ice cap, during the summer months, could be completely ice-free within five to seven years.

    That statement put Gore in hot water when Maslowski told The Times of London that his data did not allow for such a prediction:

    “It’s unclear to me how this figure was arrived at,” Dr Maslowski said. “I would never try to estimate likelihood at anything as exact as this.”

    Mr Gore’s office later admitted that the 75 per cent figure was one used by Dr Maslowksi as a “ballpark figure” several years ago in a conversation with Mr Gore.

    The claim that Gore “predicted” an ice-free Arctic in 2014 is a simplification of these events. However, Gore is definitely guilty, in these cases, of cherry picking science or playing loose with the details of that science.

    Gore’s statements gained the most viral attention in 2014 and 2015, both because these were years in which Gore’s statements implied an ice-free summer in the Arctic and because those years had relatively more arctic sea ice than preceding years.

    From a broad perspective, however, summer sea ice in the Arctic has, in fact, been declining at faster rates relative to 20th century, and the year 2016 has tied with the year 2007 (the year highlighted by Gore in his Nobel speech) for the second least Arctic summer sea ice on record (the lowest recorded sea ice extent occurred in 2012).

    While the disappearance of summer sea ice is difficult to predict, a 2013 review of different approaches (including Maslowski’s) summarized the range of various predictions for the first ice-free summer in the Arctic:

    We have investigated three approaches to predicting 21st century summer Arctic sea ice loss as represented by trendsetters, stochasters, and modelers [three quantitative approaches used to make predictions]. At present, it is not possible to completely choose one approach over another as all approaches have strengths and weaknesses. […]

    Time horizons for summer sea ice loss of these three approaches turns out to be roughly 2020, 2030, and 2040 respectively for trendsetters, stochasters, and modelers. […]

    It is reasonable to conclude that Arctic sea ice loss is very likely to occur in the first rather than the second half of the 21st century, with a possibility of loss within a decade or two.

    Arctic sea ice is, without question, on a declining trend, but Gore definitely erred in his use of preliminary projections and misrepresentations of research. Because Gore himself did not claim to have made these predictions, however, and because his statements applied specifically to summer sea ice in the Arctic, we rate the claim that Gore “predicted the ice caps will melt by 2014” as a mixture.



  14. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    23,944

    Climate Change

    Where does it say we're all supposed to be underwater by now?

    I mean, that's what you said. I don't see that nor have ever seen any reports stating by June 2017 we're all supposed to be underwater, so wondering where you got that info.
    Come Be The Apple Of The PWW Owner's Eye!






    *PSD Wrestling Wars Link* http://forums.prosportsdaily.com/sho...restling-Wars!

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    75,473
    Quote Originally Posted by Timmmahhh View Post
    According to the properly vetted and documented scientific findings, no....No we weren't.

    Next question.
    The biggest immediate problems that we're seeing is the increase of global ocean temperatures is altering the corral structure, which exists as a framework of so many other creatures' habitats. And it might sound silly to care about corral but that is how so many species find shelter and go about their business. And everything trickles up the food chain.

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •