So....the "consensus" on global warming was a crock all along? - Page 326 - E46Fanatics E46 BMW Social Directory E46 FAQ 3-Series Discussion Forums BMW Photo Gallery BMW 3-Series Technical Information E46 Fanatics - The Ultimate BMW Resource BMW Vendors General E46 Forum The Tire Rack's Tire Wheel Forum Forced Induction Forum The Off-Topic The E46 BMW Showroom For Sale, For Trade or Wanting to Buy

Go Back   E46Fanatics > Everything Else > The Off-Topic > Political Talk

Political Talk
You may discuss anything regarding politics in this forum ONLY. If you cannot respect others opinions, your access to this forum will be removed.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 08-15-2019, 09:33 PM   #6501
Cabrio330
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Dallas
Posts: 154
My Ride: 2013 F30 335i
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhumb View Post
Some assume that because climate scientists don't understand AGW fully (scientists never understand anything fully) the default is that AGW either isn't occurring or not to the degree currently predicted.

However:

"Greenland's ice is melting at the rate scientists thought would be our worst-case scenario in 2070"
http://www.businessinsider.com/green...st-case-2019-8

Perhaps the "doubt" argument isn't the refuge against AGW some think it is, that it's implications only point in one direction: little to no AGW. That needle could, just as logically, point in the other direction, not necessarily in the direction you might hope or expect.

Sent from my LM-G710VM using Tapatalk
Interesting hypotheticals and point understood. But I don't think the argument that climate scientists could be wrong in either direction, not just one direction, is as persuasive as you appear to think.

In any event, always good to remember that errors are likely, and it's entertaining to debate how extreme they could be.
__________________
Quote:
The world began to crumble when feelings started overruling facts.--Ricky Gervais
Cabrio330 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 12:29 AM   #6502
Act of God
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: In your gf's front hole
Posts: 356
My Ride: Longboard
Send a message via ICQ to Act of God Send a message via AIM to Act of God Send a message via Yahoo to Act of God
lol I was waiting for someone to post the Greenland BS. Been keeping this in my pocket all week.

https://www.thelocal.dk/20190808/dan...nd-heat-record
Danish climate body wrongly reported Greenland heat record
Denmark's national climate body has admitted it wrongly reported record warm temperatures on the centre of the Greenland ice sheet last week, in what it called "good news from a climate perspective".
Quote:
The Danish Meteorological Institute, which has a key role in monitoring Greenland's climate, last week reported a shocking August temperature of between 2.7C and 4.7C at the Summit weather station, which is located 3,202m above sea level at the the centre of the Greenland ice sheet, generating a spate of global headlines.

But on Wednesday it posted a tweet saying that a closer look had shown that monitoring equipment had been giving erroneous results.

"Was there record-level warmth on the inland ice on Friday?" it said. "No! A quality check has confirmed out suspicion that the measurement was too high."
__________________
Whataboutism is a moral necessity, because it disarms the hypocrisy the left wields like a battle axe by illustrating the undeniable truth.
Act of God is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 08:08 AM   #6503
WDE46
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Old Greg's Cavern
Posts: 12,953
My Ride: '13 128i STX
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cabrio330 View Post
My mistake, I interpreted your comment as meaning man is responsible for all warming. I see now you were just suggesting man is 100% responsible for all of the CO2 increase. I don't necessarily take issue with that, but if that is your position then perhaps you can explain:

- what caused CO2 levels to change prior to man's known existence on earth, or for that matter, after man's known existence but prior to man's creation of significantly more CO2; and

- for the causes you give in response to my first question, please explain how each of those causes are no longer variable or at least stopped contributing at all to CO2 variability. I assume, given your assertion that man is now the sole cause of 100% of the CO2 increase that you can persuasively explain how those other pre-man factors are now of no consequence.

Thanks.

It doesnít matter that much why previous increases happened. Itís certainly an interesting area of research. But what does matter is that we know the current increase is because of manís burning of fossil fuels. We know this because of the proportion of carbon isotopes in the atmosphere vs in the past.


Sent from my iPhone using E46Fanatics mobile app
__________________
WDE46 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 12:19 PM   #6504
Cabrio330
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Dallas
Posts: 154
My Ride: 2013 F30 335i
Quote:
Originally Posted by WDE46 View Post
It doesnít matter that much why previous increases happened. Itís certainly an interesting area of research. But what does matter is that we know the current increase is because of manís burning of fossil fuels. We know this because of the proportion of carbon isotopes in the atmosphere vs in the past.


Sent from my iPhone using E46Fanatics mobile app
You lost me. If we don't know why previous increases (and decreases happened), how can we allocate "responsibility" for current increases? How can we rule out that non-man causes, which have clearly been pretty dramatic in the past, aren't perhaps more dramatic today? It seems you are taking the view that previous historic highs of CO2 are caps which cannot be exceeded, therefore anything above any previous historic highs must therefore be due to man. Is that the reasoning here?
__________________
Quote:
The world began to crumble when feelings started overruling facts.--Ricky Gervais
Cabrio330 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 12:29 PM   #6505
WDE46
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Old Greg's Cavern
Posts: 12,953
My Ride: '13 128i STX
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cabrio330 View Post
You lost me. If we don't know why previous increases (and decreases happened), how can we allocate "responsibility" for current increases? How can we rule out that non-man causes, which have clearly been pretty dramatic in the past, aren't perhaps more dramatic today? It seems you are taking the view that previous historic highs of CO2 are caps which cannot be exceeded, therefore anything above any previous historic highs must therefore be due to man. Is that the reasoning here?


I explained it. Carbon isotope proportions is how itís done. Burning fossil fuels results in a different proportion of carbon isotopes in the atmosphere.


http://www.realclimate.org/index.php...ities-updated/


Sent from my iPhone using E46Fanatics mobile app
__________________
WDE46 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Today, 11:42 AM   #6506
ed17331
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Hanover, PA
Posts: 21
My Ride: 2002 BMW 325i Sedan
This ice core data for the last 400,000 years shows that CO2 levels have been this high several times before (and long before man can be blamed). It has always reverted to lower levels over time as natural geologic feedback cycles work their magic. The CO2 rises are sudden (in geologic timescales) and the reversion to lower levels less so. The current ďsuddenĒ rise in CO2 levels looks like it has been going on for the last 15,000 years or so. What makes you so sure that the natural geologic processes that reduced CO2 levels after it spiked 140,000 yrs ago and 240,000 years ago (and again before that) have stopped and will no longer be effective in the future? Do you even know what those processes are? Do you fully understand them?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File...core-petit.png

Note: I am not disputing your carbon isotope data showing that lately (since 1850 or so) human activities have likely contributed to the rise in CO2 levels. But I will point out that the human activities explanation fails to account for the significant rise in CO2 levels for the last 15,000 years or so. How do you account for this?

And why wouldnít the same natural geologic processes that reduced CO2 levels in the past work now and in the future?
ed17331 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Today, 12:17 PM   #6507
mrkprsn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Oakton VA
Posts: 29
My Ride: 2000 BMW 323Ci
For 800,000 years CO2 levels have never been this high. That's the point. They are much higher today than they have ever been. They naturally cycle over tens of thousands of years. Using historical trends we should be on a downward concentrations cycle but just the opposite is happening.
mrkprsn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Today, 12:51 PM   #6508
Act of God
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: In your gf's front hole
Posts: 356
My Ride: Longboard
Send a message via ICQ to Act of God Send a message via AIM to Act of God Send a message via Yahoo to Act of God
If they were higher 800,000 years ago how can you say they are higher today "than they ever have been"?
__________________
Whataboutism is a moral necessity, because it disarms the hypocrisy the left wields like a battle axe by illustrating the undeniable truth.
Act of God is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Today, 04:25 PM   #6509
WDE46
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Old Greg's Cavern
Posts: 12,953
My Ride: '13 128i STX
So you only think critically when something goes against your preconcetions?


Sent from my iPhone using E46Fanatics mobile app
__________________
WDE46 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Today, 04:53 PM   #6510
Cabrio330
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Dallas
Posts: 154
My Ride: 2013 F30 335i
Quote:
Originally Posted by WDE46 View Post
So you only think critically when something goes against your preconcetions?


Sent from my iPhone using E46Fanatics mobile app
So you only ask another question when you cannot answer the first question?
__________________
Quote:
The world began to crumble when feelings started overruling facts.--Ricky Gervais
Cabrio330 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Today, 04:54 PM   #6511
Cabrio330
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Dallas
Posts: 154
My Ride: 2013 F30 335i
Quote:
Originally Posted by Act of God View Post
If they were higher 800,000 years ago how can you say they are higher today "than they ever have been"?
Maybe he thinks the earth is only 800,000 years old.
__________________
Quote:
The world began to crumble when feelings started overruling facts.--Ricky Gervais

Last edited by Cabrio330; Today at 04:57 PM.
Cabrio330 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Today, 04:57 PM   #6512
Cabrio330
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Dallas
Posts: 154
My Ride: 2013 F30 335i
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrkprsn View Post
For 800,000 years CO2 levels have never been this high. That's the point. They are much higher today than they have ever been. They naturally cycle over tens of thousands of years. Using historical trends we should be on a downward concentrations cycle but just the opposite is happening.
The trend is tens of thousands of years and has ups and downs but you think a 169-year snapshot proves we are violating the natural cycle?
__________________
Quote:
The world began to crumble when feelings started overruling facts.--Ricky Gervais
Cabrio330 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Today, 06:13 PM   #6513
Shaban
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Virginia
Posts: 37
My Ride: 2005 CBR600
Quote:
Originally Posted by Act of God View Post
If they were higher 800,000 years ago how can you say they are higher today "than they ever have been"?


Were they higher 800,000 years ago? Show your work.
__________________
- Alex
Shaban is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Today, 06:50 PM   #6514
ed17331
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Hanover, PA
Posts: 21
My Ride: 2002 BMW 325i Sedan
Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_3746.JPG
Views:	8
Size:	48.7 KB
ID:	781879

This is not the original ice core data graph I tried to post earlier, but it shows similar data.

You can see spikes in CO2 levels of equal magnitude to the most recent one roughly 140,000 yrs ago and 240,000 yrs ago and 330,000 yrs ago and 420,000 yrs ago (and more spikes of somewhat lesser magnitude before those going back at least 800,000 yrs).
ed17331 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Today, 07:50 PM   #6515
Shaban
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Virginia
Posts: 37
My Ride: 2005 CBR600
ďOf equal magnitudeĒ is simply false. 2018 is at 415ppm, not 318ppm as shown in your graph (240,000 years ago, largest pre-human spike).


Sent from my iPhone using E46Fanatics
__________________
- Alex
Shaban is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Today, 07:58 PM   #6516
WDE46
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Old Greg's Cavern
Posts: 12,953
My Ride: '13 128i STX
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cabrio330 View Post
So you only ask another question when you cannot answer the first question?


**** off hypocrite. Iíve answered basically all technical questions in here. Iíve even been critical of things that support my own opinion. I donít see that from anyone else.


Sent from my iPhone using E46Fanatics mobile app
__________________
WDE46 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Today, 07:58 PM   #6517
WDE46
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Old Greg's Cavern
Posts: 12,953
My Ride: '13 128i STX
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cabrio330 View Post
The trend is tens of thousands of years and has ups and downs but you think a 169-year snapshot proves we are violating the natural cycle?


Carbon ****ing isotopes. Address it.


Sent from my iPhone using E46Fanatics mobile app
__________________
WDE46 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Today, 08:47 PM   #6518
Cabrio330
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Dallas
Posts: 154
My Ride: 2013 F30 335i
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaban View Post
ďOf equal magnitudeĒ is simply false. 2018 is at 415ppm, not 318ppm as shown in your graph (240,000 years ago, largest pre-human spike).


Sent from my iPhone using E46Fanatics
So looking at ed's graph, 400,000 years ago you would have seen the all-time (sic) new high CO2 level compared to the previous record high 800,000 years ago and explained the difference how? The magnitude of change sure seems to be equal or very close to the increase at subsequent new highpoints.
__________________
Quote:
The world began to crumble when feelings started overruling facts.--Ricky Gervais
Cabrio330 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Today, 08:48 PM   #6519
Cabrio330
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Dallas
Posts: 154
My Ride: 2013 F30 335i
Quote:
Originally Posted by WDE46 View Post
**** off hypocrite. Iíve answered basically all technical questions in here. Iíve even been critical of things that support my own opinion. I donít see that from anyone else.


Sent from my iPhone using E46Fanatics mobile app
You're such a delicate, insecure flower.
__________________
Quote:
The world began to crumble when feelings started overruling facts.--Ricky Gervais
Cabrio330 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Today, 08:55 PM   #6520
Cabrio330
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Dallas
Posts: 154
My Ride: 2013 F30 335i
Quote:
Originally Posted by WDE46 View Post
Carbon ****ing isotopes. Address it.


Sent from my iPhone using E46Fanatics mobile app
Hey daffodil, I haven't questioned the conclusion that the increase in atmospheric CO2 is accounted for by burning fossil fuel. For a guy who really, really wants to appear smart you sure have a hard time keeping up.

But, since you really really want to appear as an authority on carbon isoptopes, you probably already have a long list of points to rebut the findings of Murray Salby, who disagrees with you, Professor Daffodil.
__________________
Quote:
The world began to crumble when feelings started overruling facts.--Ricky Gervais

Last edited by Cabrio330; Today at 09:03 PM.
Cabrio330 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Censor is ON



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:42 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
(c) 1999 - VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.