+ Reply to Thread
Page 8 of 62 FirstFirst ... 6789101858 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 613
  1. #71
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,272
    Thanks
    946
    Thanked
    1,022
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    'A media myth has emerged disputing this fact. The myth is based on the fact that temperatures have risen more slowly over the past 16 years than previously. However this period is too short to eliminate the effect of short term natural influences on temperature, and no other attempt has been made to eliminate their effect. Therefore the conclusion is invalid.' Skeptical Science

    Conclusion? The 16 years you're so stuck on is not enough time to determine the trend, they need decades of observations and not just temp.

  2. #72
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,272
    Thanks
    946
    Thanked
    1,022
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    'In order to reliably measure the human influence on climate it is necessary either to use temperature data covering several decades...' Skeptical Science.

  3. #73
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,603
    Thanks
    126
    Thanked
    267
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Kirst33 View Post
    Conclusion? The 16 years you're so stuck on is not enough time to determine the trend, they need decades of observations and not just temp.
    I'll return to this after your next response. This is important to discuss.
    But before we do, will you concede that there has been no statistically significant warming for 16 years? If you believe the above quotes from Skeptical Science, then you should have no issue conceding that fact. I don't see why it is so hard to admit it.

  4. #74
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,272
    Thanks
    946
    Thanked
    1,022
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    I'll concede your 16 years and that they are still investigating trends. But their article still very much states that global warming is happening due to human emissions. And that 16 years is too short a time to determine a trend.

    Other than that I'm not really interested in continuing the conversation. I'm sure you'll read into that as me not able to hold my own. Take care.

  5. #75
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,603
    Thanks
    126
    Thanked
    267
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Kirst33 View Post
    I'll concede your 16 years and that they are still investigating trends. But their article still very much states that global warming is happening due to human emissions. And that 16 years is too short a time to determine a trend.

    Other than that I'm not really interested in continuing the conversation. I'm sure you'll read into that as me not able to hold my own. Take care.
    Thanks for the concession.

    In regard to the time period required to determine a trend.
    You may find the NOAA State of the Climate report from 2008 stated the following:
    The simulations rule out (at the 95% level) zero trends for intervals of 15 yr or more, suggesting that an observed absence of warming of this duration is needed to create

    a discrepancy with the expected present-day warming rate.
    Page 24 for those that don't want to read the whole document.
    http://www1.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/c...008-lo-rez.pdf

    So five years ago. They said that 15 years was enough.

    Two years ago, they said that you needed 17 years.
    LIVERMORE, Calif. -- In order to separate human-caused global warming from the "noise" of purely natural climate fluctuations, temperature records must be at least 17 years long, according to climate scientists
    https://www.llnl.gov/news/newsreleas...-11-11-03.html

    Now they are saying how many years?
    It seems those goal posts just keep getting further away.

    We only needed 15 years of warming (post the cooling period between the 1940's and 1970's) in order for them to determine that we were heading for 'catastrophic warming'. That was enough evidence to throw billions of money away that could otherwise be spent feeding the poor.

    How many years of no warming would be required for this money to stop being wasted?

  6. #76
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,603
    Thanks
    126
    Thanked
    267
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    This graph says alot. CO2 has increased substantially over the last decade, but yet no warming.

    6a010536b58035970c017ee9f9c395970d.jpg

  7. #77
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    townsville
    Posts
    2,816
    Thanks
    1,570
    Thanked
    1,277
    Reviews
    2
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Awards:
    100 Posts in a week
    Are you trying to convince others or yourself?

  8. #78
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,603
    Thanks
    126
    Thanked
    267
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by MonsterMoosMum View Post
    Are you trying to convince others or yourself?
    I don't need any convincing.

  9. #79
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,272
    Thanks
    946
    Thanked
    1,022
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    I am not interested in continuing the debate with father as it's obvious where his feelings lie on this subject. But, I just wanted to post some links for those that may come across this thread and are interested in learning further as it is not just temperature that helps scientists determine that global warming is happening.

    Here is a bit of info regarding the myth that there has been no warming since 1998: https://realitydrop.org/#myths/45

    Here is a quote from that link regarding temperature (for those of you following, Father will surely reply with his "tallest" comments): 'There's also a tendency for some people just to concentrate on air temperatures when there are other, more useful, indicators that can perhaps give us a better idea of how rapidly the world is warming. Oceans, for instance — due to their immense size and heat storing capability (called "thermal mass") — tend to give a much more "steady" indication of the warming that is happening. When we look at ocean temperatures, records show that the Earth has been warming at a steady rate before and since 1998 and there are no signs of it slowing anytime soon.'

    You can learn more about climate myths vs. reality at https://realitydrop.org/# and here http://climaterealityproject.org/

    Skeptical Science is also another great link: http://www.skepticalscience.com/
    And regarding temps since 1998: http://www.skepticalscience.com/glob...ed-in-1998.htm

    Skeptical Science's "Escalator" is another great tool to understanding (watch the animated graph): http://www.skepticalscience.com/graphics.php?g=47

    Global warming and what we should do about it is like many topics around the world, what seems like common sense to many, others just don't get (Wayne LaPierre of the NRA and others constant debate of gun control in the States is a perfect example!)
    Last edited by Kirst33; 06-04-2013 at 09:46. Reason: forgot to include skeptical science. 2nd edit: found the escalator!

  10. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Kirst33 For This Useful Post:

    Atropos  (06-04-2013),beebs  (06-04-2013),BigRedV  (06-04-2013),Funchu  (06-04-2013)

  11. #80
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,603
    Thanks
    126
    Thanked
    267
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    I'll take one thing at a time here.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kirst33 View Post
    'There's also a tendency for some people just to concentrate on air temperatures when there are other, more useful, indicators that can perhaps give us a better idea of how rapidly the world is warming. Oceans, for instance — due to their immense size and heat storing capability (called "thermal mass") — tend to give a much more "steady" indication of the warming that is happening. When we look at ocean temperatures, records show that the Earth has been warming at a steady rate before and since 1998 and there are no signs of it slowing anytime soon.'
    Ok. Lets have a look at sea temperatures.

    1-global.jpg


 

Similar Threads

  1. Vanuatu - Great or not so great?
    By Clarabelle in forum Destination Suggestions
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 29-10-2012, 10:56
  2. Green poop
    By Alphabetsoup in forum General Parenting Tips, Advice & Chat
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 24-05-2012, 20:02

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
free weekly newsletters | sign up now!
who are these people who write great posts? meet our hubbub authors!
Learn how you can contribute to the hubbub!

reviews
learn how you can become a reviewer!

competitions

forum - chatting now
christmas gift guidesee all Red Stocking
Bamboo Lulu
Unique, non-toxic wooden eco toys for babies. Water-based paints, saliva-resistant & baby safe. Super soft, prints & basics for baby, made from bamboo & organic cotton. Hypoallergenic - great for eczema relief. FREE gift with purchase. Code BUBHUB
sales & new stuffsee all
True Fairies
True Fairies is the first interactive website where children can engage and speak with a real fairy through the unique webcam fairy portal. Each session is tailored to the child, and is filled with enchantment and magic.
Visit website to find out more!
featured supporter
Maternity Clothes
Looking to buy maternity clothes? :: Check the bubhub directory of local & online maternity clothes shops :: Find preloved maternity wear
gotcha
X

Pregnant for the first-time?

Not sure where to start? We can help!

Our Insider Programs for pregnancy first-timers will lead you step-by-step through the 14 Pregnancy Must Dos!