Yeah so global warming huh...

[TranaGreg]

It is true, but only if you talk to all the scientists. The problem is that the press listens to the doomsday cult.

you have a point, many people tend to dismiss the opinions of scientists funded directly or indirectly by big oil or by the coal industry

[Hi.I'm.Mandy]

It is true, but only if you talk to all the scientists. The problem is that the press listens to the doomsday cult.

Has anyone seen a comprehensive study on what an additional degree by 2100 would mean? There are none, because it is not a catastrophic event. What you see are studies far higher rises, because they are catastrophic. Yet the first is in line with existing trends. You need to invent a flex point to get higher warming.

If you want an easily verifiable fact, find the simple average temperature rise for the last 120 by decades and project that for the next 82 years. A rise of 1° C is right on line. Continuing as we have been is very doable. You have to find a way to distort the experience curve up to get serious problems.

J

it's a shame all those scientists wasted so many years of their lives studying when they could have just used your more accurate calculations.

[swampdragon]

c'mon people dont fall for the inaccuracies of OJ - it never gets you anywhere using research, facts and logic

[Sour Masher]

c'mon people dont fall for the inaccuracies of OJ - it never gets you anywhere using research, facts and logic

Yeah, I was tempted to do a link dump from scores of studies, starting with a simple, comprehensive source of data on the issue, NASA: https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

I was going to get into how OJ's estimates for continued warming are low, and how it doesn't factor in that 80-90% of the warming we are causing that has been absorbed by the world's oceans, which is much better at absorbing heat with minimal temperature impact, but that heat absorption is still having devastating effects for a variety of delicate eco systems. I was going to get into how continued, unabated carbon dioxide dumping into our atmosphere will lead to irreversible damage to our environment that math clearly indicates is coming rapidly, so we can't "wait and see" for another few decades.

I was also going to get into how people against the Paris Accords dismiss how little it does, and how ineffectual governments as a whole are in affecting real change, and use that line of reasoning to emphasize how the slow moving wheels of bureaucracy are not suddenly going to become highly efficient pistons of change just as soon as folks like OJ think it is time to address this issue. The idea that we could stop on a dime, dramatically and instantaneously slowing carbon emissions years down the line, once the effects of our negligence are irrefutable to all is absurd, and even if such a herculean task were possible, it will likely be too late at that point to avoid centuries of conditions that will negatively impact most life on the planet.

I was going to link to lists of all the scientific societies that affirm global warming is real, human-made, and an urgent, dire issue we must tackle NOW, as a refutation that the only scientists saying this are part of a fringe doomsday cult. I was going to point out that over 97% of publishing scientists agree on this matter, so why would anyone think that 97+% is the crazy cult, and not the under 3% that largely also happens to be in the pocket of fossil fuel. Does a cult have to be a doomsday one, or can it be one that denies the overwhelming truth?

But I decided it would not lead to anything fruitful.

[TranaGreg]

Yeah, I was tempted to ...

I respect your self-control.

[Sour Masher]

I respect your self-control.

Thank you; I pride myself on my self-control .

[TranaGreg]

I think maybe I won't put the snow tires on this winter ... it's sunny & 16/60 degrees here this afternoon

[onejayhawk]

Yeah, I was tempted to do a link dump from scores of studies, starting with a simple, comprehensive source of data on the issue, NASA: https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

I was going to get into how OJ's estimates for continued warming are low, and how it doesn't factor in that 80-90% of the warming we are causing that has been absorbed by the world's oceans, which is much better at absorbing heat with minimal temperature impact, but that heat absorption is still having devastating effects for a variety of delicate eco systems. I was going to get into how continued, unabated carbon dioxide dumping into our atmosphere will lead to irreversible damage to our environment that math clearly indicates is coming rapidly, so we can't "wait and see" for another few decades.

I was also going to get into how people against the Paris Accords dismiss how little it does, and how ineffectual governments as a whole are in affecting real change, and use that line of reasoning to emphasize how the slow moving wheels of bureaucracy are not suddenly going to become highly efficient pistons of change just as soon as folks like OJ think it is time to address this issue. The idea that we could stop on a dime, dramatically and instantaneously slowing carbon emissions years down the line, once the effects of our negligence are irrefutable to all is absurd, and even if such a herculean task were possible, it will likely be too late at that point to avoid centuries of conditions that will negatively impact most life on the planet.

I was going to link to lists of all the scientific societies that affirm global warming is real, human-made, and an urgent, dire issue we must tackle NOW, as a refutation that the only scientists saying this are part of a fringe doomsday cult. I was going to point out that over 97% of publishing scientists agree on this matter, so why would anyone think that 97+% is the crazy cult, and not the under 3% that largely also happens to be in the pocket of fossil fuel. Does a cult have to be a doomsday one, or can it be one that denies the overwhelming truth?

But I decided it would not lead to anything fruitful.

I believe it's real. That's not an issue. The issue is whether it is a serious danger currently or in the near future, meaning the next century. The answer to that question does not have a consensus. Also, anyone that cites 97% is drinking koolaid, because the real scientists don't talk that way.

I'm curious why you think my estimates are low. I was using the simple regression, ie straight line, projections. That is the standard starting point for any sort of statistical analysis. I may not be a scientist, but I am a statistician.

I thought this was bumped because Al Gore's Doomsday clock expired. Too bad.

J

[TranaGreg]

... I'm curious why you think my estimates are low. ...

I'm pretty sure he explained this, right after the sentence that started "I was going to get into how OJ's estimates for continued warming are low, and how it doesn't factor in ... ".

[onejayhawk]

I'm pretty sure he explained this, right after the sentence that started "I was going to get into how OJ's estimates for continued warming are low, and how it doesn't factor in ... ".

The question was directed at Sour Masher. Your explanation was an argument to deviate from normal procedure. That's fine, but let's not confuse hypothesis with experimental result.

you have a point, many people tend to dismiss the opinions of scientists funded directly or indirectly by big oil or by the coal industry

Case in point. It is as no more legitimate to dismiss scientists funded by oil companies as it is to dismiss scientists funded by political advocates. Also, no less legitimate, so there is that.

J

[nullnor]

this was a cute video. it's a cartoon of the story of Sticky. how a small group of an extinct individuals of a species survived in a lone bush, in the middle of the ocean for 80 years.

https://aeon.co/videos/how-a-tiny-group-of-insects-escaped-extinction-by-hiding-in-a-bush-for-80-years

btw this was actually a true story. if anyone was wondering.

Once declared extinct, Lord Howe Island stick insects really do live October 5, 2017

"The Lord Howe Island stick insect has become emblematic of the fragility of island ecosystems," Mikheyev says. "Unlike most stories involving extinction, this one gives us a unique second chance."

if you were to look at the universe like it behaved sometimes like an organism... save the stick insects, save the world.

[nullnor]

https://www.thenation.com/article/the-united-states-is-polluting-the-world-and-locking-refugees-out/

an interesting article if you're liberal. reminds my of the Dennis Hopper zombie movie Land of the Dead. i kind of fear becoming something like that someday. being a member of the haves, and being oblivious to the nots.

i wonder if everything is just a bait and switch lie.

like tax cuts is just a way to redistribute money upwards. or patriotism or nationalism is really racism...or anti-global warming is really anti-immigration (and we're causing more immigration from global warming, and then use it as an issue), or being pro-life is really being pro-poverty and pro-business to have cheap labor.

i remember when someone said here that republicans only care about people when they are babies or a fetus, and once it grows up they no longer care. i know that's not true but, someone asked what they meant.

pro-pollution (or bait and switch and call it anti-regulation), give them respiratory diseases, cancer, and cheap cigarettes.
make health care inaccessible, kill them off early so they don't have to pay 'entitlements'.
be against public education, sex education, college education. teachers.
be against low wage workers, unions, attempts to organize.
safety nets, welfare, food stamps. etc..
science, curing disease.

i suppose if i were republican, i'd be against these things too.

but the earth has a certain way of working these things out. if immigrants vote democrat, and global warming causes more immigrants, than being a conservative in favor of global warming, is like voting yourself out of office... and you can put up all the border walls and sophisticated surveillance in the world, but mother nature will just keep coming at you.

it doesn't look good. but there are constructive solutions. can't fool all of the people all of the time, you know. it's good for the GOP to be in charge. get everything out in the open. let everyone see what these so-called tax cuts will do. 20%!! lol, i almost shit myself. than again Bill Clinton did the capital gains reduction. yeah his economic bubble burst. raise your hand if you lost your job in the 90's... just like healthcare. let them try. then one has no-one to blame but oneself.

edit: it depresses me because im part of the problem too. i make a little over 40k and pay 1/3 in taxes. i am an enabler.

[nullnor]

i think im depressed :/

[onejayhawk]

i think im depressed :/

Descartes said cogito ergo sum. Cogito ergo adflictus does not have the same ring.

J

[TranaGreg]

public service announcement: make sure your A/C is properly tuned ...