Arctic ice melt is slowing down, but climate change could soon come back biting

[mbk34]

Nothing but more climate alarmism on this Tech website.

Please remember that the only place on Earth that isn't worried about climate change is the USA. I guess that's because the oil industry there wants to continue it's current path. NASA used to produce reports on climate change but it was threatened with having it's funding cut if it didn't toe the party line. Nevertheless 99.9% of scientists agree the climate change is real and happening.

It was WARMER 100,000 years ago according to NOAA. If it was WARMER 100,000 years ago, without humans & "the industrial revolution/burning fossil fuels" then how did it get so warm?
The Earth has a cycle...but since we do not EDUCATE people about how things work, they believe all of this nonsense called global warming. Whoops! I meant climate change. Uh oh! I meant climate emergency.

If you actually read the NOAA report rather than cherry picking certain parts you'll see it states "No, that doesn’t mean current warming is natural or that it won’t, overall, be harmful to humans and other life".

The hottest year on record globally was 2024. The previous hottest year was 2023. It's a pretty simple pattern.

 

[Axeia]

I am one that believes that the massive loss of rain forest combined with deforestation overall is possibly just as responsible as the burning of fossil fuels.


But, but what about the cycle of bullshit?
See that NOAA graph I posted above? No? You can see how consistent the cycles have been, and you can also see how badly the natural balance was thrown off, and when it happened.
Can you say out loud that you think that happened as our industrial age came to be is a complete coincidence? Because I would love to hear why.

We're an accelerator and possibly amplifier. Fuel to the fire as it were, but it's not like it wouldn't happen at all without us. A bunch of vulcanos spewing out a greenhouse gasses and burning down masses of vegetation or killing of plankton could do something very similar.

It would be in our best interest to not speed that up as it's going to lead to more frequent natural disasters which are costly and will come at the cost of human life... But good luck stopping it. For every government that tries their hardest (like Germany and its immense reliance on solar power) you'll have some poor nation (or the US) opening up coal power plants.
Not to mention a lot of 'green' energy isn't even all that green in the end with non-recyclable limited lifespan solar panels and wind turbines. Nuclear fission could probably tie us over till nuclear fusion is figured out which seems to be the only truly viable option with the ever growing need for more power. But there's too many people against nuclear power because they think they'll have barrels of green goop in their backyard.

 

[wiyosaya]

Just refer to the Breitbart "information" @Win7user put up above. It is so laughable that my daughter told me that her colleagues that read it basically said it should have been written with crayons.

I'm willing to buy a set of crayons that I'll donate to anyone who needs them.

 

[scavengerspc]

We're an accelerator and possibly amplifier. Fuel to the fire as it were, but it's not like it wouldn't happen at all without us.

It would not have happened without us. The simple stats show no other variation other than people.

A bunch of vulcanos spewing out a greenhouse gasses and burning down masses of vegetation or killing of plankton could do something very similar.

Not even close man:

Are Volcanoes or Humans Harder on the Atmosphere?

Does one major volcanic eruption generate more climate-altering gas than that produced by humans in their entire history?

www.scientificamerican.com

Which emits more carbon dioxide: volcanoes or human activities?

Human activities emit 60 or more times the amount of carbon dioxide released by volcanoes each year.

www.climate.gov

"Human activities emit 60 or more times the amount of carbon dioxide released by volcanoes each year. Large, violent eruptions may match the rate of human emissions for the few hours that they last, but they are too rare and fleeting to rival humanity’s annual emissions. In fact, several individual U.S. states emit more carbon dioxide in a year than all the volcanoes on the planet combined do."

Also, remember that volcanos are a part of the 4.5 billion year natural balance.

 

[wiyosaya]

I dont want to hear jabs at comprehension from a crowd that still parades around their "models" that get proven wrong every 5-6 years, with the same excuse of "well our science and tools are better now so THIS time we'll be correct". Something something "definition of insanity" something something.

The overwhelming majority of climate predictions have either been flat out wrong (see again, florida being above water) or of a far smaller scale than predicted. The credibility of the climate science community has been shredded by their constant alarmism.

Perhaps you should re-read the article to verify what it says about models.

Science is about updates. Its about knowing that no-one knows everything and providing evidence for what is claimed. Unfortunately, there are those out there who eschew science in favor of personal information that typically has no proof and that they have decided is truth. Truth is not fluid, and because some dude that claims to know everything claims something is true, it does not mean that whatever is claimed is true. Most of the "dudes" will claim things and offer no proof. Science lays out what it has found for anyone and everyone, including you and I, to verify or debunk.

Think of the model of the solar system and the universe. The ancients used to think that the Earth was the center of all until someone came along and proved it was not by sound scientific reasoning that at first, was considered Heresy, and then after many years, was accepted as fact. People even thought Einstein was FOS and his theories are now accepted.

Nothing is ever set in stone to a scientist.

Without science, and improving models. none of us would be making comments from our personal computers.

 

[Crabjuice]

I remember the Y2K bug and that the world was supposed to end in 2012.

Im in IT. The Y2K bug wasn't a thing because software engineers knew the problem existed and urgently needed to be fixed so they fixed it. 2012 was the end of the Mayan calendar and I'm pretty sure no one was worried about that. Might be that your memory is very selective.

 

[wiyosaya]

It was WARMER 100,000 years ago according to NOAA. If it was WARMER 100,000 years ago, without humans & "the industrial revolution/burning fossil fuels" then how did it get so warm?
The Earth has a cycle...but since we do not EDUCATE people about how things work, they believe all of this nonsense called global warming. Whoops! I meant climate change. Uh oh! I meant climate emergency.


Arctic sea ice hasn't declined as quickly as models predicted.

Had many storms or unusual weather in Texas recently?

Where I am, I met my wife 25-years ago. We used to go snowshoeing and cross-country-skiing every year when we first met. For the past several years, we have barely had any snow.

When I was a child, I remember building snow forts in my front yard. We have not had enough snow for that recently.

 

[Neatfeatguy]

Im in IT. The Y2K bug wasn't a thing because software engineers knew the problem existed and urgently needed to be fixed so they fixed it. 2012 was the end of the Mayan calendar and I'm pretty sure no one was worried about that. Might be that your memory is very selective.

Wow....in IT huh?

It wasn't even close to having everything fixed in the code for Y2K for all businesses, schools and even some countries. So no, it wasn't all fixed. Some was, some wasn't.

 

[Mark Fuller]

Im in IT. The Y2K bug wasn't a thing because software engineers knew the problem existed and urgently needed to be fixed so they fixed it. 2012 was the end of the Mayan calendar and I'm pretty sure no one was worried about that. Might be that your memory is very selective.

Of course the Y2K bug was fixed and sure no one was worried about 2012. The point was about alarmism.

 

[lonetac]

See, I agree that kind of stuff happens. But when it does, their research is always mysteriously missing, or is so far off the actual facts they get laughed out of consideration.
Just refer to the Breitbart "information" @Win7user

Peer reviewed is a thing. Science deniers are not functioning humans.

 

[lonetac]

Perhaps you should re-read the article to verify what it says about models.

Science is about updates. Its about knowing that no-one knows everything and providing evidence for what is claimed. Unfortunately, there are those out there who eschew science in favor of personal information that typically has no proof and that they have decided is truth. Truth is not fluid, and because some dude that claims to know everything claims something is true, it does not mean that whatever is claimed is true. Most of the "dudes" will claim things and offer no proof. Science lays out what it has found for anyone and everyone, including you and I, to verify or debunk.

Think of the model of the solar system and the universe. The ancients used to think that the Earth was the center of all until someone came along and proved it was not by sound scientific reasoning that at first, was considered Heresy, and then after many years, was accepted as fact. People even thought Einstein was FOS and his theories are now accepted.

Nothing is ever set in stone to a scientist.

Without science, and improving models. none of us would be making comments from our personal computers.

10000x this. Science is a process and learning journey. Its not expected to be right 100% about everything all the time. Its about making educated guesses with data that makes sense and agreed upon amongst peers.

Science is an evolution. Thats the point.

Science deniers are not functioning humans and should not be taken serious or given any consideration.

 

[Crabjuice]

Wow....in IT huh?

It wasn't even close to having everything fixed in the code for Y2K for all businesses, schools and even some countries. So no, it wasn't all fixed. Some was, some wasn't.

Didn't say all of it was fixed, but OK.

 

[lonetac]

Didn't say all of it was fixed, but OK.

As an security minded individual whom works in the industry, we know what we did to prevent the biggest fallout of y2k.

no sense in providing any validation to the brain rot being thrown around.

 

[Axeia]

It would not have happened without us. The simple stats show no other variation other than people.

Not even close man:

Are Volcanoes or Humans Harder on the Atmosphere?

Does one major volcanic eruption generate more climate-altering gas than that produced by humans in their entire history?

www.scientificamerican.com

Which emits more carbon dioxide: volcanoes or human activities?

Human activities emit 60 or more times the amount of carbon dioxide released by volcanoes each year.

www.climate.gov

"Human activities emit 60 or more times the amount of carbon dioxide released by volcanoes each year. Large, violent eruptions may match the rate of human emissions for the few hours that they last, but they are too rare and fleeting to rival humanity’s annual emissions. In fact, several individual U.S. states emit more carbon dioxide in a year than all the volcanoes on the planet combined do."

Also, remember that volcanos are a part of the 4.5 billion year natural balance.

Source 1: Does not compensate for things like forests burning down or algae/plankton getting killed off as a secondary effect.
Although admittedly it can also have the complete opposite effect feeding algae with volcanic ash or cooling the earth by blocking out the sun.

Source 2: Vulcanoes have been around for nearly all of earths history and have had periods of increased activity causing spikes. Human activity on a level where it affects the environment has been around for a lot less (industrial revolution wasn't until the 1800s).

Natural balance, yes... but they have periods of increased and decreased activity. Is that still part of the balance?

---

I think we mostly agree btw except for the details. I'm not saying human activity has been completely irrelevant. It's just that I don't think we're the sole cause and there's still a lot left to learn. Part of the reason why all predictions/models were so off the mark seems to be due to a lack of understanding still. I was always taught that the rain forests were the biggest CO2 dump we had, but turns out that algae/plankton play a bigger role.
Turns out modelling an entire planet and all its ecosystems to make predictions is quite hard.

I fully agree that we're messing the planet and it's gonna to bite us but I'm probably getting too old to care much about reversing it. I keep my own footprint quite low but it does little compared when you hear about Trumps policies or heck even something like some celebrity getting coffee by private jet.

 

[Win7user]

Yep everyone. THAT is his proof. Breitbart.
An obvious genius in MAGA world.
And for extra laugh credit, check out their sources. That and their views are beyond comedy.
Prepare for some new laugh lines, because I can see Infowars evidence coming soon!

A closed MAGA mind is the harm, an open MAGA mouth is the tragedy.

Hey, stop smoking that carp, boy!

 

[scavengerspc]

Hey, stop smoking that carp, boy!

From the one that quotes Breitbart!

 

[Mark Fuller]

The thing tbat really gets me about what we have done that is an absolute fact is like pollution, junkyards, graveyards, crime, etc. You cannot argue about the effects of things we have done that we have undeniably brought upon ourselves. Maybe global warming or climate change is not really the worst thing we could image. I don't think that it would ever extinct all life on the Earth. Given the adaptive resilience of both man and mother nature, I am sure some things will survive.

 

[wiyosaya]

I know this is hard for non-scientists to understand, but scientists are financially incentivized to find results that are in vogue. It leads to both publications (scientific fame and better jobs) and literal funding for their research. Sure, not all scientists "sell out", but you have to start with the understanding that STRONG incentives are aligned with with what the funders want, be it tobacco companies funding risk studies or liberal politicians elected on climate change funding climate change research.

Sorry, "but scientists are financially incentivized to find results that are in vogue" is an over-generalization and, therefore, logical fallacy, unless you have evidence that ALL of them are. (I highly doubt you do.)

IMO, its more correct to say Maybe some scientists are, but its highly unlikely that all scientists are.

 

[Mark Fuller]

Sorry, "but scientists are financially incentivized to find results that are in vogue" is an over-generalization and, therefore, logical fallacy, unless you have evidence that ALL of them are. (I highly doubt you do.)

IMO, its more correct to say Maybe some scientists are, but its highly unlikely that all scientists are.

 

[Mark Fuller]

Without a doubt scientists on both sides of the street have financial incentives.

 

[scavengerspc]

Without a doubt scientists on both sides of the street have financial incentives.

Nothing on you man, but I hate that "both sides" argument.

It just seems like saying a private plane needing to land on a highway and a fully loaded
Boeing 777 crashing into the ocean really are both just accidents.

 

[wiyosaya]

Without a doubt scientists on both sides of the street have financial incentives.

Reminiscent of "You had very find people on both sides."

 

[Mark Fuller]

Nothing on you man, but I hate that "both sides" argument.

It just seems like saying a private plane needing to land on a highway and a fully loaded
Boeing 777 crashing into the ocean really are both just accidents.

I guess maybe it is a kind of compromise, but both sides have private planes and 777's too. There's just no way to get around the fact that wrong is wrong and two wrongs don't make a right, and the NTSB accident investigation procdures for both incidents are the same.

 

[mbk34]

I find it best not arguing with such people. If they believe that 99.9% of scientists are lying then really there's nothing else you can say. Their posts only emphasise that America has declined intellectually, morally and politically.

 

[Angga B]

The earth climate has been changing, is changing, and will be changing, with or without YOU.