NASA says 2017 was the second-hottest year on record since 1880

[yRaz]

Look, as a USA citizen, I just want to go back to eating Tide Pods. I can't do that without the 40" mud tires on my truck so can we put this whole global warming thing behind us? I mean, what's more important, Nascar or climate change? Now if you don't mind, I'm going to look at my stash of Dale Earnhardt KFC buckets!

 

[wiyosaya]

Look, as a USA citizen, I just want to go back to eating Tide Pods. I can't do that without the 40" mud tires on my truck so can we put this whole global warming thing behind us? I mean, what's more important, Nascar or climate change? Now if you don't mind, I'm going to look at my stash of Dale Earnhardt KFC buckets!

I was so worried that one of you in the tide pods thread was going to post a self-immolation challenge video on YouTube that I thought about notifying the moderators...

 

[JaredTheDragon]

All you have to do to understand "climate change" politics is look up "failed global warming predictions".

Spoiler alert: they've all failed. Not one prediction has come to pass. None.

 

[wiyosaya]

All you have to do to understand "climate change" politics is look up "failed global warming predictions".

Spoiler alert: they've all failed. Not one prediction has come to pass. None.

Spoiler alert: Global warming is a trend - not a prediction. Models made by scientists do contain inaccuracies.

However, effects are more apparent as they can be observed. Look up "declining ice cover". Spoiler alert: it is happening.

 

[yeeeeman]

Yeah, I don't understand why it is so hard to believe that we are indeed accelerating the heating process. Can't we see already how hot are cities during summer compared to lets say, country side? That heat is from pavement, from a lot of cars, from a lot of HVACs which pump out heat. On top of that we have the nice CO2 spilled by our cars. So, again, why it is so hard to believe that we are doing all this stuff and it is indeed harmful for the planet?

 

[JaredTheDragon]

Yet CO2 barely makes it a few hundred feet into the atmosphere before falling off. It weighs too much here to float and persist, and no mechanism has ever been shown or demonstrated that it is a "greenhouse gas", even on Venus. Venus isn't hot because it has a carbon dioxide atmosphere, it has a CO2 atmosphere because it has weaker gravity than Earth due to its smaller radius. CO2 "floats" there, held up by Venus's charge emission (heat). Here on Earth, however, O2 and N and Argon float much more readily than CO2, which persists for only 5 years at 100 feet above sea level. Oxygen persists for 4,500 years, in comparison, and Nitrogen even longer - because they are balanced in Earth's gravity.

People just love to ignore the physics and pretend that sensationalism has bearing on actual atmospheric mechanics.

 

[cuerdc]

Global cooling threat as was colder than last year...??

 

[wiyosaya]

Yet another source of CO2 - Microwave Ovens - https://phys.org/news/2018-01-microwaves-bad-environment-cars.html

 

[Ean Mogg]

The biggest lie here is "when records began" dendrologists and historians know a different story like 2000 years ago the earth was a lot hotter than today the Roman empire had to use northern countries to grow food as italy was hotter than it is today, Greenland was inhabited as well as Baffin islands so by that deduction the northwest passage was open then all of a sudden in about 500ad a Meteor hit Peru off the coast so throwing so much dirt into the atmosphere the whole earth went into a mini ice age which the earth is only now coming out and these are not theories these are facts if you know where to look ,,,

Really, now? The dark ages - meteor? That is not what the scientific consensus says. https://phys.org/news/2016-04-volcanoes-trigger-crises-late-antiquity.html

So, would your solution be that humanity invent mass-drivers capable of bombarding the sh!thole countries from space to combat climate change?

It is true there have been documentaries on the BBC about this Meteor and dendrologists can only confirm a big drop in temperature (which Vikings called Ragnarok) and the north from the coast of Britain up north was uninhabitable for over a year but historians from Rome and Athens at the time report sightings of said meteor around the 500s but as they changed the calendar we could be a year out or a hundred years out and the BBC seem to have lost these documentaries since they've gone pro climate change and 2000 years ago or less we'll never know exactly the Vikings colonized all the islands from Greenland over to Baffin island and all the islands north of that and some ancient maps show the Northwest Passage open and during the Roman era all the mediterranean area was part of a band that now warms the Sahara and you can find this information in books that were written before we had global warming ^_~

 

[Corey Jackson]

Yeah, uh-huh. Sound legit.

National foundation, national propaganda. These are the same people that still can't tell us what heat is in the first place, and believe in things like black holes, neutron stars, and The Big Bang. They'll say anything to stay relevant and keep their outrageous funding.

Because you are such a more reliable source than all the scientists who research the climate for a living.

 

[Manuel Diego]

Yet CO2 barely makes it a few hundred feet into the atmosphere before falling off. It weighs too much here to float and persist, and no mechanism has ever been shown or demonstrated that it is a "greenhouse gas", even on Venus. Venus isn't hot because it has a carbon dioxide atmosphere, it has a CO2 atmosphere because it has weaker gravity than Earth due to its smaller radius. CO2 "floats" there, held up by Venus's charge emission (heat). Here on Earth, however, O2 and N and Argon float much more readily than CO2, which persists for only 5 years at 100 feet above sea level. Oxygen persists for 4,500 years, in comparison, and Nitrogen even longer - because they are balanced in Earth's gravity.

People just love to ignore the physics and pretend that sensationalism has bearing on actual atmospheric mechanics.

"CO2 has a long average lifespan: every new molecule that is produced will remain in the atmosphere for more than a century,” (http://old.iaa.es/content/concentration-carbon-dioxide-rise-upper-layers-earth’s-atmosphere). I know this is just what a PhD in charge of a research program says, not what JarredTheDragon writes on a forum, so it's to be taken with a grain of salt. Plus the scientist who said that did not use bold letters, so it's probably not true... /s
They also say that their instrument (again, just a measuring instrument that is probably lying, not a guy's rant which has to be true) has "revealed an increase in the amount of carbon dioxide contained in the top layers of the atmosphere between 2002 and 2014 from 5% to 12%". How dare they! We all know, thanks to JarredTheDragon, that CO2 barely makes it a few hundred feet into the atmosphere. Amen!
And as for CO2 not causing greenhouse effect, what can we say? It must be true, of course, it's Jarred's spell. Nevermind that scientists consider that it is, they are all (all of them! at the same time!) lying. For example: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-carbon-dioxide-is-greenhouse-gas/.

I have been studying physics for the past 5 years (so I'm really not an expert!), it's fascinating. I remember, before that, the absurd statements I sometimes made, out of ignorance. But studying really helps discerning, and a little critical thinking helps being a little more prudent when stating things that you really have no clue about. Some dragons should better study and think before stating things they just heard somewhere, but don't really know about. Now please surprise me, Jarred, tell me where you got your Phd...

 

[Silvernine]

Now please surprise me, Jarred, tell me where you got your Phd...

If you really want to know, his sources seems to all come from a guy named Miles Mathis. An egotistical raving conspiracy theorist and rascist who is known for his ridiculous and outlandish theories and ineptitude in math and science.

"Sometimes called the New Leonardo, Miles Mathis is a wide-ranging thinker and creator. His two websites offer the reader everything from science and math to art, poetry, and criticism. Mathis is known worldwide for his fearlessness in attacking all power structures, and no one else on the web has produced such an impressive and extended analysis of modern art and science in so short a time. Some older critics have created greater bodies of work, but Mathis is unique in that he criticizes from within, as a working scientist and artist. In this way his critiques are never abstract or academic: they are instead blisteringly specific, down to the precise line where a famous proof goes wrong."

Here is an examples of a particularly cute claim from Miles Mathis:

But a distance times a distance is not a distance squared, if they are in line. A distance times a distance is a distance squared only in the case that the two distances are orthogonal, so that we have a square or something. A distance times a distance in line cannot be a distance squared anymore than a distance plus a distance can be a distance squared. This is another mainstream misunderstanding.

 

[Clans]

Since 1880? And the world is at least 4 billion years old!
This is like saying the room temperature in my house is the warmest it has ever been since 8 AM this morning.

 

[Bubbajim]

To everyone who's getting annoyed because either the climate has changed before, or the Earth has been hotter before than it is now, you're really not understanding what exactly the threat is.

It's not that the world will become too hot to sustain life, it's not that humanity will get wiped out. The problem is part ecological, as many, many species of flora and fauna won't be able to evolve at the requisite rate in order to survive, so many will go extinct. But, where humans are concerned, the problem is more geopolitical.

The times that people referenced when "it was hotter X thousand/million years ago!!1!" were times where there either wasn't a human population, or there was but it was so tiny that climate effects didn't really matter. The situation we find ourselves in now, however, is rather different. We've almost 7.5 billion people alive, we have about 40% of that number living on coastlines, riverbanks or other water-side areas. We have millions already dying in extreme poverty, and refugee crises going on, caused by a few piddling little wars in (relatively) tiny countries. And all that is within the current climate that our societies have grown up in.

Fast forward to sea level rises displacing coastal communities, deserts growing and making more and more land less able to be farmed, increased wars of competition for land and resources, and you have a great recipe for the immiseration of anyone lucky enough to be alive at such a time.

Imagine you could see a political event brewing, the likes of which was going to leave your grandchildren and their grandchildren in warring, diseased times. Would you have a moral duty to do something to try and prevent that? Because currently we've got an ecological situation that's going to lead to exactly those conditions - so let's perhaps do something about it.

 

[Badvok]

deserts growing and making more and more land less able to be farmed

This highlights the 'Chicken Little' woe-mongering doctrine of the Church of Climate Change. In fact, if there is a warming trend (which there probably is), then vast tracts of land that are currently too cold will become viable farmland, far exceeding any land lost to desertification or coastal flooding.

 

[Manuel Diego]

What is clear is that, as we say in my language, there's no one more blind than he who doesn't want to see.

 

[Bubbajim]

This highlights the 'Chicken Little' woe-mongering doctrine of the Church of Climate Change. In fact, if there is a warming trend (which there probably is), then vast tracts of land that are currently too cold will become viable farmland, far exceeding any land lost to desertification or coastal flooding.

Alright, let's follow that line of thinking - who owns that land? Where is it situated? Will the governments and populations of those countries welcome with open arms all those people displaced through famine and land ruination?

 

[Impudicus]

Finally, it's cooling off. Well, if they change last years results...

 

[A Perkins]

Was curious how many 'experts' would show up to comment here on why global warming isn't happening or isn't a problem. The internet never disappoints!

If you'd like to really discuss a specific scientific aspect you don't think is right, I'm down to talk. AMA (I'm a PhD student in the atmospheric sciences.)

 

[Billy Vinson]

LIARS...