The climate change consensus extends beyond climate scientists

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

There's no number of weather records for a particular geographic region that will prove global warming, as it's the global average over time that tracks climate change.

It's the total heat energy carried by the earth that is relevant to the discussion of climate change. That will manifest in local weather, but local weather will not be proof of climate change.

Perhaps it's too hot where you are, but I'd need to see something more than an observation of 3 ambulances and a stuck bridge. Lets see how crop yields turn out, life expectancy, per capita income...

Global warming is a prime candidate for confirmation bias. We need as unbiased, objective observations as possible, which is why I appreciate Aerohead's contributions (not that he's unbiased, but that he largely presents relevant facts).

The whole point of me talking about "record low" temps here isn't to deny global warming to disprove climate change, but to prove the irrelevance of point in time and space measurements in drawing conclusions about a global trend.

The Meteorological year ends November 30th. Only then will the researchers have all the data sets from which to determine how we did for the year.
That said, weather 'extremes' are something the climate scientists consider,as they are 'black swans',something the climate models do not exclude.The accelerated warming at the poles,as best as the scientists can figure,has affected the stratospheric polar jet/night jet,which is coupled to the jet stream.Instability in the polar jet is considered to be a driver for the jet stream excursions which effect the regional distribution of atmospheric energy,water vapor,stalled high-pressure areas,and such,which can wreak havoc,like the snowmaggedons,early melts,flooding,heat waves,blizzards,super-cells,and the like.Reliable weather data has been compiled since 1880,so we have quite a bit of data from which to do statistical analysis and recognize trends or not.
That Saharan heat is in Greenland right now,and they're witnessing record melting as I type this.In the Arctic Circle,Siberia,Scandinavia,Greenland and Alaska are experiencing wildfires of such magnitude,that the carbon dioxide from the fires will be enough by itself,to amplify global warming according to the folks monitoring up there.Japan's under Typhoon NARI,China's experiencing a 'Tibetan High',with up to 38-C (100.4-F),Belgium just set a heat record (105-F),France (108-F),Germany(102F in Cologne)),Poland,Netherlands,Britain.Fires burning in Canada.
We had a highway buckle in Burleson,Texas last week which shut major traffic down.Ozone Action Days here.My forehead perspiration carries nitric acid into my eyes when working outdoors.Very nice!

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

Climate change is the change in weather over hundreds and thousands of years. A decade or 2 of hot years by the definition of climate change proves nothing, aside from the dooms day climate change believers being a cult.

Plus in the United States only 4% of Americans believe climate, pollution and environment is the most important issue. According to the Gallup poll that number normally stays around 3 or 4 percent.

The bride being warped from heat proves someone hired incompetent engineers, not climate change.

I don't understand how someone who drives a gas burner can say they care about climate change.
Almost like listening to someone who flys all over the world in a private jet and lectures people who can't afford a first class plane ticket about how they make too much CO2.

A decade or two of amplified arctic warming is enough for a large enough fresh water pulse to 'flip' the North Atlantic thermohaline conveyor,which would bring on another 'Little Ice Age',as in 1550.Throw in another Mount Agung-type volcanic eruption on top of that and you'd have a serious situation for many millions of people.And for a long time.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

I could maybe see humanity collectively accepting the downclimb for a short duration so long as the other peak is sufficiently higher than the one they were atop, or the threat they are facing on their current peak so personally antagonizing that they can no longer stay where they are.

This topic reminds me of the philosophy scenario that asks if we owe Mickey Mouse anything. Most would say no because Mickey Mouse isn't real (as a sentient being). Following that question is whether we owe future generations (yet unborn) anything, considering they are no more real than Mickey Mouse...

That isn't a justification for not considering future generations, but I do think at the core of humanity is a short-term outlook and need to see immediate results. It's evidenced all around by things like the level of debt the typical person carries. We're all too willing to sacrifice future well-being for current well-being, with the current being "real" and the future being "hypothetical".

I'm not sure about the rest of the world,but in the USA,if we're to remain a nation as envisioned by the founding fathers,then it's an imperative of our Constitution to look out for all future generations.It's not optional.
NASA's mission statement at it's founding in 1958 included '...to understand and protect or planet.'
'Knowledge will forever govern ignorance,and people who mean to be their own governors must arm themselves with the power knowledge gives.A popular government without popular information or the means of acquiring it is but a prologue to a farce or tragedy,or both.' James Madison
'Experience is a cruel teacher- it gives the exam first-then the lesson.' U.S. ARMY,8th-Air Force, Tuskeggee airman,Leslie Odom,Jr.,'Red Tails Squadron,WW-II.

[oil pan 4]

Yes vulcanism, solar events and the lack of them are a far greater threat to civilization than climate change.
While the cult of global warming is waiting for climate change to kill us all a volcano could easily pop up, take out hundreds of millions of people, same for a solar driven little ice age.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

Yes vulcanism, solar events and the lack of them are a far greater threat to civilization than climate change.
While the cult of global warming is waiting for climate change to kill us all a volcano could easily pop up, take out hundreds of millions of people, same for a solar driven little ice age.

The scientists say that we weren't on Earth the last time this much carbon dioxide was in the atmosphere.We didn't evolve for the planet as we'll relatively soon know it.
Catastrophe will begin with the Thwaites Glacier in Antarctica,and it's all downhill from there.
The deaths will be in the tens,then hundreds,then thousands,then millions,then billions.

[litesong]

Originally Posted by freebeard

In (IIRC) the Science Pavilion they had an immense model of Puget Sound with the new Monorail extended into a circle around the entire Puget Sound area.
It never grew from the original length.

Yes, the model of the Puget Sound was accurate & simulated the tides in the Puget Sound. This model & an even more accurate model (at the University of Washington?) helped them properly place the Sewage plant for the growing Seattle region.
Also, the free fed money for a mass transportation system (which could have included an extended monorail system or whatever the region wanted), which Seattle turned down, went to Portland, Or. Portland now has a mass transportation system serving three counties.

[litesong]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

.....the cult of global warming......

Even tho this website emphasizes good economical driving, it is still a driver's forum, with the anti-science, global warming nah-sayers in number & by name.

[litesong]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

I would always turn down federal money.... comes with..... heinous stipulations.....racist/sexist "affirmative action"....laws...

Yes, its heinous NOT to be racist/sexist.....

[freebeard]

[not sure if serious]

It's deeper than that. Things that are not in the Constitution: Any Federal Court that is not the Supreme Court. Political parties.

[oil pan 4]

Originally Posted by aerohead

The scientists say that we weren't on Earth the last time this much carbon dioxide was in the atmosphere.We didn't evolve for the planet as we'll relatively soon know it.
Catastrophe will begin with the Thwaites Glacier in Antarctica,and it's all downhill from there.
The deaths will be in the tens,then hundreds,then thousands,then millions,then billions.

Been hearing that since the 1970s.
Not exactly that but close enough.