The climate change consensus extends beyond climate scientists

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by All Darc

I was right and wrong 50/50 :

https://science.howstuffworks.com/en...uestion473.htm

Nice reading... take a look.

Ocean rise could be more than 68 meters, but it would require melt antartic ice (repreents 90% of world ice), all of it, and that's quite impossible to global warmring each such point.

So, it could be as high as they show in A.I Artificial Intelligence, but if temperature was changed up to melt everthing, Earth would be a steam room.

Correct me if I'm wrong,but the glaciologists have said that if all mountain glaciers,Arctic ice,Greenland,and Antarctica melt,we're looking at 80-meters (270-feet) sea-level rise.Some believe it can't last a century with the feedbacks underway.So buckle up and get your snorkel ready!

[oil pan 4]

Darn that puts me at less than 4,000 feet above sea lever, better start looking for higher ground.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by freebeard

Via Suspicious 0bservers:
July 2019 Was Not the Warmest on Record: Roy Spencer, PhD

Each month,temperature data from three separate global databases are used to ascertain the official,published,global mean average temperature.Together,these form the data for the 'Meteorological' year,published each November.
I thought I had the sources with me,but I don't.Memory says: the data is from NASA,NOAA,and Hadley Center,UK.There are millions of terrestrial,ocean,atmospheric,and remote-sensing,satellite-based,reporting stations used.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

We already know they cherry pick like crazy to make every month the warmest on record.
At best it's observation based science, at the very least with a strong bias if not outright fraud is being used to support a predetermined conclusion.
You see this any time a religion is put in charge of science.

'Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.'

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by aerohead

Correct me if I'm wrong,but the glaciologists have said that if all mountain glaciers,Arctic ice,Greenland,and Antarctica melt,we're looking at 80-meters (270-feet) sea-level rise.Some believe it can't last a century with the feedbacks underway.So buckle up and get your snorkel ready!

... and at a foot of rise per century, that would take much longer than civilized humans have existed to happen (27,000 years). We're on target for about a foot of sea-level rise over 100 years, or about 1/8th inch per year.

Not good, but people are capable of adapting to 1/8th inch per year.

As a tangent thought, has anyone ever contemplated that it's the year 2019, which is a very small number? Considering geologic and cosmic time, 4000 or so years of civilization is an instant. We very well might be living much closer to the beginning of history than the end of it.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by slowmover

A hoax to exert more control and fleece everyone. “International Agencies” to be created, no doubt.

The Big Lie is one folks can’t believe would be fostered upon them. Just keep repeating until they do. (Heinrich Himmler commenting on Jewish tactics).

Whomever is the OP needs to request the thread title be changed. “Consensus” isn’t science. Consensus is politics or religious accord. Who, whom. Not truth.

.

It is Granger Morgan,physicist,and policy expert,Carnegie Mellon University,who is the specialist who determined the 95% scientific consensus on climate change,reported by,ABC NEWS Television broadcast's,Bill Blakemore,December,8,2005.

[oil pan 4]

Originally Posted by aerohead

'Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.'

Climate gate 1 and 2.
Then there was climate gate 3 but that was down graded to gross scientific misconduct.
Any belivers who haven't heard of any of these chose to bury their heads in the sand and pretend everything is perfect.
Even if you ignore the fraud there is the funding bias, where it's been proven by the sugar industry of all places that scientific studies are more likely to end with favorable results to the entity that supplied the funding.

[freebeard]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

The argument to take action sooner rather than later certainly makes sense.

....Global warming affects absolutely everything, and not necessarily in a negative way. ....That said, what is known is that adaptation and preparation is made easier when there's more time, and rapid change puts more pressure on creatures (including us) attempting to adapt. The question then becomes whether we get more bang for the buck delaying the rate of change, or by preparing for it.

"Premature optimization is the root of all evil." — David Knuth

Though I'm no expert, it seems more straightforward to me to build something that accommodates current and future weather than to keep what I have built and try to manipulate the outdoor thermostat. This especially when the timescale we're talking about is still many generations. We're not even talking about us having to build a new home for ourselves, but perhaps great grandchildren needing to build elsewhere, or fortify against future weather.

We could spin off a thread, maybe in Saving@Home. I'd advocate to accommodating temperature extremes and wind-driven debis. But after watching S0 this morning and the Cosmic Disaster video I embedded above, I'll add fist-sized hail and UV radiation.

It would prompt me to produce documentation (under a Creative Commons license) on an high-performance, up-rateable building system.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by Vman455

I can think of several off the top of my head:
-Who's going to pay for it?
-How would we deal with the psychological fallout? (People don't like being told what cars they can or cannot buy, what modes of transportation they can or cannot use, what foods they can or cannot eat, etc.)
-Where will the resources necessary to accomplish the buildout of solar and wind capacity (huge amounts of various metals, concrete, silicon, etc.) come from?
-Where will the resources necessary to accomplish the buildout of energy storage come from?
-How will we get the above out of the ground, refined, manufactured, transported, and installed without using fossil fuel energy?
-And again, who's going to pay for all of that and how?

When we can't even recycle the vast bulk of our plastic waste in this country because we were shipping almost the entirety of it to one country which then decided it wasn't economically feasible to keep accepting and recycling it, it isn't realistic to assert we could handle a complete energy transition simply by willing it into being. You might not think greed, selfishness, laziness, etc. are desirable human traits and we should wish them away, but we can't--they're real, and in order for such a scheme to work, they must be dealt with somehow.

*first,skip the economics.It's not even an issue considering the challenge.When the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor,nobody sat around and argued about what WW-II was going to cost!
*the 'dollar a year people' will figure out the logistics.They're the same people who got us into this mess anyway.
*Suspend habeas corpus.
*Suspend the first Amendment.
*People won't have any say in consumer products.The 'Law of the Paris Dressmaker' ends.
*Let slacker raiders roam the streets for the unpatriotic.
*Reinstate a national speed limit.
*Rewrite residential and commercial building codes,aim for Dubai's Solar Decathalon,zero-carbon architecture.
*Reduce the size of new home construction to 1973's 1,661-sq-ft.(you'll be able to build 160-homes with what we build 100-homes with today)
*Victory gardens.
*End meat production.(They won't know the difference between beef and soy substitutes).
*Synchronize all traffic lights.(cars will get hwy mpg in city)
*Ban left turn signals.
*Demolish all corner real estate development,install cloverleafs,and place a moratorium on any new corner real estate development.
*National automotive design,the 'Victory' car.Sold at grocery stores.No dealerships.Universal parts availability.Every mechanic knows how to service them.Wherever you breakdown,there will be parts.
*Phase out all coal-fired power by 2037
*Phase out all natural gas by 2037
*Phase out all ICE by 2025.
*Phase in the 54.5 mpg CAFE standard.
*Subsidize the sale of 21,750,000 plug-in hybrids,or BEVs a year, starting 2025,through 2037.By 2037 the entire US fleet will be electric and zero-carbon.
*Federal Public School minimum curriculum standards in math,science,physics,thermodynamics,drivers education,drivers training.
*Barracks provided for Americans whose jobs are non-essential,and will be terminated for the duration.
*Revocation of all FCC broadcast licenses for any entity who goes against the 'war' effort.
*convert railroads to all-electric.
*convert trucking to all-electric.
*mining is already mostly all-electric.
*We've already discussed electric agribusiness.
*Build out grid to 50% of capacity (we currently waste 50% of generated power)
*Raw materials will come from where they've traditionally come from.All electric extraction.All electric processing.All electric transporting.
We'll pay for it with what we currently lose to entropy at every stage of fossil-fuel:wells-to-wheels etc..
yadda,yadda,yadda............................

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by freebeard

You're repeating bad information. Cow farts is a red herring — they're ruminates, belching is the problem not farts. And adding seaweed to their diet controls the belching.

Not that that does anything for the deforestation and violence.

Today, from S0, two papers:

South China Post: China scientists warn of global cooling trick up nature’s sleeve

The Global Warming Policy Forum: Against Censorship: The Climate Story Forbes Doesn’t Want You To Read

I'd just mention that China isn't the 'globe.'