The climate change consensus extends beyond climate scientists

[aerohead]

If, what they're running around with their hair on fire saying doesn't come to pass,it will obviously tell on itself.And in that context I don't know what to say about them,as I have no connection to them.I presume that there's a reason why they behave as they do.Without that context I'd be lost.Their narrative might give insight into their command of the issues,or lack thereof.That would be the first clue.
I've read things which are quite alarming,but only because of connecting the dots.Abraham Lincoln referred to it as 'understanding arithmetic.' I don't believe Bjorn Lomberg,Julian Simon,or Michael Crichton understood 'arithmetic.' The same way I don't believe 'freshwater' economists understand 'arithmetic.'

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by redneck

It goes to the validity of the claim that climate change is not as dire as predicted.





>

I've experienced 132-F heat index.I wouldn't wish anyone to experience that.However this is what's in the pipeline with business as usual.Dire isn't a scientific term.It's nominal level data.It can't be quantified.
132-F is ratio level data,of the highest level.Human factors research has quantified the envelope for human life.If we wait to act,it could be the sum of all fears.All you have to do is go to El Salvador to experience it.It's coming to a United States near you.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by redneck

The Earth cools down then warms up then cools down...???

It’s cyclical...???

Who would have thought...???




>

we can't have an ice age without Milanovitch cycles.

[freebeard]

Where are we going and why are we in this hand-basket?

Meanwhile, on the way, record setting cold in Denver.

[oil pan 4]

Originally Posted by redneck

It goes to the validity of the claim that climate change is not as dire as predicted.





>

The dire reports aren't really dire. Any one who has read the report knows this.

[litesong]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

We're below 2 ppm methane.

Hundreds of years ago, methane was 0.7ppm. As perma-frost thaws from AGW, theory considered that methane would be produced from the bio-mass. Ten(?) years ago, spot regions of Arctic perma-frost regions were reported over 2ppm methane & later 3ppm. Most recent evidence show spot readings of methane as high as 16ppm over waters on Siberian continental shelves. As methane bubbles toward the surface, much(most?) methane is absorbed in the waters, before reaching the sea & ocean surfaces. Of course, perma-frost thaws on land do not have absorptive ocean waters.
Yeah, we're below 2ppm methane.......... but not for long. Of course, there is way over the amount of perma-frost bio-mass, if heated, to produce many multiples of 2ppm atmospheric methane.

Also, small recent studies of third place GHG nitrous oxide emissions, long considered to be of negligible concern, show twelve times greater perma-frost thawing release than previously thought.

How 'bout this tidbit:
https://www.theguardian.com/environm...climate-crisis

[oil pan 4]

Originally Posted by aerohead

1850 coincides with pre-industrial Earth.It's handy.You wouldn't expect to,and would not see any change before 1850,so why waste paper.
We don't include carburetors in studies involving electronic fuel injection,why include pre-coal-fired steam? This is when anthropogenic carbon dioxide really took off.We turned a corner.

The excuses you make aren't in line with the context of the ipcc report. If you read it you would understand.

[litesong]

Originally Posted by freebeard

.... record setting cold in Denver.

Worse than snow, is the excess atmospheric warming, which is causing the jet stream to waver & at times, reach to the south. With the jet stream to the south, Arctic cold, pressured by incoming warm fronts from the south, can move to lower latitudes.

Presently, the jet stream has sagged south of Colorado. Warm fronts from the south have caused almost 4 million square kilometers of the high Arctic to elevate 4degC to 7degC over average. The warm front also had the energy to push the Arctic cold front all the way to Colorado, with no resistance from the jet stream, as stated, which is south of Colorado.

Another case in point, in January 2009(?) the North Pole was very warm (between 5degC & 14degC over average), heated by said warm fronts. The far north Arctic cold was powered rapidly to the south, causing Maine's lowest ever recorded low temperature of -50degF.

[freebeard]

It cuts both ways, with warm air from the South up over PNW.

Tim Poole: Twitter Gave a MASSIVE Gift To Trump Banning Politics Ads, Democrats Cheer Their Own Demise

07:59 the the woman who was on the Joe Rogan
08:01 podcast with me she said hi here's our
08:03 current definition ads that refer to an
08:06 election or a candidate that's obvious
08:08 ads that advocate for or against
08:10 legislative issues of national
08:12 importance such as climate change health
08:14 care immigration national security and
08:16 taxes whoa whoa . this sparked
08:20 controversy climate change yup advocacy
08:23 groups cannot talk about climate change
08:25 that's political Wow

[litesong]

Originally Posted by freebeard

It cuts both ways, with warm air from the South up over PNW.

Its good you agree with me. My mention of "Warm fronts from the south have caused almost 4 million square kilometers of the high Arctic to elevate 4degC to 7degC over average", does NOT negate the truth that increasing AGW generated infra-red energy absorbing GHGs over the Earth are warming the entire bio-sphere.... on an average. Yeah, thanks for agreeing with me. I'll give you a big "Thanks" in your post.