The climate change consensus extends beyond climate scientists

[redpoint5]

I've learned a lot here, especially from Sendler. I'm always quoting his stuff in another forum (and here).

I still have interest in the original intent of the site. Just need to get around to further testing this virtual alternator delete idea. I need a higher capacity battery I think... and less resistance in my wiring.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by euromodder

Hard scientific facts I'm afraid




Over here, Belgium/Netherlands, the land is subsiding as Northern Scandinavia is being lifted - bouncing back up after losing the weight of its ice-cap.
We were on the edge of that ice cap ... being pushed UP as the ice cap built up and pushed Scandinavia down
Now the reverse is happening


Came across a page on post-glacial rebound, when looking up just how much northern Scandinavia has been lifted (it's still being lifted up )
Didn't find that right away - but its like 800m or thereabout ...

But did find that Maryland and the US East and West Coast are sinking quite a bit due to post-glacial rebound around central Canada
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-glacial_rebound

We have the same in Belgium and the Netherlands .

If you want to get a grasp on how fast things can change in northern Scandinavia:
https://www.independent.co.uk/enviro...e-8373787.html

Coastline rising 300+ meters in 10000 years
Over 3m per century
1.5m in 50 years

You should find similar things in north America, and especially northern Canada (rising a LOT ! )
But as it's a bigger continuous landmass, things won't appear to change as drastically in the US as in Europe
Shorelines illustrate it best


Here global warming and rising waters since the ice age, have (re)created the English Channel again, and refilled most of the North Sea ...
A lot of the North Sea and all of the channel is less than 100-120m deep - the height the sea level rose after the ice age ... in less than 10000 years

It's quite fascinating to read about
And lot more info now than back in the late 80s ...


The worst thing you can believe is that things won't or don't change.
They do. And they will.
Some in your lifetime. Some not.
Some more/faster than you might expect !


If you built close to shore like along Highway 1 in CA, or close to the edge of say the White Cliffs along the English Channel, then yes, it gets very simple: you will regret that one day ... possibly sooner than expected.
'Cos sandy shores will be eaten away, and the cliffs will crumple further


People have a tendency to build in high-risk areas, and think nothing will happen.
Goes back to well before Pompei ...



Gonna be a while still, though
But it'll likely come
After the interglacial spike - if it is one indeed.
Essentially no-one has ever witnessed or properly documented the end of an interglacial
Spikes get washed out and flattened, averaged out in ancient data thru uncertainty in measurements


We really don't even know for sure what triggers a flip-over either way
Lots of theories though

We simply don't know if earth is about to come out of the ice ages , or not.
We're still in one,
even though we think we see high temperatures.
Interglacials are a bit of a mis-nomer
They're merely warmer spells in what is still a long, cold period for earth
But as Ice Age has been used for the really cold spells in the cold period, people have the tendency to think it's warm now, while it really isn't.


We could just as well be witnessing the start of the very end of like 2,5 million years of ice-age
And fail to realize it, thinking it's man-made global warming ...

We won't know until after it's done
And we won't be around to see it
Mankind, maybe ...



I always laugh when these discussions pop up, thinking of my old geology professor
One of those old-timers who went down to Antarctica, drilling ice cores by hand ...

He warned us, back in the late 80s, in tempore non suspecto, that people would claim the coming of a new ice age, while others would claim we'll fry

His claim:
They'll both be wrong ... and they'll both be right
For a while
And they won't have a clue

He's still spot-on ...

Glaciologists define 'Interglacial' as a function of the pre-Industrial Revolution sea level. It is their scientific definition.
The sea ice,ice shelves,glaciers,and mountain glaciers present,11,000 years ago,are all features of an interglacial.
From the paleo record,it will be impossible to experience another ice age until Earth's orbit resumes the precession of the equinox superimposed upon the elliptical orbit permutation Milankovich cycle.
Global warming would impact 'natural' effects which,otherwise,would lead to another Glacial.

[redpoint5]

Hey, it's Wednesday!

Throwing this post back out since aerohead (and others) probably missed it and is catching up. Don't want to see him go the way of Old Mech.

I miss the topic, but can talk about other things too.

Originally Posted by MetroMPG

New rule! No more climate change discussion on EcoModder for one month.

You might call it a cooling-off period.

(I'm here all week. Try the veal.)

If it were my decision alone, I'd ban the topic outright. Unfortunately, there are two benevolent dictators around here, and we compromised.

Thank you for your cooperation.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by RustyLugNut

I do volunteer tutoring for undergrad students at several of the local universities. I get to rub shoulders with climate students and their professors. They seem less sure of the media proposed climate disasters. They are willing to debate the points and take notes. They admit that "modern climatology" is in it's infancy. And they readily admit their studies are skewed towards pro-AGW since there are no grants to be had to do no-AGW studies. They do admit that current climate models are just that - models.

If professors and their underlings say as much, what is the basis for your authority to denigrate someones informative post?

Saw your comment and wanted to butt in.
I'm uncertain that in an undergrad curriculum,that the students would even have enough statistical tools underneath them,to even understand the level of multivariate statistical techniques embodied in the numerical climate models.I just finished a fairly recent college textbook in statistics,and it doesn't even scratch the surface of what grad students and post-docs would be using.And it's the mathematics department who'd be building the models,alongside the field scientists.
And even if their professor had the training,I don't think they'd be introducing certain materials to the students until they were in grad school.
Climate models use a lot of differential equations not even mentioned in undergraduate statistics.
The models have accurately predicted global warming since the late 1990s.I don't know what the controversy would be.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by sendler

"How do we keep the lights on, avoid revolution and turmoil, keep children in school and people in work, yet still manage to fundamentally transform the human presence on planet Earth before ‘business as usual’ leads to run-away climate change, a drastically impoverished biosphere, and the early demise of our species?
Metaphorically speaking we are challenged to redesign the plane we are on in mid-flight. How do we keep the basic needs met while we are preparing and experimenting with the kind of transformational change that will make ‘business as usual’ obsolete and offer a qualitatively different alternative?"
.
https://medium.com/age-of-awareness/...n-b59a2dc5bac1
.

Something Heinberg mentioned :
'O'vertornea,Sweden achieved 100% fossil-fuel free status in 2010.
Heinberg says that there is no structural barrier to substituting fossil-fuels,as of 2011.It was just a matter of 'price.' And the price of renewables has been falling each year since ,while technology improves,efficiency climbs,capacity factor improves,and grid-scale energy storage in already in the marketplace,and undergoing continuous R & D.
18-TW of business-as-usual primary energy can be replaced by 8.3-TW of renewables to meet demand,by getting rid of the fossil-fuels.
And if we're going to stabilize the would population at 9-billion,that's all we ever have to build for.All housing,commercial buildings,industry,infrastructure,etc.,will be 'finished.'No more mining or extractive industry after equilibrium and stasis.No more expansion of the money supply,inflation,loss of savings,austerity....................

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by MetroMPG

New rule! No more climate change discussion on EcoModder for one month.

You might call it a cooling-off period.

(I'm here all week. Try the veal.)

If it were my decision alone, I'd ban the topic outright. Unfortunately, there are two benevolent dictators around here, and we compromised.

Thank you for your cooperation.

Whoops! Sorry! I just now got back on the computer,since Saturday,and made my way back up the postings until I arrived here.I'll see you all in a month.

[freebeard]

aerohead — Be aware that there was a post between 7899 and 7900 that pointed out exactly what is going on. Unfortunately I didn't archive it.

Check out the main page:

Currently Active Users: 524 (8 members and 516 guests)
View Who's Online
Most users ever online was 5,560, 06-11-2019 at 05:42 AM.

Not that long ago. I'm really tired of that Accidental Icon ad.

See y'all in a month 27 days. It will be interesting to see how it goes then.

edit: If you have email notifications turned on you can follow what's happening without even visiting this website.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=klDWJ5PNqLU

[oil pan 4]

Aerohead, the absolute undisputed king of not reading earlier posts.

[redpoint5]

Well, his main internetting is Wednesday, and he starts from where he left off and works to now...

That strategy bit me in the butt the other day when replying to my oldest emails and then finding that the discussion had already moved on, and what I had sent was no longer relevant. I start from most recent and work older now, even though it isn't "fair" to whoever sent the earlier messages. It's a first-in, last-out strategy.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

Aerohead, the absolute undisputed king of not reading earlier posts.

If I were a 'real' person,Id have internet service at home.And since I'm limiting my trips to town to 2-days a week,it's a few days in between visits to EcoModder.And since you guys move so quickly in the meantime,by the time I do get back online,I'm always behind and trying to catch up.
So hey,I get to be king by default!
Appreciate everyone's patience.