IPCC Report Shows With Certainty Humanity Is A Major Factor In Climate Change

[Vaskadar]

http://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg1/#.UlQyvVDBN8F

For those of you who don't understand, 95% certainty is greater than our certainty of the effects on vitamins on our body, more certain than we are on how gravity works. There would have to be vast amounts of empirical evidence contradicting the report for there to be any other possibility.

There isn't a single doubt in the scientific, peer-reviewed community that humans have had a major impact on the environment, and anyone who claims otherwise is either a shill, misinformed/misunderstanding, or paid to post fake results.

Please, read the report.

 

[Vaskadar]

There are fourteen chapters in the report. You can feel free to read the bold print, and the finer print for the explanations behind it.

 

[Big-Al]

Perhaps we need to delete some?

 

[Al]

The only way the lunatics would ever believe global warming is real is for God himself to tell them. No amount of studies or reports would sway them.

 

[Firefly]

I'll leave these here.
I'm not saying global warming isn't happening, it is but it's not us that's causing it.
Just remember who staff the ipcc.
link 1
link 2
link 3
link 3
The IPCC are not to be trusted.

 

[Benfica]

Nah, 200 years of industry, forest destruction and everyday's human activity doesn't have influence at all

 

[Firefly]

There's a load of evidence that shows this level of global warming has happened several times in the past. Read the links.
The IPCC are staffed by governments. This allows them to rubberstamp green tax. It is a huge issue of corruption.

 

[N1ghtmare]

The only way the lunatics would ever believe global warming is real is for God himself to tell them. No amount of studies or reports would sway them.

Or you could just be Firefly.

 

[Al]

Or you could just be Firefly.

Conspiracy theories are grand!

 

[Gir]

Change is good. Let's soak all of it it all in. Mmmm! Besides, those religious twats were begging for it thirteen years ago. Oh and there was that Mayan calendar thing too. Why start complaining now??

If you can't take the heat, stop complaining about it.

 

[Firefly]

If you're not going to read the links (read, not visit) then there's not point anyone disagreeing.

Change is only good if it improves things. Change for the sake of change is not good.

 

[Vaskadar]

The author of those articles is no longer involved in the scientific community (says so on his site). I'd have thought a fellow skeptic like yourself would have been more aware of that. There are people like Benj Arriola (who are involved in internet marketing) who are paid to produce falsified or misleading information, or even fake articles.

Do you know what a shill is? Someone who infiltrates forums to deliberately spread falsified claims because they're paid to do so.

I've read through this one man's articles and they do not align with information presented in other articles. I myself have been involved in reef surveys in the Caribbean and oceanographic research at Gerace research station, and have observed first-hand the negative impact of rising average temperatures on various ecological systems.

Research on the alps and the industrial revolution has revealed that the carbon soot from that time had caused heat to be absorbed into the mountainside, thus melting the snow and causing a spike in temperature in the late 1800's.
Source below:
http://www.pnas.org/content/110/38/15216.full.pdf

Mankind does have a profound effect on his surrounding environment. The heat given off from concrete buildings in major cities is due to the lack of absorbing properties that disperse heat evenly because of the large flat surfaces. Yes, just by being there, the concrete buildings give off heat absorbed by the sun.

 

[Renegade Retard]

For those of you who don't understand, 95% certainty is greater than our certainty of the effects on vitamins on our body, more certain than we are on how gravity works. There would have to be vast amounts of empirical evidence contradicting the report for there to be any other possibility.

So...trust in global warming, be leery of vitamins and gravity.

Got it.

Thanks for helping those of us who don't understand. We are so fortunate to have you here to enlighten us.

 

[Zxanphorian]

There's a load of evidence that shows this level of global warming has happened several times in the past. Read the links.
The IPCC are staffed by governments. This allows them to rubberstamp green tax. It is a huge issue of corruption.

How is this for corruption: Many politicians are bankrolled by major oil, coal, natural gas, and other fossil fuel corporations. Look at their donor sheets. These folks manipulate the politicians and public opinion to be against any type of change in the energy front's status quo.

Also, the IPCC is not staffed by governments. Governments of many countries call on their own best of the best climate scientists and other related fields to produce the best science possible at one time. This science will then be used by the policy makers of the governments when it is synthesized. The IPCC being composed of governmental puppets and bureaucrats is furthest from the truth.

I'll leave these here.
I'm not saying global warming isn't happening, it is but it's not us that's causing it.
Just remember who staff the ipcc.

link 1

This article makes the assumption that CO2 amounts vs temperature is a linear function. It is not, the climate is a non-linear system. Many factors can have an effect, such as the many oscillations (AO, NAO, ENSO) and their teleconnections, the immense and non-linear sink/source of the ocean, volcanic activity, forest fires, and human activity.

link 2

S. Fred Singer and The Heartland Institute are climate skeptics and a conservative/libertarian think tank respectively.

link 3

The science community has internal politics, who knew? So does every other human organization.

link 3

Who even wrote that article?

The IPCC are not to be trusted.

Who should be trusted for climate science then?

-----

Anyhow, you all should know my position, so I shouldn't need to rehash everything.

But I think it would be immensely arrogant to say that we are not causing even a little destruction to the environment.

Look at the smog in China.
The oil spills of Exxon Valdez and Deepwater Horizon.
The Dust Bowl (Yes, the Dust Bowl's severity was caused by anthropogenic causes. We removed vast swaths of environmentally-suited and deep-rooted prairie grass and placed in monoculture crops that were not suited to the soil. So what do you get when you couple drought + high winds + plants where they shouldn't be? Huge dust storms that choked the already-decimated economy.)
Poisoning of the water table of nearby fracking sites.
The Great Pacific Garbage Patch.
The destruction of mangrove forests in tropical cyclone-prone coastline.
After the grounding of airplanes after September 11, 2001, there was a marked increase in average temperatures over United States airspace, due to the elimination of contrails that contribute to solar dimming and thus lower temperatures.

So the question is: Will we have the will to change or ways now? Or will we leave our children or grandchildren or great grandchildren to pick themselves up out of the ashes that we neglected to stop?

 

[cryptophreak]

I'll leave these here.
I'm not saying global warming isn't happening, it is but it's not us that's causing it.
Just remember who staff the ipcc.
link 1
link 2
link 3
link 3
The IPCC are not to be trusted.

I have no idea how you evaluated any of that as credible, especially more credible than the overwhelming consensus in climate sciences. Some guy on a blog with a shaky understanding of a few climate-related metrics is sort of a ridiculous basis for anything.

So...trust in global warming, be leery of vitamins and gravity.

Got it.

Thanks for helping those of us who don't understand. We are so fortunate to have you here to enlighten us.

I've seen you say some pretty stupid things, but I think this is the first time I've seen you go deliberately out of your way to misunderstand the point and argue a contemptibly transparent straw man, as if any of us were convinced that you even believed yourself.

Read Zxan's comment (as it's an educated answer and not an unqualified blogger's opinion) and then watch this:

[m]http://vimeo.com/28991442[/m]

 

[Vaskadar]

So...trust in global warming, be leery of vitamins and gravity.

Got it.

Thanks for helping those of us who don't understand. We are so fortunate to have you here to enlighten us.

What I'm saying is that climate change is undoubtedly caused by humans. Vitamins, on the other hand, like gravity are not fully understood. Essentially stating that there should be no reason that people deny this other than greed/ignorance/selfish reasons and or misconceptions.

I'm not sure where you stand on the issue, but it's still important that you consider peer-reviewed science as fact. I mean, undoubtedly, this last summer had record highs, higher than the summer before in many different states. The summer for the southern hemisphere this last year saw even greater numbers of records broken (we're looking at you, Australia). This coming Australian summer will probably continue the trend of extreme weather.


You guys should be saying: "No shit, Vask. It's fucking hot. I think it'll get fucking hotter this next year. Fuck."

But instead I see these ludicrous and asinine responses.

 

[Zxanphorian]

The fun thing is that some (all) climate deniers say that we are plateauing in the warming in the past decade. The reality is that most, if not all of the warmest years have occurred in this period, and if you extend the trend out to say, 1950 (you really can't diagnose a trend in warming in just a 10 year time span), there is a clear indication that we are warming at a pretty good clip.

They say, "crisis averted," but this could very well be a passing cycle. Many things can explain why there was indeed a plateau, such as the oscillations as I said earlier, but also the oceans. Oceans are a very good sink of atmospheric CO2, and as it turns out, the oceans are able to sequester a lot more CO2 than previously understood (this also leads to acidification and the destruction of coral habitats due to bleaching). Oceans are also a good thermal sink, because of their large volume and the rather large heat capacity (which is why coastal areas are usually cooler in the summer and warmer in the winter). Upwelling and convection can transfer warm ocean water to deeper layers, leading to thermal sequestration. Oceanic mixing is also affected by oscillations such as ENSO (El Niño-Southern Oscillation), in which wind patterns change ocean dynamics.

How long will this last? I'm not sure, but the warming that should have happened in the atmosphere wasn't not introduced, but it instead ended up in the deep ocean. And depending on what cycle we are with the oscillations, we may be in a world of hurt in the next 10-15 years.

An interesting article about the oceans: http://www.climatecentral.org/news/temperature-plateau-is-likely-due-to-warming-of-deep-oceans-16280

Also I would like to urge you all to look up how climate oscillations and the ocean interact when it comes to global temperature. The system is not as cut and dry as climate skeptics tend to think. That the introduction of CO2 into the atmosphere and the resulting warming or lack thereof is the only thing that matters.

 

[Vaskadar]

The fun thing is that some (all) climate deniers say that we are plateauing in the warming in the past decade. The reality is that most, if not all of the warmest years have occurred in this period, and if you extend the trend out to say, 1950 (you really can't diagnose a trend in warming in just a 10 year time span), there is a clear indication that we are warming at a pretty good clip.

They say, "crisis averted," but this could very well be a passing cycle. Many things can explain why there was indeed a plateau, such as the oscillations as I said earlier, but also the oceans. Oceans are a very good sink of atmospheric CO2, and as it turns out, the oceans are able to sequester a lot more CO2 than previously understood (this also leads to acidification and the destruction of coral habitats due to bleaching). Oceans are also a good thermal sink, because of their large volume and the rather large heat capacity (which is why coastal areas are usually cooler in the summer and warmer in the winter). Upwelling and convection can transfer warm ocean water to deeper layers, leading to thermal sequestration. How long will this last? I'm not sure, but the warming that should have happened in the atmosphere wasn't not introduced, but it instead ended up in the deep ocean.

I think the information in the report should clear things up quite a bit, a bit of a refresher if you will on the whole 'passing cycle' hypothesis.

And yes, I've viewed first-hand the destruction of aquatic habitats. The sugar industry in Florida produces a lot of nitrogen runoff that causes plankton blooms and seaweed growth spurts that can prove destructive for the coral and fatal for numerous inhabitants of the ocean.

I was stationed here: http://www.geraceresearchcentre.com/ for several weeks to collect information (and enjoy the snorkeling, too) doing John Rollino's program.

 

[Zxanphorian]

I think the information in the report should clear things up quite a bit, a bit of a refresher if you will on the whole 'passing cycle' hypothesis.

And yes, I've viewed first-hand the destruction of aquatic habitats. The sugar industry in Florida produces a lot of nitrogen runoff that causes plankton blooms and seaweed growth spurts that can prove destructive for the coral and fatal for numerous inhabitants of the ocean.

I was stationed here: http://www.geraceresearchcentre.com/ for several weeks to collect information (and enjoy the snorkeling, too) doing John Rollino's program.

I just added some stuff to my post if you are interested to edit your reply.

But yeah, the problem with something like GCC is that it is global, and the effects are unequally distributed. A single point on the globe is not a representative sample of the whole. If it is not happening in my backyard, it isn't happening at all is a common fallacy of any argument when it comes to things like this. It is most certainly happening in other parts of the world.

 

[Renegade Retard]

You guys should be saying: "No shit, Vask. It's fucking hot. I think it'll get fucking hotter this next year. Fuck."

But instead I see these ludicrous and asinine responses.

I was making a smart-ass joke about the wording of your post, not the topic of your post. That dead-horse topic has been beaten enough over the last quarter century that it didn't need a serious reply.

If you only want serious comments, don't post on a gaming off-topic forum.