stadiumwave Posted January 16 Share Posted January 16 This is a golden chain of tweets from Paul Roundy, who is no denier, and is a brilliant Atmospheric Scientist. I highly encourage clicking the thread & reading objectively. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stadiumwave Posted January 16 Share Posted January 16 @greenskeeper how about you go challenge Roundy since you're so smart? You're the weenie. No objevtivity whatsoever. I bet you did not even read because that's what most of you do. You will NOT entertain any point from anyone that threatens you're own understanding. A closed mind is just a disgrace to science. I guess I'd understand if one were completely denying the science about "greenhouse gases". That is not what Roundy & many others are doing. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
csnavywx Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 It's a testable hypothesis and soon. There are some similarities with the late 1877/78 El Nino, which came after 6 (!) years of Nina conditions. We had 3 years here, so while pretty extensive, not quite the amount of pre-conditioning we had then. The strong ENSO component will undoubtedly fade. Question is how cool it gets during the upcoming moderate-strong Nina. (The recent +IOD collapse is likely a harbinger here.) Also, we've had a very notable increase in trade wind strength over the past 20-30y, possibly due to the "pattern effect" of anthropogenic aerosol loading in the Pacific. It's a transient climate response that one would expect to be peaking right around now (this decade). The peaking and gradual relaxation of that effect in combination with a notable increase in EEI would support higher temps over time. Right now my eyes are glued to ocean heat content readings and EEI. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chubbs Posted January 17 Share Posted January 17 Roundy is providing a qualitative argument. I would need to see his argument developed further with quantification to give it some credence. I haven't seen any detailed analysis that indicates that enso has had any effect beyond the short-term, 0 to 3 years. There is plenty of evidence that warming has accelerated since the end of the hiatus independent of enso, not surprising since the rate of forcing has accelerated a bit also due to aerosol reductions. That said we need to wait a bit to understand the ramification of the current nino. Need to run enough clock to erase this nino's memory. Don't think we will have to wait long. This nino will probably be a faded memory by next winter, completely erased in two years. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluewave Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 The recent analysis from Cowtan is that the rate of warming since 2010 has increased but the magnitude of the increase is still uncertain. https://tamino.wordpress.com/2024/01/05/global-warming-picks-up-speed/ What about the trend in the adjusted data, i.e. apart from the factors that make those incessant fluctuations? I can apply the same analysis and get this: Much is essentially the same as with the original, raw data: there is undoubtedly a change in rate around 1970, and there is evidence of another change around 2010. But this time the uncertainty range is narrower, the uncertainties are a lot smaller, and the evidence for recent change is now conclusive. Conclusion: since 1950 the adjusted data show at least three different warming rates: near zero from 1950 until about 1970, then about +0.02 °C/yr until around 2010, and about +0.027 °C/yr since. Not just the above analysis, but other statistical tests confirm that although the uncertainty in the current rate is considerable, we conclude with confidence that it’s faster than it was during the preceding decades. Global warming picks up speed. That’s using the data from HadCRU, and the story is the same when using data from NASA (the GISTemp data from the Goddard Institute for Space Studies), from NOAA (the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration), from the Berkeley Earth surface temperature project, or the ERA5 data from Europe’s Copernicus Climate 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LibertyBell Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 On 1/16/2024 at 12:32 PM, stadiumwave said: This is a golden chain of tweets from Paul Roundy, who is no denier, and is a brilliant Atmospheric Scientist. I highly encourage clicking the thread & reading objectively. I'll also add there are important things to discuss about humankind's impact to the environment besides climate change-- overhunting and overfishing as well as pollution and usage of pesticides not only adversely impact the environment, but our health too. We were discussing the impact of overfishing in our subforum earlier https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collapse_of_the_Atlantic_northwest_cod_fishery https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_End_of_the_Line_(book) Clover, a former environment editor of the Daily Telegraph and now a columnist on the Sunday Times, describes how modern fishing is destroying ocean ecosystems. He concludes that current worldwide fish consumption is unsustainable.[2] The book provides details about overfishing in many of the world's critical ocean habitats, such as the New England fishing grounds, west African coastlines, the European North Atlantic fishing grounds, and the ocean around Japan.[3] The book concludes with suggestions on how the nations of the world could engage in sustainable ocean fishing.[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_fishing The journal Science published a four-year study in November 2006, which predicted that, at prevailing trends, the world would run out of wild-caught seafood in 2048. The scientists stated that the decline was a result of overfishing, pollution and other environmental factors that were reducing the population of fisheries at the same time as their ecosystems were being annihilated. Many countries, such as Tonga, the United States, Australia and Bahamas, and international management bodies have taken steps to appropriately manage marine resources.[6][7] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Marine_Foundation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overfishing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Pauly Through the 1990s, Pauly’s work centered on the effects of overfishing. The author of several books and more than 500 scientific papers, Pauly is a prolific writer and communicator. He developed the concept of shifting baselines in 1995 and authored the seminal paper, Fishing down marine food webs, in 1998.[7] For working to protect the environment, he earned a place in the "Scientific American 50" in 2003, the same year The New York Times labeled him an "iconoclast". Pauly won the International Cosmos Prize in 2005, the Volvo Environment Prize in 2006, the Excellence in Ecology Prize and Ted Danson Ocean Hero Award in 2007, the Ramon Margalef Prize in Ecology and Environmental Sciences in 2008,[8] and the Nierenberg Prize for Science in the Public Interest from the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in 2012. In 2015, Pauly received the Peter Benchley Ocean Award for Excellence in Science.[9] In 2016, he was honored in Paris with the Albert Ier Grand Medal in the Science category.[10] In 2017, he received, together with Dirk Zeller as part of the Sea Around Us leading team, the Ocean Award in the Science category.[11] Also in 2017 and specifically on French National Day, he was named Chevalier de la Légion D’Honneur.[12] Pauly has written several books, including Darwin's Fishes[13] (Cambridge University Press), Five Easy Pieces: How Fishing Impacts Marine Ecosystems (Island Press) and Gasping Fish and Panting Squids: Oxygen, Temperature and the Growth of Water-Breathing Animals. Views[edit] To date, he frequently expresses opinions about public policy. Specifically, he argues that governments should abolish subsidies to fishing fleets[14] and establish marine reserves. He is a member of the Board of Oceana. In a 2009 article written for The New Republic, Pauly compares today's fisheries to a global Ponzi scheme.[15] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shifting_baseline https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fishing_down_the_food_web 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Great Snow 1717 Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 4 hours ago, LibertyBell said: I'll also add there are important things to discuss about humankind's impact to the environment besides climate change-- overhunting and overfishing as well as pollution and usage of pesticides not only adversely impact the environment, but our health too. We were discussing the impact of overfishing in our subforum earlier https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collapse_of_the_Atlantic_northwest_cod_fishery https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_End_of_the_Line_(book) Clover, a former environment editor of the Daily Telegraph and now a columnist on the Sunday Times, describes how modern fishing is destroying ocean ecosystems. He concludes that current worldwide fish consumption is unsustainable.[2] The book provides details about overfishing in many of the world's critical ocean habitats, such as the New England fishing grounds, west African coastlines, the European North Atlantic fishing grounds, and the ocean around Japan.[3] The book concludes with suggestions on how the nations of the world could engage in sustainable ocean fishing.[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_fishing The journal Science published a four-year study in November 2006, which predicted that, at prevailing trends, the world would run out of wild-caught seafood in 2048. The scientists stated that the decline was a result of overfishing, pollution and other environmental factors that were reducing the population of fisheries at the same time as their ecosystems were being annihilated. Many countries, such as Tonga, the United States, Australia and Bahamas, and international management bodies have taken steps to appropriately manage marine resources.[6][7] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Marine_Foundation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overfishing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Pauly Through the 1990s, Pauly’s work centered on the effects of overfishing. The author of several books and more than 500 scientific papers, Pauly is a prolific writer and communicator. He developed the concept of shifting baselines in 1995 and authored the seminal paper, Fishing down marine food webs, in 1998.[7] For working to protect the environment, he earned a place in the "Scientific American 50" in 2003, the same year The New York Times labeled him an "iconoclast". Pauly won the International Cosmos Prize in 2005, the Volvo Environment Prize in 2006, the Excellence in Ecology Prize and Ted Danson Ocean Hero Award in 2007, the Ramon Margalef Prize in Ecology and Environmental Sciences in 2008,[8] and the Nierenberg Prize for Science in the Public Interest from the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in 2012. In 2015, Pauly received the Peter Benchley Ocean Award for Excellence in Science.[9] In 2016, he was honored in Paris with the Albert Ier Grand Medal in the Science category.[10] In 2017, he received, together with Dirk Zeller as part of the Sea Around Us leading team, the Ocean Award in the Science category.[11] Also in 2017 and specifically on French National Day, he was named Chevalier de la Légion D’Honneur.[12] Pauly has written several books, including Darwin's Fishes[13] (Cambridge University Press), Five Easy Pieces: How Fishing Impacts Marine Ecosystems (Island Press) and Gasping Fish and Panting Squids: Oxygen, Temperature and the Growth of Water-Breathing Animals. Views[edit] To date, he frequently expresses opinions about public policy. Specifically, he argues that governments should abolish subsidies to fishing fleets[14] and establish marine reserves. He is a member of the Board of Oceana. In a 2009 article written for The New Republic, Pauly compares today's fisheries to a global Ponzi scheme.[15] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shifting_baseline https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fishing_down_the_food_web what are the odds of greenskeeper reading your post??? lol.....about the same as my odds of winning The Masters in April... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LibertyBell Posted January 18 Share Posted January 18 2 hours ago, Great Snow 1717 said: what are the odds of greenskeeper reading your post??? lol.....about the same as my odds of winning The Masters in April... Greenskeeper has about the same odds of buying an NFL franchise lol 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Great Snow 1717 Posted January 19 Share Posted January 19 13 hours ago, LibertyBell said: Greenskeeper has about the same odds of buying an NFL franchise lol Surely you are not referring to the football league....perhaps you are referring to the Nonsense For Life League???.. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LibertyBell Posted January 20 Share Posted January 20 On 1/19/2024 at 7:23 AM, Great Snow 1717 said: Surely you are not referring to the football league....perhaps you are referring to the Nonsense For Life League???.. we've given too much power to the states-- look what Alaska has been doing-- unnecessarily exterminating bears and wolves when the real issue is climate change. https://grist.org/science/alaska-predator-control-caribou-wolves-bear-hunt/?utm_source=pocket-newtab-en-us 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
csnavywx Posted January 23 Share Posted January 23 I'm still lending some credence to the shipping aerosol hypothesis mostly because they called the warming *before* it happened and it showed up pretty much exactly where and when you would expect it (N Pac, N Atl maximized in late summer). Of course, it's not the only thing going on and it will take some time to disentangle all the factors, but definitely not ready to drop it as a contributing factor. (The IMO phase out was in 2 stages, a smaller one in 2015/16 and the second bigger drop in 2020). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LibertyBell Posted January 23 Share Posted January 23 2 hours ago, csnavywx said: I'm still lending some credence to the shipping aerosol hypothesis mostly because they called the warming *before* it happened and it showed up pretty much exactly where and when you would expect it (N Pac, N Atl maximized in late summer). Of course, it's not the only thing going on and it will take some time to disentangle all the factors, but definitely not ready to drop it as a contributing factor. (The IMO phase out was in 2 stages, a smaller one in 2015/16 and the second bigger drop in 2020). This is exactly why there are plans to dump aerosols (SO2 specifically) into the atmosphere every year starting in 2030. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LibertyBell Posted January 24 Share Posted January 24 On 1/18/2024 at 2:42 PM, Great Snow 1717 said: what are the odds of greenskeeper reading your post??? lol.....about the same as my odds of winning The Masters in April... Oh look we have a new weenie to add to the list GS1717, he's a pheasant killer too ;-) check out seagull boy's page lol. He's banned from OT for good reason and about to be 5 posted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Typhoon Tip Posted January 25 Share Posted January 25 On 1/23/2024 at 4:53 PM, LibertyBell said: This is exactly why there are plans to dump aerosols (SO2 specifically) into the atmosphere every year starting in 2030. Bad idea 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LibertyBell Posted January 25 Share Posted January 25 8 hours ago, Typhoon Tip said: Bad idea Yep, it will also alter rainfall patterns, but the tests have already happened in the New Mexico desert and it looks like the plans are going forward (by several nations) starting in 2030 and to be continued every year to maintain a 1C-2C drop in temperatures. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChescoWx Posted January 25 Share Posted January 25 PHL Airport vs PNE (NE Philly Airport) Can you say UHI impact.... 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
csnavywx Posted January 25 Share Posted January 25 Nobody cares since you won't provide falsification criteria for your theory. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chubbs Posted January 25 Share Posted January 25 Must be 2 Northeast Philly Airports 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LibertyBell Posted January 25 Share Posted January 25 6 hours ago, csnavywx said: Nobody cares since you won't provide falsification criteria for your theory. Greenskeeper is smoking the crack again. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheClimateChanger Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 11 hours ago, csnavywx said: Nobody cares since you won't provide falsification criteria for your theory. The data for PNE are also made up. The real chart is the one @chubbsshared. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheClimateChanger Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bdgwx Posted January 26 Author Share Posted January 26 All of the data points are in. The composite trend since 1979 has increased from +0.18 C/decade at the end of 2022 to +0.19 C/decade at the end of 2023. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LibertyBell Posted January 26 Share Posted January 26 19 hours ago, TheClimateChanger said: and DC hit 80 degrees today, the earliest that has ever happened by 4 weeks! By the way, really nice color on those buildings lol 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Typhoon Tip Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 On 1/26/2024 at 3:40 PM, LibertyBell said: and DC hit 80 degrees today, the earliest that has ever happened by 4 weeks! By the way, really nice color on those buildings lol I wish there was some sense of Moderator responsibility to this thread, because when someone posts a statement of point fact, and they are met in return with these insulting emoji replies ... that is not mere free-speech at work. 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LibertyBell Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 1 hour ago, Typhoon Tip said: I wish there was some sense of Moderator responsibility to this thread, because when someone posts a statement of point fact, and they are met in return with these insulting emoji replies ... that is not mere free-speech at work. It's good they have to keep their mouth shut, because they know whenever they post that I will go weenie every post they make for the rest of their lives, that keeps them quiet and their trash opinions out of the forum. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LibertyBell Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 1 hour ago, Typhoon Tip said: I wish there was some sense of Moderator responsibility to this thread, because when someone posts a statement of point fact, and they are met in return with these insulting emoji replies ... that is not mere free-speech at work. Go look at their profiles though I've effectively neutralized their low IQ ignorant selves by weenieing every post they ever make, thus they can't post their garbage anywhere on this site. They've also been banned from OT, so getting them 5 posted is next. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheClimateChanger Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LibertyBell Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 20 hours ago, TheClimateChanger said: I heard of this, see we are moving forward with geoengineering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
csnavywx Posted April 5 Share Posted April 5 On 12/7/2023 at 8:52 AM, Typhoon Tip said: Forgive me, economics isn't my bag. I get the stressed domestic production - due to CC. Intuitive enough. I guess I was thinking along the lines of, 'the value of the dollar drops while printing more money' as inflation - which really is more of a secondary response ( and really bad approach) to dwindling resources. I can see how as GDP stressing gets worse, prices go up - that's academic. I think it's what happens as reactionary policies that is the problem. Ex, the Germans were hung out to dry and left pretty destitute prior to WWII. Political identity was in crisis. GDP didn't really exist. Inflation there resulted, which led to the bad idea of printing more money. There's a lot of geopolitical/geodesic math between that and Hitler's decision to annex Poland ..etc ... but in principle, their society was left in a flight or fight pathway by a destitution both economically, then triggered further by that political identity crisis after WWI. Evil loves that vulnerability. Ex II, Soviets pulled out of Afghanistan (their "Vietnam"). The U.S. abandoned their supplies to the region when that happen - bop ahead 10 or 20 years and in waltzes the Taliban. I mean humans do this ... but I'm digressing. What I'm getting at is you can see the seeds of global conflict. Interesting. Reinforcing this conversation wrt Ortiz-Bobea et. al with this new paper, which attempts to quantify CC's effect on food inflation. https://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-023-01173-x#:~:text=Evaluating these results under temperature,amplify by 30-50%. TLDR, it's a lot. Enough that we should expect to see what's happening to cocoa in more commodities (sharp squeezes and dumps that don't quite correct back to the original level over the longer run). Inflation volatility also increases. Does not bode well for either food or fixed incomes that rely on government bonds. A persistent 50-150bp of headline inflation will cause a significant devaluation across the board and also hamper any equity price runs via bond volatility spikes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now