3 3
brenthutch

Green new deal equals magical thinking

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

Natural cycles have given us ice ages, ice free poles and CO2 levels ten times higher than than they are today.

Elevated CO2 has resulted in record food production, shrinking deserts, a greener planet and no change in floods, droughts, hurricanes and wildfires.

And I've already shown you how the things that caused those natural cycles are not currently present and that at those times civilization did not exist as it does now.  See Holocene Climatic Optimum.

I also notice that you're picking the things that occur in some places but not others and the events that so far have the lowest provable track record yet you're leaving out the examples of things that have changed and will change the most.  Russia will finally have the north sea naval bases it's craved for the last 200 years, their food production will improve and they'll finally be able to plant corn on the scale that more southern countries do now.  So, for them and Canada it's pretty great.  Unfortunately, for most of the Ocean and the rest of the inhabited land mass it's not so great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

The PROVEN direct correlation is that global temperatures drive CO2, not the other way around.

That is semi-correct. It's called a feedback loop. Look it up.You are getting crankier and crankier as your specious arguments fall apart. GND is not a policy, it is a series of ideas some of which could become policy in some modified form. Relax a little, you are being alarmist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, gowlerk said:
27 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

The PROVEN direct correlation is that global temperatures drive CO2, not the other way around.

That is semi-correct. It's called a feedback loop. Look it up.You are getting crankier and crankier as your specious arguments fall apart. GND is not a policy, it is a series of ideas some of which could become policy in some modified form. Relax a little, you are being alarmist.

I missed that he said that.  Bhutch, please show your work for how it's actually a natural cycle of global warming that has caused the rise in CO2 and not CO2 (along with other greenhouse gases) causing a rise in global temperatures beyond that of the rate of temperature change from the natural cycle.  Something tells me you'll have trouble with legitimate sources.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, brenthutch said:

The PROVEN direct correlation is that global temperatures drive CO2, not the other way around. (As Al Gore’s chart showed us in An Inconvenient Truth)

Nope.  There is definitely some positive feedback, but this time, we can prove that 90% of the CO2 in the atmosphere is ours, not nature's.  Fossil fuels have a specific carbon isotope ratio (specifically a different ratio between carbon 12 and carbon 13) - and that ratio is appearing in the amounts you would expect if the new CO2 were from fossil fuels.

So we know for a fact that most of the new CO2 is coming from our burning of fossil fuels, not from "global temperatures."

Now, as time goes on, we will see more and more positive feedbacks - and those will also start releasing CO2.  Like larger wildfires and burning permafrost.  And again, we will be able to tell what comes from where by the ratio of carbon isotopes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DJL said:

I missed that he said that.  Bhutch, please show your work for how it's actually a natural cycle of global warming that has caused the rise in CO2 and not CO2 (along with other greenhouse gases) causing a rise in global temperatures beyond that of the rate of temperature change from the natural cycle.  Something tells me you'll have trouble with legitimate sources.

Look at any paleo climate reconstruction and you will see that we are currently in a naturally occurring warm cycle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
9 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

Look at any paleo climate reconstruction and you will see that we are currently in a naturally occurring warm cycle.

Now that's funny. Find me an example of a climate warming event that happened as quickly as the one we are having without greenhouse gases being released causing it. Natural or not. At least you are now admitting that warming is happening instead of claiming otherwise.

Edited by gowlerk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

Look at any paleo climate reconstruction and you will see that we are currently in a naturally occurring warm cycle.

Interesting graph!  The last big warming was from -4C below baseline to +2.5C in 10,000 years.  That's about .065C a century.  Due to AGW, we are currently warming by .9C a century.   Well over ten times faster.  That's a remarkable increase in speed from what nature can do.

In addition, the warmest it's gotten in the past half million years or so is 2.5C above baseline.  We're going to blow past that within the next century.

Thanks for the info; a good demonstration of how the biosphere has never been stressed this hard before.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
1 hour ago, brenthutch said:

Look at any paleo climate reconstruction and you will see that we are currently in a naturally occurring warm cycle.

No.  If you're going to make a claim like that you need to back it up, not allude to some vague reference I'm supposed to go look up.

Edited by DJL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
2 hours ago, gowlerk said:

Mr. Watts I presume? Good thing you are up with all the cutting edge denier research!

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/08/04/paleoclimate-cycles-are-key-analogs-for-present-day-holocene-warm-period/

It simply illustrates that over geological time scales there are natural warming and cooling cycles.  It says nothing whatever about the current RAPID warming.  You can't even see 100 years on the time axes (100 years is less than 1 pixel in width).

BH either doesn't understand what's going on, or he is deliberately obfuscatating.

Edited by kallend
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, billvon said:

Interesting graph!  The last big warming was from -4C below baseline to +2.5C in 10,000 years.  That's about .065C a century.  Due to AGW, we are currently warming by .9C a century.   Well over ten times faster.  That's a remarkable increase in speed from what nature can do.

In addition, the warmest it's gotten in the past half million years or so is 2.5C above baseline.  We're going to blow past that within the next century.

Thanks for the info; a good demonstration of how the biosphere has never been stressed this hard before.

 

The author, Renee Hannon, is an oil field geologist who has worked for Conoco-Phillips and Arco.  Look her up on Google Scholar and you find the magnificent total of TWO refereed publications, neither of which are in the field of climatology.

Typical of the kind of fossil fuel industry shill that Wattsup finds to write pseudo-academic articles for them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
4 hours ago, kallend said:

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/08/04/paleoclimate-cycles-are-key-analogs-for-present-day-holocene-warm-period/

It simply illustrates that over geological time scales there are natural warming and cooling cycles.  It says nothing whatever about the current RAPID warming.  

Yep, fifteen HUNDREDTHS of a degree in the past two decades, we are really blowing the doors off.  Put your thinking caps on for just a minute and consider how devastating your environment would be if temperatures SKYROCKETED from 72F to a blistering 75.6F.   (The two degrees C increase deemed to be dangerous by the IPCC). OMG! What organisms could possibly adapt to such a massive and rapid increase in temperature. 

Edited by brenthutch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

Recording the past and predicting the future are two different things 

And the best part is then one can pick and choose exactly the data one wants, without regard to context or anything else. 

:/

Wendy P. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, brenthutch said:

That's not me that is NOAA

No, that's all you.  Here's NOAA:
=======================

Global surface temperatures have increased about 0.74°C (plus or minus 0.18°C) since the late–19th century, and the linear trend for the past 50 years of 0.13°C (plus or minus 0.03°C) per decade is nearly twice that for the past 100 years. The warming has not been globally uniform. Some areas (including parts of the southeastern U.S. and parts of the North Atlantic) have, in fact, cooled slightly over the last century. The recent warmth has been greatest over North America and Eurasia between 40 and 70°N. Lastly, seven of the eight warmest years on record have occurred since 2001 and the 10 warmest years have all occurred since 1995.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, brenthutch said:

Well here it is, the Green Newer Deal

https://earther.gizmodo.com/bernie-sanders-climate-plan-is-nothing-short-of-a-revol-1837456120

no longer a vague list of aspersions, this is a real meat-on-the-bones policy.  Who’s on board?  Roll call!

Completely on board for pushing it 100%.  That way the compromised and watered down version that actually goes into effect might actually put us on track.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

3 3