Collateral Damage (12-23-2021),Peter1469 (12-23-2021)
But computer modelling does pose problems. The results are only as good as the data inputs. Miss something, even if it is seemingly insignificant, and your results are useless.
ΜOΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
Collateral Damage (12-23-2021)
So the primary question I asked, what temperature is the earth supposed to be, remains unanswered, yet we are supposedly at some sort of tipping point, which beyond there is 'no hope' according to some.
Sorry, there are gaping holes in not only the 'settled science', but the hole in the statement in and of itself.
While I believe that humans are the custodians of this planet, and it behooves us to leave as little impact as possible, mandating, demanding, taxing and belittling those who do not comply is counterproductive, to put it politely.
So, bottom line, pontificate as you will. Your 'panic' is your problem, not mine.
"I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations." -- James Madison
Your question, "What is the temperature of the earth supposed to be?", is open to interpretation. I interpret things literally and a literal interpretation is that the earth is always at the temperature it is supposed to be at. The desirable global mean temperature of the Earth's surface (I think this is what you intended to mean) would be something that would give us stable sea levels and not flood low-lying cities and any areas where large numbers of people live. That would be something around 0.5 degrees Celsius below where we are now or a little lower than that. There is some amount of warming already in the pipeline and some amount of sea level rise left in the pipeline, about 0.5 degrees C. of warming is an educated guess and 3 feet of sea level rise over the next 200 years.
The science is not settled but it is well understood that humans have caused around 100% of the warming since 1970 (about 0.9 degrees C) and that there is around another 0.5 degrees C. of warming that will occur once the Earth's surface achieves thermal equilibrium. It is well understood that if we continue on the business as usual path that future generations will face gobal catastrophe. Even if all nations live up to the Paris Accord the world will face a climate catastrophe sometime near the end of this century.
What is so bad about a carbon tax or laws that would prevent a climate catastrophe? We have all kinds of laws governing the use of pesticides, harmful chemicals, food additives, and laws regulating the pharmaceutical and food industry.
I am not panicking. I am trying to inform people. I won't live long enough to be greatly affected by climate change. This forum isn't going to have any impact on the world, it is just a place for people to discuss issues, to learn, or to make social contacts and friendships.
Last edited by skepticalmike; 12-23-2021 at 02:37 PM.
Climate scientists have not been predicting catastrophe in the short time, certainly not the IPCC or any climate science articles that I have read over the past 20 years.
You cherry pick 1 thing that some scientists got wrong that is entirely insignificant and then draw a conclusion from that. Nearly all glaciers are melting and that melting
is generally accelerating just as expected.
Where did these graphs come from. They didn't come from any respectable scientific source. Mann's hockey stick graph has held up well and the graph presented in the latest IPCC report shown on post# 43 is indicates that the current climate is much hotter than at anytime over the past 2000 years.
I'll give you points for trying to answer the question. The real answer is, we don't know. The idea that taxing people will somehow change a natural cycle is a bit delusional, to be honest. And to claim that any 'warming' since the 1970s is 100% man made is denying that the natural cycles exist.
As to flooding along coasts, is it not man's folly that they built there? Why should all people be taxed to find away for people who made poor geographical decisions to be protected?
Considering there is melt off in some areas, but ice flow gains in others, the overall impact is nothing as the models predicted... because every day, the things that can effect the frost/defrost at the polar caps change. I'm sure the number of aircraft used to gather for the most recent climate summit didn't have an effect whatsoever, hmmmm?
"I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations." -- James Madison
Peter1469 (12-23-2021)