If you can google your biased, bullshit links you can find the real data. Give it a try.
Lake Mead and Climate Change
- Thread starter Mina
- Start date
If you can google your biased, bullshit links you can find the real data. Give it a try.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
See the thread where Trump was concerned about the Chinese controlling the climate to weaponize hurricanes. It’s very illuminating to know that Trump really believes in climate change and believes it so strongly that he wondered if it could be used as a weapon against the United States.
Do you have an example of a link that supports your position?
Taichiliberal
Shaken, not stirred!
Unfortunately true. I feel bad for the next generation that has to grow up with this decline.
Taichiliberal
Shaken, not stirred!
Right wing/corporate wonks need to shift the conversation when it's apparent that they can't factually or logically disprove a point. So they put forth questions that will do this, and if you don't take the bait, they'll just double down, putting words in your mouth and trying bridge their detour to the original premise as proof of their accusations.
Taichiliberal
Shaken, not stirred!
No, he's just a stupid right wing troll....all talk and no substance. Just let him sail off into willfully ignorant seas. Saves you time and effort and a headache.
Into the Night
Verified User
Into the Night
Verified User
No, you are preaching.
I don't believe in your religion.
Inversion fallacy. You are describing yourself and other believers in the Church of Global Warming.
Inversion fallacy. It is YOU needing attention.
They are YOUR fallacies. Inversion fallacy.
It's your life to waste.
Into the Night
Verified User
Attempted force of negative proof fallacy.
Into the Night
Verified User
Weather is not climate. Hurricanes are not climate. Climate has no value. It cannot change.
Into the Night
Verified User
Attempted force of negative proof fallacy.
Into the Night
Verified User
RQAA
Into the Night
Verified User
RQAA
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
RQAA
cancel2 2022
Canceled
Yes many, of which this is but one.
cancel2 2022
Canceled
Yes a huge number, this is but one.
A “Weakening Warming Trend Of The Last 40 Years Is Apparent”, Says German Expert Gosselin on 11. May 2022
Fritz Vahrenholt: The transition to green energies and the missing warming
By Kalte Sonne
Dear ladies and gentlemen,
During the energy crisis that has become visible in Germany and Europe over the past few months, things have gotten quieter about the supposedly imminent climate emergency. On the one hand, energy prices and security of supply have pushed the climate issue into the background. On the other hand, a weakening of the warming trend of the last 40 years is apparent.
The temperature curve of the satellite-based measurements of the University of Alabama UAH has been oscillating between -0.2 and 0.4 degrees for 20 years and seems to have remained stable since 2015, as shown in the next graph in the enlargement. (Source: woodfortrees). The mean value is drawn in green- it shows a slightly decreasing trend since 2015. Why hasn’t this been reported?
What are the reasons for this stagnation?
CO2 concentrations in the air have continued to rise unabated. It is true that global annual CO2 emissions have been more or less constant for some years now, at 40 billion tons of CO2. Slightly more than half is absorbed by the oceans and plants, so that currently each year the equivalent of about 2.5 ppm CO2 is added to the air concentration. In 2015, there were 401 ppm of CO2 in the air; in 2021, there were 416 ppm. At this rate, by the way, we would never reach the IPCC’s scary scenarios of 800 to 1000 ppm in 2100.
No, the lack of warming must have other reason
What has been the amount of natural warming in the last 30 years?
And how big is the natural cooling in the next 30 years?
A change in global temperature can also happen naturally. We know that clouds have decreased by about 2% after the turn of the millennium, and that for the last ten years cloud cover has been stable at a low level. Second, there are oceanic temperature cycles such as the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation AMO, which increased sharply from 1980 to the beginning of this millennium (by 0.5 degrees, after all), has remained at maximum since then, and is now weakening slightly again (see next graph).
The United States Weather and Oceanographic Administration, NOAA, writes that the AMO can amplify anthropogenic warming in the warm phase and make it disappear in the cold phase. According to NOAA, the AMO is a naturally occurring change in North Atlantic temperatures that has occurred for at least 1000 years with alternating warm and cold phases of 20-40 years. Add to this the weakening solar radiation since 2008, and further significant warming beyond 1.5 degrees is unlikely in the next 30 years.
Sea ice melt has stalled
The stagnant trend of temperatures that has been observed for several years can also be seen in the halted decline in Arctic sea ice extent reported by the European Copernicus program in March (see next graph
This is actually good news.
Wouldn’t it be time for climate researchers to bring these trends to the attention of politicians and the public? After all, politicians are currently readjusting the priorities of energy supply. While until last year’s price explosion and the aftermath of the Ukraine war it was apparently taken for granted that climate impacts would be the sole determining factor for energy policy, we are all now being made aware of the importance of security of supply and price trends.
However, German policymakers are still reacting inadequately. They believe they can solve the problem of self-generated energy shortages due to the double phase-out of coal and nuclear energy by simply building more wind farms and solar plants. It must always be remembered that in 2021 the share of wind and solar energy was just over 5% of primary energy supply (oil, gas, coal, nuclear, renewables). Even in a good windy year, it would not be much more than 6%.
Politicians do not have the necessary courage to repeal the coal phase-out law, to stop the nuclear phase-out, to lift the natural gas fracking ban and the ban on CO2 capture at coal-fired power plants. Not yet.
Gas-fired power plants like the one in Leipzig are still being built to replace coal-fired power plants with domestic lignite. Industry is already further ahead. Volkswagen has postponed the conversion of two of its own coal-fired power plants into gas-fired power plants indefinitely. This statement by CEO Diess was not widely reported in Germany, but it was abroad.
The U.S. government is also repositioning itself. John Kerry, the U.S. government’s climate envoy, for whom the 1.5-degree target was previously the sole political guideline, is now putting things into perspective and, in view of skyrocketing energy prices, saying that 1.8 degrees should be quite sufficient as a target. China, India and Southeast Asia, whose growth path is threatened by the price explosion, are practicing a renaissance of coal production.
That’s where we should listen when Jochem Marotzke of the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology in Hamburg says: “It’s unrealistic to bring global emissions to zero by 2050… a 2.5 degree world is still better than a 3.5 degree world.”
Let us reassure Mr. Marotzke: a 2.5 degree world will not be achieved in this century because natural variations in climate dampen anthropogenic warming. Had this been adequately accounted for in climate models, we would all have been spared much public panic and flawed policy decisions.
With best wishes
Fritz Vahrenholt
https://notrickszone.com/2022/05/11...last-40-years-is-apparent-says-german-expert/
Last edited:
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
That’s nice but I accept the data from the world’s best Space Agency - NASA.
NASA put mankind on the Moon, put the James Webb telescope out to L2, has put more successful probes on Mars and the distant reaches of our solar system along with many other scientific advances “for all mankind”.
What has your country done for the world? Why do you persist in attacking my country and my fellow Americans with lies and disinformation? Who are you working for?
https://climate.nasa.gov/
https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/
https://climate.nasa.gov/causes/
Scientists attribute the global warming trend observed since the mid-20th century to the human expansion of the "greenhouse effect"1 — warming that results when the atmosphere traps heat radiating from Earth toward space.
Certain gases in the atmosphere block heat from escaping. Long-lived gases that remain semi-permanently in the atmosphere and do not respond physically or chemically to changes in temperature are described as "forcing" climate change. Gases, such as water vapor, which respond physically or chemically to changes in temperature are seen as "feedbacks."
cancel2 2022
Canceled
Nature Communications by Buentgen et al reported on the results of a double-blind experiment of 15 different groups that yielded 15 different Northern Hemisphere summer temperature reconstructions
Each group used the same network of regional tree-ring width datasets.
What’s fascinating is that all groups, though using the same data network, came up with a different result.
When it comes to deriving temperatures from tree rings, it has much to do with individual approach and interpretation. Sure we can follow the science, but whose results? Maybe people can now see why climate aiarmists are so terrified to allow their results to be criticised?
The 15 groups (referred to as R1–R15) were challenged with the same task of developing the most reliable NH summer temperature reconstruction for the Common Era
Published: 07 June 2021
The influence of decision-making in tree ring-based climate reconstructions
Ulf Büntgen, Kathy Allen, …Jan Esper
Nature Communications volume 12, Article number: 3411 (2021) Cite this article
Abstract
Tree-ring chronologies underpin the majority of annually-resolved reconstructions of Common Era climate. However, they are derived using different datasets and techniques, the ramifications of which have hitherto been little explored. Here, we report the results of a double-blind experiment that yielded 15 Northern Hemisphere summer temperature reconstructions from a common network of regional tree-ring width datasets. Taken together as an ensemble, the Common Era reconstruction mean correlates with instrumental temperatures from 1794–2016 CE at 0.79 (p < 0.001), reveals summer cooling in the years following large volcanic eruptions, and exhibits strong warming since the 1980s. Differing in their mean, variance, amplitude, sensitivity, and persistence, the ensemble members demonstrate the influence of subjectivity in the reconstruction process. We therefore recommend the routine use of ensemble reconstruction approaches to provide a more consensual picture of past climate variability.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-23627-6
Each group used the same network of regional tree-ring width datasets.
What’s fascinating is that all groups, though using the same data network, came up with a different result.
When it comes to deriving temperatures from tree rings, it has much to do with individual approach and interpretation. Sure we can follow the science, but whose results? Maybe people can now see why climate aiarmists are so terrified to allow their results to be criticised?
The 15 groups (referred to as R1–R15) were challenged with the same task of developing the most reliable NH summer temperature reconstruction for the Common Era
Published: 07 June 2021
The influence of decision-making in tree ring-based climate reconstructions
Ulf Büntgen, Kathy Allen, …Jan Esper
Nature Communications volume 12, Article number: 3411 (2021) Cite this article
Abstract
Tree-ring chronologies underpin the majority of annually-resolved reconstructions of Common Era climate. However, they are derived using different datasets and techniques, the ramifications of which have hitherto been little explored. Here, we report the results of a double-blind experiment that yielded 15 Northern Hemisphere summer temperature reconstructions from a common network of regional tree-ring width datasets. Taken together as an ensemble, the Common Era reconstruction mean correlates with instrumental temperatures from 1794–2016 CE at 0.79 (p < 0.001), reveals summer cooling in the years following large volcanic eruptions, and exhibits strong warming since the 1980s. Differing in their mean, variance, amplitude, sensitivity, and persistence, the ensemble members demonstrate the influence of subjectivity in the reconstruction process. We therefore recommend the routine use of ensemble reconstruction approaches to provide a more consensual picture of past climate variability.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-23627-6
I dislike bad faith arguments. If two people disagree with one another's actual positions, fine, perhaps facts and logic can move one or both of them. But if one is insisting on disputing something he knows perfectly well the other never actually claim, there's no point in even discussing, since at that stage one of the people is focused on distraction rather than investigation.