Good News. Global Warming Will Not End Life As We Know It

[The Barbarian]

But as you have seen, we are seeing more extreme weather.

Nope. See OP.

Well, let's see the data...

Floods​

Between 2000 and 2020, the number of major floods worldwide more than doubled, from 1,389 to 3,254, while the incidence of storms grew from 1,457 to 2,034, according to a United Nations report.

Flooding is caused by increased rainfall from water stored in the atmosphere and rising sea levels. The latter happens as sea ice melts and ocean water expands, Seneviratne said.

In July, around 130 people, including children and counsellors at a summer camp, were swept to their deaths during flash floods in central Texas.

Climate Central, a U.S.-based advocacy group, said the floods were fuelled by an intense, moisture-heavy storm, which is made more likely and powerful in a warmer climate.

Storms​

Tropical cyclones, like typhoons and hurricanes, are unlikely to occur more frequently because of climate change, but the proportion of extreme ones is rising, according to the IPCC.

Large amounts of water held in the atmosphere and the energy created by warmer air temperatures make storms more intense.

U.S. government scientists forecast an above-normal 2025 hurricane season, with warmer sea-surface temperatures a major contributor. Last year's Atlantic hurricane season was one of the costliest on record with five major hurricanes.

Why is the weather becoming more extreme? | Context by TRF

Climate change makes extreme weather like Hurricane Melissa more frequent and intense

www.context.news

This wouldn't have been hard for you to check for yourself.

 

[Wrangler]

We know that atmospheric carbon drives atmospheric temperatures

Peat

LOL You skipped over how the data shows CO2 comes after temperature change, making your religion have cause and effect backwards.

And repeat.

 

[Wrangler]

But as you have seen, we are seeing more extreme weather.

Repeat. See OP.

@Armour of God, see what I mean about being schizophrenic about how wearier not being climate? In above post, he implies equality.

 

[Wrangler]

It's just the one that's increasing.

From an all-time low as the 400 M graph shows.

GHG effects are not merely about wavelength absorption but mass. 1 gigaton of water + 1 CO2 molecule does not measurably go up in planetary temperature when 1 more CO2 molecule is added to the atmosphere.

But Venus has a very dense atmosphere, is close to the Sun, and absorbs most of the incoming infrared.

Confession. There are more causal agents than a trace gas.

 

[The Barbarian]

It's just the one greenhouse gas that's increasing.

From an all-time low

To a higher concentration, and as you just learned, global temperatures are thereby rising.

1 CO2 molecule does not measurably go up in planetary temperature when 1 more CO2 molecule is added to the atmosphere.

Takes a lot more than that. Millions of tons of CO2:
About 1079 metric tons per second globally, from burning fossil fuels. Over 31 million metric tons annually.

How Much Carbon Dioxide Are We Emitting? - NASA Science

A visualization feature captures the quantities of climate change.

science.nasa.gov

Of course there are other sources as well.

Confession. There are more causal agents than a trace gas.

Of course. It's just that adding more carbon increases the temperature.

 

[The Barbarian]

But as you have seen, we are seeing more extreme weather.

Repeat. See OP.

I see your issue now. You think the World News Daily is a scientific source. No wonder you got confused. Try to find scientific data, not tabloid headlines. It's not just a recent thing:

Nature Mar 2012

A decade of weather extremes​

The ostensibly large number of recent extreme weather events has triggered intensive discussions, both in- and outside the scientific community, on whether they are related to global warming. Here, we review the evidence and argue that for some types of extreme — notably heatwaves, but also precipitation extremes — there is now strong evidence linking specific events or an increase in their numbers to the human influence on climate.


Journal of Climate Mar 2008

What Has Changed the Proportion of Intense Hurricanes in the Last 30 Years? Abstract​

The recently reported increase in the proportion of intense hurricanes is considerably larger than those projected by the maximum potential intensity (MPI) theory and the results of numerical simulation. To reconcile this discrepancy, the authors examined the best-track datasets for the North Atlantic (NA), western North Pacific (WNP), and eastern North Pacific (ENP) basins. It was found that the changes in the tropical cyclone formation locations and prevailing tracks may have contributed to the changes in the proportion of the intense hurricanes over the past 30 yr. The authors suggest that the changes in the formation locations and prevailing tracks have a profound impact on the basinwide tropical cyclone intensity. Thus, how the atmospheric circulation in the tropical cyclone basins responds to the global warming may be a critical factor in understanding the impacts of global warming on tropical cyclone intensity.



And you're confusing weather and climate again. Extreme events are weather. Long-term trends are climate. Learn more about it here:

https://www.noaa.gov/explainers/what-s-difference-between-climate-and-weather

 

[The Barbarian]

And once more, how carbon is driving rising temperatures:

You should base your decisions on data, not tabloid articles.

 

[Armour of God]

Lots of non-scientists think that science claims "infallibility." It's commonly claimed by those who don't like what science finds. Deniers of climate change often label those who accept scientific data as "alarmists" Easier to just ostracize them with a personal attack.

For example, Exxon's scientists very accurately predicted warming climate. This finding was a threat to income, so the company hid their findings while at the same time used those findings to prepare the company for warming.

Politicians and such get huge funding from corporations with an agenda to hide climate change. Many politicians have shares in such companies. Industry lobbyists give billions to politicians to stop more efficient energy sources. The last thing they want to hear is that man made climate change is a scientific fact and that they wasted their money. So they will deny and ignore any evidence that opposes them.

Mr pseudo-science you are being destroyed once again, this time by someone else and I'm enjoying it

 

[Wrangler]

But as you have seen, we are seeing more extreme weather.

I have seen with my own eyes for years more moderate weather and I saw that it was good.
Genesis 1:4 And God saw that the light was good. Then he separated the light from the darkness.

LOL Still can't admit the moral point. Less extreme weather is good for humanity.

 

[Wrangler]

To a higher concentration, and as you just learned, global temperatures are thereby rising.

Still not getting it.

1. CO2 is a trace gas, negligible. Doubling it is still negligible parts per million.
2. In understanding planetary temperature of our neighbors, you CONFESSED CO2 is not the only cause of planetary temperature.
3. And even worse, you have cause and effect backwards. Temperature changes, then CO2 changes (about 800 years later).

 

[Wrangler]

I see your issue now. You think the World News Daily is a scientific source. No wonder you got confused. Try to find scientific

Many people are unaware of this. There is no corresponding list of proponents.

Global Warming Petition Project
31,487 American scientists have signed this petition,
including 9,029 with PhDs​

View attachment 84388

No comment on the Oregon Petition (renamed Global Warming Petition Project). 31,487 American scientists have signed this petition, including 9,029 with PhDs, reject your nonsense. And so do I.

Thank God the common man can vote and not just scientists you approve!

 

[Armour of God]

@Wrangler @The Barbarian

The world is going to end in 4 years and your still driving around in a car...

HOW DARE YOU

 

[Wrangler]

The world is going to end in 4 years

And the watermelons will still be saying it's MAN'S FAULT. There is no guilt in striving to live in prosperity rather than poverty. The goal of all life is to improve their circumstances.

 

[The Barbarian]

To a higher concentration, and as you just learned, global temperatures are thereby rising.

CO2 is a trace gas, negligible. Doubling it is still negligible parts per million.

You're still not getting it. By the late 1800s, scientists realized that an increase in CO2 in the atmosphere would cause warming. And now the data confirms it. You have it backwards:

Yeah, I know, you don't want facts. But reality doesn't care what we think about it.

In understanding planetary temperature of our neighbors, you CONFESSED CO2 is not the only cause of planetary temperature.

You were confused, and I showed you why Pluto is in a warm period. That's called "instruction", not confession.

You seem really, really emotional about this; why not set your assumptions aside and do a little review of scientific literature? Supermarket tabloids aren't scientific literature, BTW.

 

[The Barbarian]

The world is going to end in 4 years and your still driving around in a car...

Deniers get all hysterical about the science. But the fact is, we're not all going to die. A lot of people are getting hurt by the changes, and more will hurt in the future. But the world won't end. Calm yourself.

 

[The Barbarian]

There is no guilt in striving to live in prosperity rather than poverty. The goal of all life is to improve their circumstances.

For a Christian, the goal is to live a life as an imitation of Christ. It's not about who dies with the most money.

 

[The Barbarian]

No comment on the Oregon Petition (renamed Global Warming Petition Project).

Well there is this, from Americans:
The American public isn’t as divided on climate change as you might think. The definitive polling on climate, from the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication, shows that the number of Americans who think global warming is happening outnumber those who don’t by nearly five to one (72% versus 15%). So, while some candidates frame climate as a too-close-to-call question (or even “a hoax”), both voters — and scientists — know that’s not true.

Polling Shows Clear Climate Consensus Among Americans

72% of Americans acknowledge global warming, defying divisive political rhetoric.

coveringclimatenow.org

Thank God the common man can vote and not just "scientists" you approve!

31,487 American scientists have signed this petition, including 9,029 with PhDs, reject your nonsense. And so do I.

Environmental Research Letters, Volume 8, Number 2

Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature​

Among abstracts expressing a position on AGW, 97.1% endorsed the consensus position that humans are causing global warming.
... Our analysis indicates that the number of papers rejecting the consensus on AGW is a vanishingly small proportion of the published research.

And now you can see why the bandwagon argument is such a loser for climate deniers. Not just climate scientists, but also ordinary Americans acknowledge the fact of man-made climate change.

I know this discussion probably didn't go the way you wanted, but it's an opportunity to learn more about the issue. It's not what the tabloids are telling you.

 

[Wrangler]

You're still not getting it. By the late 1800s, scientists realized that an increase in CO2 in the atmosphere would cause warming.

That is where you are wrong as I’ve already stated and proven multiple times. Yours is not science but religion.

You embrace the MAN IS BAD mantra at all costs.

 

[Wrangler]

For a Christian, the goal is to live a life as an imitation of Christ. It's not about who dies with the most money.

I said all life seeks to improve their situation. You deny even this.

 

[Wrangler]

Well there is this, from Americans:
The American public isn’t as divided on climate change as you might think. The definitive polling on climate,

Polling is political. @Armour of God, see how he changes from science to politics?

His very first post invoked “real” climatologists. Now, he cedes the science ground to invoke polling. And even here, he fails in his Appeal to Authority.

The poll that matters is elections. The electorate voted out of office watermelons. Trump, thankfully pulled us out of the Paris accords.