Extreme is the New Normal

Casual discussion amongst spiritual friends.

Re: Extreme is the New Normal

Postby Alex123 » Sat Jan 29, 2011 2:53 am

Dear Hanzee, Kim, All,

Some people criticize oil and gas industry, and yet they use the technological conveniences brought by those very same technologies.

I wonder how people would get to work riding in a bicycle in a -20 temperature. When you travel to distant places on other continents, most likely you are using a jet plane. When you go to the supermarket to buy your food, I bet that in most cases the food was brought there by a truck (burning diesel or gasoline). Most of us used a car or a bus to get to the supermarket to buy groceries. Another usage of this carbon based technology.

The plastic bags in which you carry your food, or plastic bottles for water, or even most of the stuff you wear, was made or delivered to you or shops in dependence on the technologies that some demonize.


I would like GW to be the case. It is cold in Canada. It is much harder to survive in a cold climate rather in than in warm climate. Try to be without power when it is freezing outside vs when it is hot outside. Former is dangerous, the latter is just inconvenient.


RE: Original post.

Today's changing weather is NOT extreme if we examine the history of the planet. There have been very hot and cold climates as now. The natural cataclysms existed long before Homo Sapients. Ice has been growing and melting long before us. To be strict, it seems that the planet spend more time in the hot phases and today we live in one of the coldest periods that the Earth has had in its 4.5 billion history. Greenland has an arctic climate now, it used to grow palm trees (it had hot climate) in fairly recent epoch. So warming up of the Earth would more likely be nature reverting to a normal, more warm climate. Nothing to raise fear about if the rise in temperature is the return to normal temperature that was for millions of years. I surely hope that this is the case that Earth is warming, and not a blip before us going into another ice age where there is 1 mile of ice over New York and many other cities in Northern Hemisphere. That, global cooling, would be much more worse than global warming.
I was not; I was; I am not; I do not care."
User avatar
Alex123
 
Posts: 2813
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Extreme is the New Normal

Postby Hanzze » Sat Jan 29, 2011 4:52 am

_/\_
Last edited by Hanzze on Wed Feb 02, 2011 2:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Just that! *smile*
...We Buddhists must find the courage to leave our temples and enter the temples of human experience, temples that are filled with suffering. If we listen to Buddha, Christ, or Gandhi, we can do nothing else. The refugee camps, the prisons, the ghettos, and the battlefields will become our temples. We have so much work to do. ... Peace is Possible! Step by Step. - Samtach Preah Maha Ghosananda "Step by Step" http://www.ghosananda.org/bio_book.html

BUT! it is important to become a real Buddhist first. Like Punna did: Punna Sutta Nate sante baram sokham _()_
User avatar
Hanzze
 
Posts: 1906
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2010 12:47 pm
Location: Cambodia

Re: Extreme is the New Normal

Postby Kim OHara » Sat Jan 29, 2011 5:01 am

octathlon wrote:
alan wrote:On one hand, it is kind of perversely interesting to see how long this can last.

It's a reflection of samsara, a pattern that repeats the same thing over and over, in just a slightly different way each time, never ending as long as clinging by at least 2 people continues. What is being clung to -- the need to be right.

Hmmm ... examines motivations ... nope, I don't think I'm clinging to the need to be right.
Maybe a bit of clinging to the idea that I can help someone else be right. Being a teacher for twenty years or so can do that :embarassed:
From my POV, it's pretty simple:
I know that it's daytime here now. If anyone tells me it's night, they are wrong.
I know that the earth goes round the sun. If anyone tells me the earth goes round the moon I will tell them that, yes, one can nominate the moon as the centre of movement but it's a pretty peculiar thing to do and tell them why.
I know that CO2 is a greenhouse gas and our CO2 emissions are starting to cause a lot of trouble, pretty much the same way I know about the earth and the sun. If someone denies it, I will try to put them straight. Why do I want them to know the truth? Because their error harms all of us - only a little bit, true, but if there are enough of them then the political action we need gets stalled (as it did for so long under the Republicans, if you remember).

As for Alex, I don't know his motivations. Perhaps he'll tell us?

:namaste:
Kim
User avatar
Kim OHara
 
Posts: 3006
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Extreme is the New Normal

Postby Alex123 » Sat Jan 29, 2011 3:15 pm

Hello Kim, all,

A picture is worth a thousand words. Please note that within only the past ~350,000 years (a tiny fraction of Earth's 4.5 billion history) there have been 3 major rises in temperature long before modern industralization. Today's rise is neither unique nor extreme when compared to rises in temperature ~150,000 or ~250,000 or ~350,000 years ago.

If those spikes in temperature 150K, 250K, and 350K have a natural explanation, then current rise in temperature can also have natural only explanation.

There is no need to add unneccesary and un-needed factors when natural causes can explain everything. See the chart.

co2Alex.JPG
co2Alex.JPG (59.67 KiB) Viewed 474 times
Attachments
co2AlexMillionsYears.JPG
co2AlexMillionsYears.JPG (62.22 KiB) Viewed 472 times
I was not; I was; I am not; I do not care."
User avatar
Alex123
 
Posts: 2813
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Extreme is the New Normal

Postby Kim OHara » Sat Jan 29, 2011 11:02 pm

Kim O'Hara wrote:
Kim O'Hara wrote:Hi, Alex,
I asked you a question a while ago and said that I would ignore anything else you posted until you answered the question.
So far, I'm ignoring. Until we know why you reject the weight of genuine climate science, debating individual facts and factoids will get us nowhere.
:namaste:
Kim

I asked the same question in a slightly different way, too:
Why do you choose to believe one set of people you don't know rather than another set of people you don't know?

I am not going to pay any attention until you answer either or both of those questions, and I doubt that anyone else here will do so.
At the moment you are not asking questions, let alone smart questions. You are repeating other people's pseudo-questions and pseudo-science.

:namaste:
Kim

Alex,
If all this is going to be any good to anyone, you need to participate in a dialogue.
:namaste:
Kim
User avatar
Kim OHara
 
Posts: 3006
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Extreme is the New Normal

Postby Alex123 » Sun Jan 30, 2011 2:42 am

Kim,

I've posted reasonable questions, such as in
viewtopic.php?f=12&t=6963&start=180#p113327


I understand that those graphs really complicate the issue by pulling a rug under their main arguments and scare tactics. If nature could do it before, and if explanation of rapid rise before could have purely natural explanation, then so is today. No need to add un-needed factors.

Today's changing weather is NOT extreme if we examine the history of the planet, even as short as 350,000 of years. There have been very hot and cold climates as now. The natural cataclysms existed long before Homo Sapients. Ice has been growing and melting long before us. To be strict, it seems that the planet spend more time in the hot phases and today we live in one of the coldest periods that the Earth has had in its 4.5 billion history. Greenland has an arctic climate now, it used to grow palm trees (it had hot climate) in fairly recent epoch. So warming up of the Earth would more likely be nature reverting to a normal, more warm climate. Nothing to raise fear about if the rise in temperature is the return to normal temperature that was for millions of years. I surely hope that this is the case that Earth is warming, and not a blip before us going into another ice age where there is 1 mile of ice over New York and many other cities in Northern Hemisphere. That, global cooling, would be much more worse than global warming.
I was not; I was; I am not; I do not care."
User avatar
Alex123
 
Posts: 2813
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Extreme is the New Normal

Postby Kim OHara » Sun Jan 30, 2011 4:55 am

Alex123 wrote:Kim,
I've posted reasonable questions, such as in
viewtopic.php?f=12&t=6963&start=180#p113327

I understand that those graphs really complicate the issue by pulling a rug under their main arguments and scare tactics.

Alex,
(1) There is no question in the post you link to.
(2) The graphs are irrelevant as I have said before. Much of the material you have posted is factually incorrect as well as irrelevant, and I'm ignoring all of it.
(3) Your post -again- fails to answer the question in my post that it purports to respond to. That is not dialogue and not polite. You will be shouting into a void until you do answer - as thoughtfully as you can manage - that fundamental question.
With metta,
Kim
User avatar
Kim OHara
 
Posts: 3006
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Extreme is the New Normal

Postby Alex123 » Sun Jan 30, 2011 9:22 pm

Hello Kim,

Kim O'Hara wrote:
Alex123 wrote:Kim,
I've posted reasonable questions, such as in
viewtopic.php?f=12&t=6963&start=180#p113327

I understand that those graphs really complicate the issue by pulling a rug under their main arguments and scare tactics.

Alex,
(1) There is no question in the post you link to.

If nature itself could produce those rapid spikes in temperature before, why can't it be responsible for it today? Today's spike is neither more rapid nor bigger.

Kim O'Hara wrote:(2) The graphs are irrelevant as I have said before. Much of the material you have posted is factually incorrect as well as irrelevant, and I'm ignoring all of it.


They are fully relevant. Why?

Because they show that temperature can rise high and quickly NATURALLY and without any human near-zero contribution. As you can see, modern rise is neither more extreme nor different from previous rises.

If natural-only explanation can be used for those spikes such as at ~150K, 250K, and 350K years ago - Why can't the same explanation be used today?

Why complicate the matter by adding un-necessary anthropogenic cause if nature is sole and sufficient explanation itself?


Kim O'Hara wrote:(3) Your post -again- fails to answer the question in my post that it purports to respond to. That is not dialogue and not polite. You will be shouting into a void until you do answer - as thoughtfully as you can manage - that fundamental question.
With metta,
Kim


There is no dialogue because AGW folks can't answer those questions. So at best, they deny the science that shows the full picture - that climate change was happening for a long period of time, and today's change is neither unique, nor more rapid or extreme. Humans are really insignificant with their 0.00 something% contribution to an atmosphere of a gas (CO2) that doesn't even cause GW. CO2 is used by plants, so it is actually good for them. Today it seems there us relatively little amount of this necessary plant food.

viewtopic.php?f=12&t=6963&start=140#p112619

I don't find it very believable to call AGW scientific, and deny all the scientific data that strongly rejects it. We can definitely call AGW an eco-religion, and beyond scientific disproof - but then AGW is profitable faith based religion that pays well. It is a great way to add more taxes.


CO2 lags an average of about 800 years behind the temperature changes-- confirming that CO2 is not the cause of the temperature increases. One thing is certain-- earth's climate has been warming and cooling on it's own for at least the last 400,000 years, as the data below show. At year 18,000 and counting in our current interglacial vacation from the Ice Age, we may be due-- some say overdue-- for return to another icehouse climate!http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/last_400k_yrs.html

co2Alex.JPG
Please explain the cause of those 3 spikes before humans invented ways to burn carbon fuel, and I'll tell you the reason for the 4th spike. If Nature is sole and sufficient reason for fluctuating temperature, then so is it today.
co2Alex.JPG (59.67 KiB) Viewed 435 times
I was not; I was; I am not; I do not care."
User avatar
Alex123
 
Posts: 2813
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Extreme is the New Normal

Postby poto » Thu Feb 10, 2011 1:26 am

Looks like less extreme is the new normal. At least according to global cyclone activity, we are near historical lows in both frequency and intensity of cyclones.

The total number of storms experienced globally in the last 12-months was 68, which is still near a record-low of 66 of last month.


source: http://www.coaps.fsu.edu/~maue/tropical/
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." -- C. S. Lewis
User avatar
poto
 
Posts: 363
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2009 3:21 am

Re: Extreme is the New Normal

Postby alan » Thu Feb 10, 2011 1:40 am

alan
 
Posts: 2514
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 12:14 am
Location: Miramar beach, Fl.

Re: Extreme is the New Normal

Postby poto » Thu Feb 10, 2011 4:47 am



Perhaps it would benefit you to learn more about UHI effect and the numerous problems with our surface stations.

Such problems taken into consideration, I am not surprised to see temperature records hit record highs more frequently.
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." -- C. S. Lewis
User avatar
poto
 
Posts: 363
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2009 3:21 am

Re: Extreme is the New Normal

Postby Kim OHara » Thu Feb 10, 2011 6:57 am

poto wrote:Perhaps it would benefit you to learn more about UHI effect and the numerous problems with our surface stations.

Such problems taken into consideration, I am not surprised to see temperature records hit record highs more frequently.

Hello, Poto,
The first is now routinely taken into account by reputable climate scientists and the second makes a minor problem look significant.
Can you direct us to references which show the actual errors in trend measurements due to these effects?
(Note to everyone else: please refrain from supplying them. It would be good for Poto to find them for himself.) (I am, unfortunately, a teacher first and last.)
:namaste:
Kim
User avatar
Kim OHara
 
Posts: 3006
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Extreme is the New Normal

Postby Kim OHara » Thu Feb 10, 2011 7:11 am

Extreme is the new Normal: recent news headlines
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/02/10/3134887.htm La Nina the strongest in almost a century
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/02/10/3134743.htm US braces for new round of snow
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/02/08/3133571.htm Brisbane council faces $440m clean-up bill
http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2011/s3113247.htm Brazil, Sri Lanka also struggle with flooding
:namaste:
Kim
User avatar
Kim OHara
 
Posts: 3006
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Extreme is the New Normal

Postby Alex123 » Thu Feb 10, 2011 4:14 pm

Kim O'Hara wrote:Extreme is the new Normal: recent news headlines
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/02/10/3134887.htm La Nina the strongest in almost a century
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/02/10/3134743.htm US braces for new round of snow
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/02/08/3133571.htm Brisbane council faces $440m clean-up bill
http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2011/s3113247.htm Brazil, Sri Lanka also struggle with flooding
:namaste:
Kim



The Earth's climate has been changing for 4.5 Billion years. There have been much hotter periods of time than today, and levels of CO2 generally stayed above 1,000 ppm for hundreds of millions of years vs 390ppm today.

There have been cataclysms as big as today's long ago.


Today's "rise" (compared to ice age, not compared to other more common times) is neither unique nor extreme when compared to rises in temperature ~150,000 or ~250,000 or ~350,000 years ago.

If those spikes in temperature 150K, 250K, and 350K have a natural explanation, then current rise in temperature can also have natural only explanation.

There is no need to add unnecessary and un-needed factors when natural causes can explain everything.
I was not; I was; I am not; I do not care."
User avatar
Alex123
 
Posts: 2813
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Extreme is the New Normal

Postby poto » Thu Feb 10, 2011 4:46 pm

Kim O'Hara wrote:Hello, Poto,
The first is now routinely taken into account by reputable climate scientists and the second makes a minor problem look significant.


How nice of you to contradict yourself.

Image

At least you admit there is a problem. BTW, the surface stations issues and UHI are part of the same problem. It's more than a minor issue, it's a corruption of the data.

Kim O'Hara wrote:Can you direct us to references which show the actual errors in trend measurements due to these effects?
(Note to everyone else: please refrain from supplying them. It would be good for Poto to find them for himself.) (I am, unfortunately, a teacher first and last.)
:namaste:
Kim


OK, I'm not nearly as invested in this issue as you are. So, I'm not going to waste my time on a data scavenger hunt just to have you dismiss it anyway. I have more productive things I should be doing, like working or spending more time sitting.

You don't seem to understand that as the person screaming FIRE, you have the burden of proof. You have failed and continue to fail to provide any proof that humans are causing more extreme weather events. I see no signal from humans, not in the ice caps, not in the cyclone activity, nothing. Furthermore, this supposed warming that you keep exclaiming doesn't seem to be providing any additional energy for storms, quite the opposite. Why do you ignore the record low cyclone activity? Doesn't that directly disprove your argument of more frequent and extreme weather?
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." -- C. S. Lewis
User avatar
poto
 
Posts: 363
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2009 3:21 am

Re: Extreme is the New Normal

Postby Kim OHara » Thu Feb 10, 2011 9:23 pm

poto wrote:
Kim O'Hara wrote:Can you direct us to references which show the actual errors in trend measurements due to these effects?
(Note to everyone else: please refrain from supplying them. It would be good for Poto to find them for himself.) (I am, unfortunately, a teacher first and last.)
:namaste:
Kim


OK, I'm not nearly as invested in this issue as you are. So, I'm not going to waste my time on a data scavenger hunt just to have you dismiss it anyway. I have more productive things I should be doing, like working or spending more time sitting.

You don't seem to understand that as the person screaming FIRE, you have the burden of proof.

Poto,
You are the one who is making extreme claims, by contradicting the global consensus of expert scientific opinion. If I were claiming the Earth is flat, sure, then I would face the burden of proof. But you're the one doing that, so it's up to you to back up your claim.
If it is something you know, you shouldn't have to go on "scavenger hunt" - you should know how you know it. If it's something you just think you know, finding out the truth will extend or correct your vague knowledge.
And I assure you that if you come up with "references which show the actual errors in trend measurements due to these effects", which is what I asked for, I won't dismiss them. If they are up to date and drawn from peer-reviewed literature, I will congratulate you; if they are not, I will direct you to more recent, reputable studies.
Over to you!
:namaste:
Kim
User avatar
Kim OHara
 
Posts: 3006
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Extreme is the New Normal

Postby Kim OHara » Mon Feb 14, 2011 7:00 am

Large storms more likely in future, experts say
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/02/14/3138441.htm
:namaste:
Kim
User avatar
Kim OHara
 
Posts: 3006
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Extreme is the New Normal

Postby Alex123 » Fri Feb 18, 2011 4:31 pm

Kim, so what? Climate was changing for 4.5 billion of years. The temperature has been going up and down without any influence of human technology. Today's temperatures are quite cold considering where it generally been for 100s of millions of years. We are closer to another ice age rather than warmth as usual.


If nature itself could produce those rapid spikes in temperature before, why can't it be responsible for it today? Today's spike is neither more rapid nor bigger. The burden of proof is on AGWist to provide proof for their unsubstantiated claims.

If nature itself could produce up to 7,000ppm of CO2 (not a pollutant, not a gas that warms the planet) then what is the scare about current 390ppm levels of CO2? Maybe the fact that, relatively speaking, we are CO2 impoverished?



co2Alex.JPG
co2Alex.JPG (59.67 KiB) Viewed 366 times



co2AlexMillionsYears.JPG
co2AlexMillionsYears.JPG (62.22 KiB) Viewed 366 times
I was not; I was; I am not; I do not care."
User avatar
Alex123
 
Posts: 2813
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Extreme is the New Normal

Postby Kim OHara » Fri Feb 18, 2011 11:11 pm

Pacific in climate firing line, says bank http://abcasiapacificnews.com/stories/201102/3142892.htm
Cyclone cost businesses 'more than $15m' http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/02/18/3142891.htm
Calendar highlights Indigenous awareness of changing climate http://www.abc.net.au/rural/news/content/201102/s3142390.htm
Wild weather to pummel WAhttp://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/02/17/3141874.htm
:namaste:
Kim
User avatar
Kim OHara
 
Posts: 3006
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: Extreme is the New Normal

Postby Alex123 » Sat Feb 19, 2011 12:07 am

Kim,

The weather has been changing, sometimes drastically, for 4.5 billions of years. There have been MUCH warmer periods than today, and about 19 times as much CO2 than today.

We could say that climate today is more drastic, it is much colder than it used to be for millions of years when life flourished.
I was not; I was; I am not; I do not care."
User avatar
Alex123
 
Posts: 2813
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Lounge

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests