Remember me
▼ Content

Hottest day on record (going back to 1880s) in Paris



Page 1 of 212>
Hottest day on record (going back to 1880s) in Paris25-07-2019 23:40
L8112
★☆☆☆☆
(106)
Today Paris hit a record high temp for any day-108 F. A month after setting the June record.
UK saw its 2nd hottest day ever on record, as well as its hottest July day.
The Netherlands broke its all-time heat record of 105F, the previous record being set yesterday.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/live/2019/jul/25/heatwave-uk-weather-set-to-break-records-as-europes-cities-await-hottest-day-live

I now have a question for Into the night & straight to hell: Define Climate Change.
26-07-2019 00:28
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8688)
I'm not trying to define it. YOU are.
26-07-2019 01:10
tmiddles
★★★☆☆
(646)
L8112 wrote:
Today Paris hit a record high temp for any day-108 F.


I can offer you an honest debate L8112.

I'm wondering if you regard any of the climate issues as being a direct threat at this time? I don't but would agree they are part of the symptomatic reality of the climate change issue which cannot be ignored.

Personally the reality of CO2 ppm hitting not just new highs but truly shocking increases is what I consider to be the most alarming symptom of a real problem that may be coming.

I think the "Let's not talk about this at all" camp are able to seize on the lack of mass deaths or real time calamity to dismiss the issue.


26-07-2019 01:13
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(4301)
L8112 wrote:Today Paris hit a record high temp for any day-108 F.

Is this a random, pointless observation of no value that is merely a waste of bandwidth ... or do you believe that you are validly supporting a conclusion of Global Warming?

L8112 wrote:A month after setting the June record.UK saw its 2nd hottest day ever on record, as well as its hottest July day.
The Netherlands broke its all-time heat record of 105F, the previous record being set yesterday.

For a year-and-a-half I used to respond to each such announcement of a broken high temperature record with some broken low temperature records around the same time frame. Doing so has long-since ceased to be worth the effort.

Let's just ask you directly: Do you BELIEVE that your broken high temperature records somehow do NOT occur with corresponding low temperature records elsewhere on the planet?

Just wondering what you believe. After all, you are the expert on that.

L8112 wrote:I now have a question for Into the night & straight to hell: Define Climate Change.

According to mathematics, Climate Change is the first derivative of the Climate function.

How do you define it?

.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
26-07-2019 01:52
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8688)
tmiddles wrote:
L8112 wrote:
Today Paris hit a record high temp for any day-108 F.


I can offer you an honest debate L8112.

I'm wondering if you regard any of the climate issues as being a direct threat at this time? I don't but would agree they are part of the symptomatic reality of the climate change issue which cannot be ignored.

Define 'climate change'.
tmiddles wrote:
Personally the reality of CO2 ppm hitting not just new highs but truly shocking increases is what I consider to be the most alarming symptom of a real problem that may be coming.

It is not possible to measure the global atmospheric content of CO2. The Mauna Loa data is cooked. It's useless.

CO2 has absolutely no capability to warm the Earth. No gas or vapor does.

tmiddles wrote:
I think the "Let's not talk about this at all" camp are able to seize on the lack of mass deaths or real time calamity to dismiss the issue.

What 'issue'?? You haven't even DEFINED 'climate change' yet!


The Parrot Killer
26-07-2019 02:21
tmiddles
★★★☆☆
(646)
Into the Night wrote:...


I'm never going to talk with you let it go. I don't read your posts of IBDamans posts. BYE


26-07-2019 02:34
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(4301)
tmiddles wrote:I'm never going to talk with you let it go. I don't read your posts of IBDamans posts. BYE

Great! I won't speak for Into the Night but I, for one, appreciate you wasting less of my time.

The question you have to be asking yourself is who, besides yourself, you believe you are fooling by never defining either Global Warming, Climate Change or Greenhouse Effect. Have you EVER seen two adults debate something they knew was completely undefined?

Yes, we're laughing at you, not with you. Your embarrassment is completely transparent as you avoid any discussion with those who see right through you.

Please keep up the transparent avoidance. Thank you.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
26-07-2019 02:37
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8688)
tmiddles wrote:
Into the Night wrote:...


I'm never going to talk with you let it go. I don't read your posts of IBDamans posts. BYE


Liar. You just posted to me to say you won't post to me anymore.

Define 'climate change'.


The Parrot Killer
26-07-2019 02:48
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(4301)
Into the Night wrote:Define 'climate change'.

I'll help. From THE MANUAL:

Climate, by her nature, never changes but she is believed to be constantly changing, thus forming the grand mystery of the Global Warming faith. This is a core tenet of Settled Science.




tmiddles wrote: [bonehead stuff deleted]
Into the Night wrote:It is not possible to measure the global atmospheric content of CO2.

tmiddles' WACKY religion nonetheless requires him to believe in whatever unsupported conclusions he is ordered to believe. He thinks it makes him appear smart.

Into the Night wrote:CO2 has absolutely no capability to warm the Earth. No gas or vapor does.

tmiddles' WACKY religion nonetheless requires him to believe in whatever violations of physics he is ordered to believe. He thinks it makes him appear smart.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
26-07-2019 02:52
tmiddles
★★★☆☆
(646)
L8112 wrote:
Today Paris hit a record high temp for any day-108 F.


So an important thing to note with events like this is the degree to which something is abnormal. I think it's less significant that it be the hottest day than that it be a record set every year or something along those lines.

Identifying symptoms that can't be dismissed as chance is important.

Like you could say CO2 was at it's hightest ppm on record but really the more accurate statement is to say we've broken through to a level close to 40% higher than we see in the last 800,000 years.


26-07-2019 02:55
L8112
★☆☆☆☆
(106)
IBdaMann wrote:
L8112 wrote:Today Paris hit a record high temp for any day-108 F.

Is this a random, pointless observation of no value that is merely a waste of bandwidth ... or do you believe that you are validly supporting a conclusion of Global Warming?

L8112 wrote:A month after setting the June record.UK saw its 2nd hottest day ever on record, as well as its hottest July day.
The Netherlands broke its all-time heat record of 105F, the previous record being set yesterday.

For a year-and-a-half I used to respond to each such announcement of a broken high temperature record with some broken low temperature records around the same time frame. Doing so has long-since ceased to be worth the effort.

Let's just ask you directly: Do you BELIEVE that your broken high temperature records somehow do NOT occur with corresponding low temperature records elsewhere on the planet?

Just wondering what you believe. After all, you are the expert on that.

L8112 wrote:I now have a question for Into the night & straight to hell: Define Climate Change.

According to mathematics, Climate Change is the first derivative of the Climate function.

How do you define it?

.


Once again, your intelligence, or lack thereof, is the thing that is preventing you from understanding. In the entire area of the countries of France, Germany, Netherlands, never has there been a temp recorded as high as those the last several days.

Your counter point of the deep freeze over the usa where temps dropped to -40F in Chicago, which is unprecedented, further confirms my point of abrupt climate chance. Not even necessarily warming, but climate chaos.

Thanks IB, just like your cohort ITN who is dumb as a bag of rocks, can't stop shooting yourself in the foot.

disclaimer*: I made sure that I capitalized all proper nouns in this post, so that ITN doesn't have his usual retard-freakout. Rather than asses what I am saying, cant see past the fact that I forgot to capitalize the d&t in donnie trump. That is the level of stupidity I am dealing with, which you cant see, because, you are that.
Edited on 26-07-2019 02:56
26-07-2019 03:05
HarveyH55
★★★★☆
(1000)
Gee whiz, it's summertime, heat waves happen. We had one a couple of weeks ago, barely broke a record high, once. Now, it's been about 10 degrees cooler. 80F, at sunset today, should drop into the low 70s, maybe into the 60s, in the middle of the summer, in Florida. Pretty sure these are record lows, but we never hear about such things, because it's a blessing, and it doesn't create alarm and panic. They should just think about the record cold winter they just had, helps get through the heat wave. Weather extremes have happened, well forever, it doesn't have to mean anything. Life is work, there have always been challenges thrown at us, the strong survive, the weak die. Society can change some rules, where everyone survives, everyone wins, but they can't change to forces of nature. Sure, it's unfair, but life isn't about being fair, it's about having the will to work to survive. According to Prophet Gore. we only have a little over 10 years before the planet is totally F.B.R., we reach the point of no return. Maybe it all happens at once in 2030, kind of suddenly, like in the Book of Revelations...
26-07-2019 03:18
L8112
★☆☆☆☆
(106)
HarveyH55 wrote:
Gee whiz, it's summertime, heat waves happen. We had one a couple of weeks ago, barely broke a record high, once. Now, it's been about 10 degrees cooler. 80F, at sunset today, should drop into the low 70s, maybe into the 60s, in the middle of the summer, in Florida. Pretty sure these are record lows, but we never hear about such things, because it's a blessing, and it doesn't create alarm and panic. They should just think about the record cold winter they just had, helps get through the heat wave. Weather extremes have happened, well forever, it doesn't have to mean anything. Life is work, there have always been challenges thrown at us, the strong survive, the weak die. Society can change some rules, where everyone survives, everyone wins, but they can't change to forces of nature. Sure, it's unfair, but life isn't about being fair, it's about having the will to work to survive. According to Prophet Gore. we only have a little over 10 years before the planet is totally F.B.R., we reach the point of no return. Maybe it all happens at once in 2030, kind of suddenly, like in the Book of Revelations...

stay calm. nothing will be fine.
Edited on 26-07-2019 03:19
26-07-2019 03:37
tmiddles
★★★☆☆
(646)
L8112 wrote:
...abrupt climate chance..
.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Gee whiz, it's summertime, heat waves happen. .

stay calm. nothing will be fine.


L8112 I think the key is to point out that these should be seriously evaluated as warning symptoms, not threats in themselves, so they aren't dismissed as not dangerous. The key word being "abrupt" how drastic is an anomaly.

HarveyH55: question, can you imagine a warning sign with global temperature? Is it possible?
Also define temperature (I'm kidding of course)


26-07-2019 04:44
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8688)
tmiddles wrote:
L8112 wrote:
Today Paris hit a record high temp for any day-108 F.


So an important thing to note with events like this is the degree to which something is abnormal. I think it's less significant that it be the hottest day than that it be a record set every year or something along those lines.

Identifying symptoms that can't be dismissed as chance is important.

Like you could say CO2 was at it's hightest ppm on record but really the more accurate statement is to say we've broken through to a level close to 40% higher than we see in the last 800,000 years.


Especially since no one was measuring CO2 800,000 years ago!


The Parrot Killer
Edited on 26-07-2019 04:44
26-07-2019 04:51
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8688)
L8112 wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
L8112 wrote:Today Paris hit a record high temp for any day-108 F.

Is this a random, pointless observation of no value that is merely a waste of bandwidth ... or do you believe that you are validly supporting a conclusion of Global Warming?

L8112 wrote:A month after setting the June record.UK saw its 2nd hottest day ever on record, as well as its hottest July day.
The Netherlands broke its all-time heat record of 105F, the previous record being set yesterday.

For a year-and-a-half I used to respond to each such announcement of a broken high temperature record with some broken low temperature records around the same time frame. Doing so has long-since ceased to be worth the effort.

Let's just ask you directly: Do you BELIEVE that your broken high temperature records somehow do NOT occur with corresponding low temperature records elsewhere on the planet?

Just wondering what you believe. After all, you are the expert on that.

L8112 wrote:I now have a question for Into the night & straight to hell: Define Climate Change.

According to mathematics, Climate Change is the first derivative of the Climate function.

How do you define it?

.


Once again, your intelligence, or lack thereof, is the thing that is preventing you from understanding. In the entire area of the countries of France, Germany, Netherlands, never has there been a temp recorded as high as those the last several days.
Yes there has, just not on those days.
L8112 wrote:
Your counter point of the deep freeze over the usa where temps dropped to -40F in Chicago, which is unprecedented, further confirms my point of abrupt climate chance. Not even necessarily warming, but climate chaos.
Define 'climate chaos'. Is that anything like 'climate change'? Define 'climate change'.
L8112 wrote:
Thanks IB, just like your cohort ITN who is dumb as a bag of rocks, can't stop shooting yourself in the foot.

I assure you. I hit what I aim at with every gun I own. I have never shot myself in the foot.
L8112 wrote:
disclaimer*: I made sure that I capitalized all proper nouns in this post, so that ITN doesn't have his usual retard-freakout.
Lie.
L8112 wrote:
Rather than asses what I am saying,
I assume you mean 'assess'. Trouble is, you aren't saying much. Just the usual chanting from the Church of Global Warming.
L8112 wrote:
cant see past the fact that I forgot to capitalize the d&t in donnie trump.

What is a donnie? Trump is a proper noun. It is capitalized.
L8112 wrote:
That is the level of stupidity I am dealing with, which you cant see, because, you are that.


Define 'climate change'. Define 'climate chaos'. Define 'global warming'.


The Parrot Killer
26-07-2019 04:52
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8688)
L8112 wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
Gee whiz, it's summertime, heat waves happen. We had one a couple of weeks ago, barely broke a record high, once. Now, it's been about 10 degrees cooler. 80F, at sunset today, should drop into the low 70s, maybe into the 60s, in the middle of the summer, in Florida. Pretty sure these are record lows, but we never hear about such things, because it's a blessing, and it doesn't create alarm and panic. They should just think about the record cold winter they just had, helps get through the heat wave. Weather extremes have happened, well forever, it doesn't have to mean anything. Life is work, there have always been challenges thrown at us, the strong survive, the weak die. Society can change some rules, where everyone survives, everyone wins, but they can't change to forces of nature. Sure, it's unfair, but life isn't about being fair, it's about having the will to work to survive. According to Prophet Gore. we only have a little over 10 years before the planet is totally F.B.R., we reach the point of no return. Maybe it all happens at once in 2030, kind of suddenly, like in the Book of Revelations...

stay calm. nothing will be fine.


You just can't stand to live without paranoia in your life, can you?


The Parrot Killer
26-07-2019 04:54
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8688)
tmiddles wrote:
L8112 wrote:
...abrupt climate chance..
.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Gee whiz, it's summertime, heat waves happen. .

stay calm. nothing will be fine.


L8112 I think the key is to point out that these should be seriously evaluated as warning symptoms, not threats in themselves, so they aren't dismissed as not dangerous. The key word being "abrupt" how drastic is an anomaly.

HarveyH55: question, can you imagine a warning sign with global temperature? Is it possible?
Also define temperature (I'm kidding of course)


What 'global temperature'? It's not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth.


The Parrot Killer
26-07-2019 05:40
tmiddles
★★★☆☆
(646)
L8112 wrote:
Today Paris hit a record high temp


And points for the very timely post! So good to have you back


26-07-2019 06:10
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(4301)
IBdaMann wrote:Let's just ask you directly: Do you BELIEVE that your broken high temperature records somehow do NOT occur with corresponding low temperature records elsewhere on the planet?

Just wondering what you believe. After all, you are the expert on that.

L8112 avoided the question out of shame:
Your counter point of the deep freeze over the usa where temps dropped to -40F in Chicago, which is unprecedented, further confirms my point of abrupt climate chance. Not even necessarily warming, but climate chaos.

Note: I never mentioned Chicago.

From The MANUAL:

Unprecedented: adjective
Per the Global Warming lexicon, whenever an ordinary or otherwise non-exceptional event occurs that some Climate Scientist wishes to imply requires a Settled Science explanation, the event is characterized as "unprecedented."


All these incidents you mention are matters of chance and are entirely expected to occur eventually, like having a yellow 1982 Volvo drive down your street.

IBdaMann wrote:According to mathematics, Climate Change is the first derivative of the Climate function. How do you define it?

L8112 avoided the question out of shame and made a standard lame attempt to change the topic as though no one would notice: Thanks IB, just like your cohort ITN who is dumb as a bag of rocks, can't stop shooting yourself in the foot.

disclaimer*: I made sure that I capitalized all proper nouns in this post, so that ITN doesn't have his usual retard-freakout. Rather than asses what I am saying, cant see past the fact that I forgot to capitalize the d&t in donnie trump. That is the level of stupidity I am dealing with, which you cant see, because, you are that.


OK, you have no point. You won't define your terms. You have no science to discuss. You have nothing to offer.

Did you expect a discussion on favorite letters to capitalize?

.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
26-07-2019 06:14
James___
★★★★☆
(1465)
IBdaMann wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:Let's just ask you directly: Do you BELIEVE that your broken high temperature records somehow do NOT occur with corresponding low temperature records elsewhere on the planet?

Just wondering what you believe. After all, you are the expert on that.

L8112 avoided the question out of shame:
Your counter point of the deep freeze over the usa where temps dropped to -40F in Chicago, which is unprecedented, further confirms my point of abrupt climate chance. Not even necessarily warming, but climate chaos.

Note: I never mentioned Chicago.

From The MANUAL:

Unprecedented: adjective
Per the Global Warming lexicon, whenever an ordinary or otherwise non-exceptional event occurs that some Climate Scientist wishes to imply requires a Settled Science explanation, the event is characterized as "unprecedented."


All these incidents you mention are matters of chance and are entirely expected to occur eventually, like having a yellow 1982 Volvo drive down your street.

IBdaMann wrote:According to mathematics, Climate Change is the first derivative of the Climate function. How do you define it?

L8112 avoided the question out of shame and made a standard lame attempt to change the topic as though no one would notice: Thanks IB, just like your cohort ITN who is dumb as a bag of rocks, can't stop shooting yourself in the foot.

disclaimer*: I made sure that I capitalized all proper nouns in this post, so that ITN doesn't have his usual retard-freakout. Rather than asses what I am saying, cant see past the fact that I forgot to capitalize the d&t in donnie trump. That is the level of stupidity I am dealing with, which you cant see, because, you are that.


OK, you have no point. You won't define your terms. You have no science to discuss. You have nothing to offer.

Did you expect a discussion on favorite letters to capitalize?

.


Why is the teacher throwing a temper tantrum? Does the teacher need a time our or need to go to the little boys room? I think so.
26-07-2019 07:03
tmiddles
★★★☆☆
(646)
James___ wrote:I think so.


But James what do you think about this topic? Set down that big ol' bag of Troll kibble and let's debate it.


26-07-2019 11:11
HarveyH55
★★★★☆
(1000)
tmiddles wrote:
L8112 wrote:
...abrupt climate chance..
.
HarveyH55 wrote:
Gee whiz, it's summertime, heat waves happen. .

stay calm. nothing will be fine.


L8112 I think the key is to point out that these should be seriously evaluated as warning symptoms, not threats in themselves, so they aren't dismissed as not dangerous. The key word being "abrupt" how drastic is an anomaly.

HarveyH55: question, can you imagine a warning sign with global temperature? Is it possible?
Also define temperature (I'm kidding of course)


I'm not overly religious, reading 'signs' doesn't really mean much. The weather has always been unpredictable, and can get pretty extreme sometimes. Really nothing to get alarmed over, nothing we can do to change it. Our only focus, should be how to survive it.

I don't think mankind caused any of it, just created the fiction people react to. If you paid attention, they have been jumping on everything climate related, stuff that has always happen, far as anyone can tell, calling it a sign, and needs immediate attention. Some churches jump on current events, and try to match them up with things in Book of Revelations, to get people interested in making things right with their maker, before it's too late. Seems like pretty much the same methodology. When the end comes, there isn't much any of us can do about it, either way. We never stated, and we certainly can't stop.
26-07-2019 11:24
HarveyH55
★★★★☆
(1000)
L8112 wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
L8112 wrote:Today Paris hit a record high temp for any day-108 F.

Is this a random, pointless observation of no value that is merely a waste of bandwidth ... or do you believe that you are validly supporting a conclusion of Global Warming?

L8112 wrote:A month after setting the June record.UK saw its 2nd hottest day ever on record, as well as its hottest July day.
The Netherlands broke its all-time heat record of 105F, the previous record being set yesterday.

For a year-and-a-half I used to respond to each such announcement of a broken high temperature record with some broken low temperature records around the same time frame. Doing so has long-since ceased to be worth the effort.

Let's just ask you directly: Do you BELIEVE that your broken high temperature records somehow do NOT occur with corresponding low temperature records elsewhere on the planet?

Just wondering what you believe. After all, you are the expert on that.

L8112 wrote:I now have a question for Into the night & straight to hell: Define Climate Change.

According to mathematics, Climate Change is the first derivative of the Climate function.

How do you define it?

.


Once again, your intelligence, or lack thereof, is the thing that is preventing you from understanding. In the entire area of the countries of France, Germany, Netherlands, never has there been a temp recorded as high as those the last several days.

Your counter point of the deep freeze over the usa where temps dropped to -40F in Chicago, which is unprecedented, further confirms my point of abrupt climate chance. Not even necessarily warming, but climate chaos.

Thanks IB, just like your cohort ITN who is dumb as a bag of rocks, can't stop shooting yourself in the foot.

disclaimer*: I made sure that I capitalized all proper nouns in this post, so that ITN doesn't have his usual retard-freakout. Rather than asses what I am saying, cant see past the fact that I forgot to capitalize the d&t in donnie trump. That is the level of stupidity I am dealing with, which you cant see, because, you are that.


There has been weather extremes throughout recorded history, long before fossil fuels. Using these events as 'signs' is a very old, religious way to scare people out of there wealth. It's easy enough to predict these events will happen, they happen often enough, sometimes every year for a while. Locally, we had a heat wave a couple weeks ago, one record high, barely broken, was set in 1856...
26-07-2019 11:40
tmiddles
★★★☆☆
(646)
HarveyH55 wrote:
I'm not overly religious, reading 'signs'


What I mean by that isn't religious. More like if I was a sailor in the past I'd hopefully be competent enough to "Read signs" of a storm a' brewin. We can read signs that a volcano is likely to erupt soon.

Science can predict things very reliably in some cases, and more vaguely though still usefully in others. (for example we're still waiting for earthquake predictions to work, but it's a good thing we now know once one does a Tsunami may hit).

But I think I like "clue" better, meaning "evidence to base a prediction on" instead of ~Signs~ since that does sound like a crop circle.

So am I right in assuming you'd agree we had a pretty good clue about the impact of DDT on human and animal health? From Condor eggs to liver cancer.

Can't we ask the question, and critique the analysis, that there are clues about human caused global warming?

HarveyH55 wrote:one record high, barely broken, was set in 1856...


So yeah, exactly. Would you agree that it's fair to ask "Is that really evidence?" and then you can come to a rational conclusion that it's not.
But it's POSSIBLE there could be evidence? We can say "that ain't it" because there is some standard where it could be it.

Since we've had 12,000 years of warming since the ice age I don't see breaking records to be very compelling by itself. Breaking them every year? By a lot? maybe.



Edited on 26-07-2019 11:45
26-07-2019 12:29
tmiddles
★★★☆☆
(646)
.



Edited on 26-07-2019 13:09
26-07-2019 13:07
IBdaMann
★★★★★
(4301)
tmiddles blindly posted:

Hey, Mr. Gullible, what does that chart depict? Temperatures? ... or "anomalies"?

Do you even know what those are? Hint: they aren't temperatures. Yes, the chart's author was intentionally manipulating you by labeling the chart "Global Temperatures," knowing the uneducated target audience won't scrutinize the graph ... but temperatures are nowhere on the graph.

The chart you posted is also known as a gullibility test. You did not pass.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
26-07-2019 13:10
tmiddles
★★★☆☆
(646)
I'm seeing a jump in temp from 1910 to 1950 of about 0.4 C, then flat for 40 years, then a jump of 0.6 from 1975 till now. Doesn't seem to correlate very well with CO2. Mainly why were we flat for 40 years.







Edited on 26-07-2019 13:12
26-07-2019 16:59
L8112
★☆☆☆☆
(106)
tmiddles wrote:
I'm seeing a jump in temp from 1910 to 1950 of about 0.4 C, then flat for 40 years, then a jump of 0.6 from 1975 till now. Doesn't seem to correlate very well with CO2. Mainly why were we flat for 40 years.





Remember, that the main reason there is such a high correlation for those graphs is that co2 is also a marker for the amount of heat realeased via burning coal, oil, gas etc. as those fuel methods are below 25% efficiency, meaning, most of that energy is lost to the surroundings in the form of heat.

Of the main contributors of greenhouse gases, co2 is 82%, methane 10%, nitrous oxide 6%, fluorinated gases 4%.

Yet oddly no one seems to realize that methane has 60 x the effect co2 does, nitrous oxide has 300 x the effect, fluorinated gases have anywhere from 100 to 10,000 x the effect of co2. Adjusting for those values means that co2 is less than 1% of the problem in that regard. As I said, it is only a measure for the amount of fuels burned. The increase in co2 levels is 100% due to humans, the line shoots up as it drifts from the natural background starting in the industrial revolution.
26-07-2019 18:45
HarveyH55
★★★★☆
(1000)
tmiddles wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
I'm not overly religious, reading 'signs'


What I mean by that isn't religious. More like if I was a sailor in the past I'd hopefully be competent enough to "Read signs" of a storm a' brewin. We can read signs that a volcano is likely to erupt soon.

Science can predict things very reliably in some cases, and more vaguely though still usefully in others. (for example we're still waiting for earthquake predictions to work, but it's a good thing we now know once one does a Tsunami may hit).

But I think I like "clue" better, meaning "evidence to base a prediction on" instead of ~Signs~ since that does sound like a crop circle.

So am I right in assuming you'd agree we had a pretty good clue about the impact of DDT on human and animal health? From Condor eggs to liver cancer.

Can't we ask the question, and critique the analysis, that there are clues about human caused global warming?

HarveyH55 wrote:one record high, barely broken, was set in 1856...


So yeah, exactly. Would you agree that it's fair to ask "Is that really evidence?" and then you can come to a rational conclusion that it's not.
But it's POSSIBLE there could be evidence? We can say "that ain't it" because there is some standard where it could be it.

Since we've had 12,000 years of warming since the ice age I don't see breaking records to be very compelling by itself. Breaking them every year? By a lot? maybe.


I'm not convinced that there is any unnatural warming. This is our first inter-glacial, so we don't really know what 'normal' is, or where the recovery warming ends, how it works at all. It didn't just get to our current temperature range over night, took a long time, slowly. 300 years to rise 1 C seems a reasonable pace. How would they know natural warming, from man-made? I also disagree with the idea that there will be thermal runaway, meaning it's going to keep getting hotter, if we don't reduce the CO2. There is a natural cap, to how warm it can ever get, most likely a function of water vapor, which is a major component of climate, be seldom discussed, often dismissed as not very significant. Water makes up most of the Earth's surface, and does so many things. It's been cloudy and wet for the past two days, only 83 F at the moment, our average this time of year is 92 F, and we just came off a heat wave, where we were around 100 F, little higher a few days. Basically a 20 degree drop, 10 degrees lower than average, just from cloud cover.

Basically, it might get interesting, if many regions, all around the planet, were breaking record highs, almost daily, or at least coming very close. That just doesn't happen though, even here in America, it's usually just a few states at a time. There is just nothing uncommon to the weather patterns we've been seeing, and we've had worse extremes in the past. From the scary graphs, and dire warnings, we should be seeing progressively worse weather. We've yet to see anything worse, than anything we've experience in the past.
26-07-2019 18:57
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8688)
tmiddles wrote:
I'm seeing a jump in temp from 1910 to 1950 of about 0.4 C, then flat for 40 years, then a jump of 0.6 from 1975 till now. Doesn't seem to correlate very well with CO2. Mainly why were we flat for 40 years.





It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth
It is not possible to measure the global atmospheric CO2 content.
It is not possible to measure the global sea level.

You are just comparing graphs of random numbers against each other.


The Parrot Killer
26-07-2019 19:00
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8688)
L8112 wrote:
Of the main contributors of greenhouse gases, co2 is 82%, methane 10%, nitrous oxide 6%, fluorinated gases 4%.


No gas or vapor has the capability to warm the Earth.

* You can't create energy out of nothing.
* You can't slow or trap heat.
* You can't trap thermal energy. There is always heat.
* You can't trap light.
* You can't heat the warmer surface using a colder gas.
* You can't decrease entropy in any system.
* You can't reduce the radiance of Earth and increase its temperature at the same time.

You can't do it with CO2, methane, water or water vapor, nitrous oxides, or fluorine or any of its compounds.

You can't just discard the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics and the Stefan-Boltzmann law.


The Parrot Killer
Edited on 26-07-2019 19:01
26-07-2019 23:45
tmiddles
★★★☆☆
(646)
L8112 wrote:, meaning, most of that energy is lost to the surroundings in the form of heat.
... The increase in co2 levels is 100% due to humans,.


I hadn't thought the release of heat would be significant. Interesting thought,

The spike in CO2 is proof to me humans can effect the environment. It's a very real and sudden change,

Ironically there is increased plant growth NASA has documented as a result.

This is proof of dramatic results:
co2-is-making-earth-greener

HarveyH55 wrote:
Basically, it might get interesting, .


Yes I'd agree we don't really know what would be happening otherwise but it seems safe to say we would have gradual warming. Interesting could be bad interesting so I think it's important that it be studied and understood as much as possible. The problem is that now there's the pro and the anti camps and both have a vested interest in distorting the facts



Edited on 26-07-2019 23:51
27-07-2019 01:04
HarveyH55
★★★★☆
(1000)
tmiddles wrote:
L8112 wrote:, meaning, most of that energy is lost to the surroundings in the form of heat.
... The increase in co2 levels is 100% due to humans,.


I hadn't thought the release of heat would be significant. Interesting thought,

The spike in CO2 is proof to me humans can effect the environment. It's a very real and sudden change,

Ironically there is increased plant growth NASA has documented as a result.

This is proof of dramatic results:
co2-is-making-earth-greener

HarveyH55 wrote:
Basically, it might get interesting, .


Yes I'd agree we don't really know what would be happening otherwise but it seems safe to say we would have gradual warming. Interesting could be bad interesting so I think it's important that it be studied and understood as much as possible. The problem is that now there's the pro and the anti camps and both have a vested interest in distorting the facts


CO2 occurs naturally. There is no chemical difference between natural and 'man-made', though it's implied. CO2 is released in large quantities during wildfires, which happen naturally, only we contain, and reduce the burn, when possible, where in the past they would have had to burn themselves out. Volcanoes release a great deal of CO2, among other things. There has always been CO2, in varying amounts, sometimes like much higher than we ever measured, since we didn't have the tools, when many of the major volcanic activity was going on, or before we started fight forest fires. There is also several places where spring water comes out of the ground, carbonated... I know there are gas vents around active volcanoes, which release gasses. even though the volcano has been quiet a long time. Likely places where CO2 seeps out of the ground, through chemical reaction with water as well. I really don't believe CO2 is a bad thing, certainly not as bad as they are making it out to be. There really isn't that much usually in the atmosphere to cause and measurable effects. The massive spikes we've had in the past, had zero effect on global weather/warming. Volcanoes and wildfires, usually contribute for weeks at a time, it's not a one day deal. That's more CO2, in a short time, than mankind puts out all year.

What I do get from reading through the IPCC assessment reports, is that they don't have much confidence or certainty, in what they are doing. They focus on CO2, and only potential negative effects, while brushing off any possible positive effects, or mitigating factors. It's highly subjective, which you don't commonly find in technical literature. Many of their predictions, seem very accommodating to plant growth, which would use more CO2, a lot faster than currently. Taller, strong, faster growing plants and trees, would compensate a great deal for any CO2 we are producing, and provide more food. Sort of wonder if there have been any studies, on the effects of rapid CO2 release from natural sources, and increased plant growth, like higher yielding crops during those years. I do know that plants do incredibly well, when provided much higher CO2 levels. It's a well document fact, and used commercially
27-07-2019 01:11
tmiddles
★★★☆☆
(646)
HarveyH55 wrote:
CO2 occurs naturally.


Yes the "CO2 is poison" is really more of the idiot test for the uneducated environmentalist.

However good things can cause havoc. I think I mentioned in another thread phosphorus creating algae blooms in lakes.

The biggest confusion I see generally is the attitude that Natural = Good 100% of the time. Seriously anti-human things could happen "Naturally".

We may learn so much from our study of how to deal with our own effects on the atmosphere, what matter, what doesn't, what countermeasures we can take, that we are ready and prepared to mitigate a natural event like a meteor strike.

A LOT of good can come from taking the subject seriously on both sides and de-politicizing it.


27-07-2019 02:11
Into the Night
★★★★★
(8688)
tmiddles wrote:
L8112 wrote:, meaning, most of that energy is lost to the surroundings in the form of heat.
... The increase in co2 levels is 100% due to humans,.


I hadn't thought the release of heat would be significant. Interesting thought,
Heat is not something that can be trapped and then released. You cannot trap heat.
tmiddles wrote:
The spike in CO2 is proof to me humans can effect the environment. It's a very real and sudden change,
It is not possible to measure the global atmospheric CO2 content. What spike?
tmiddles wrote:
Ironically there is increased plant growth NASA has documented as a result.

This is proof of dramatic results:
co2-is-making-earth-greener

Speculation. The reason for any improvement in the vegetation is unknown. Even your article says that. If you're going to push your religion, you need to check your sources out better.
tmiddles wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
Basically, it might get interesting, .


Yes I'd agree we don't really know what would be happening otherwise but it seems safe to say we would have gradual warming.

Why? Where is all this additional energy coming from?
tmiddles wrote:
Interesting could be bad interesting so I think it's important that it be studied and understood as much as possible.

Oh. Instead of answering such a question, you launch right into the usual doom-and-gloom scenarios.
tmiddles wrote:
The problem is that now there's the pro and the anti camps and both have a vested interest in distorting the facts

You are IGNORING some very important facts:

The fact that the 1st law of thermodynamics exists. It is still science. It has not yet been falsified.

The fact that the 2nd law of thermodynamics exists. It is still science. It has not yet been falsified.

The fact that the Stefan-Boltzmann law exists. It is still science. It has not yet been falsified.

The 'greenhouse gas' model violates these theories.


The Parrot Killer
27-07-2019 02:15
HarveyH55
★★★★☆
(1000)
tmiddles wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
CO2 occurs naturally.


Yes the "CO2 is poison" is really more of the idiot test for the uneducated environmentalist.

However good things can cause havoc. I think I mentioned in another thread phosphorus creating algae blooms in lakes.

The biggest confusion I see generally is the attitude that Natural = Good 100% of the time. Seriously anti-human things could happen "Naturally".

We may learn so much from our study of how to deal with our own effects on the atmosphere, what matter, what doesn't, what countermeasures we can take, that we are ready and prepared to mitigate a natural event like a meteor strike.

A LOT of good can come from taking the subject seriously on both sides and de-politicizing it.


CO2 is a non-issue, there was never any way to accurately measure global anything, to make the correlation, or the dire predictions. It's a fantasy that has gotten taken too far. 2030 is the tipping point, doubtful even if the planet suddenly agreed, and put their entire focus on eliminating CO2 production, there is enough time in those 10 remaining, to replace all fossil fuels, without killing off a good portion of the human population. We are energy dependent, the alternates can only meet a fraction of the current demand. Even with fossil fuels, many areas struggle during high demand. Check the number of power outages during heat waves, or deep winter storms. No country can really afford the changes being called for. The economic catastrophe is can be just as bad/worse, than any of the predicted calamities. The proposed cure, is much worse than the disease.

A meteor strike, well they happen all the time, some impressive showers every year. Now, an asteroid is something else, and read something last year I found a a little alarming. There was a landing (sort of), some photos on one. Plans for mining in the near future. Then China released plans to give one a little 'nudge', just to see if they could move it. I got a little concerned about weaponizing them, either deliberately, or changing the orbit, to where it might impact us. From my video game years as a youth, imagine some realism, in one of those big rocks, smacking into another one, changing its direction, maybe busting it up a little.

There have always been algae blooms, only a few types are considered hazardous. Phosphorous isn't a major requirement for plant growth, but doesn't hurt much. I don't really know much about algae in general, but I know that in lakes and ponds, it gets out of control, mostly do to over fishing, and the removal of some less than desirable species, that compete with the sports fish and wildlife. The fish and snails that feed on algae, will feed on any plant material, which include plants that are beneficial to the species people want to do real well. I do know there are many algae bloom related fish kills, that predated commercial fertilizers.
27-07-2019 04:55
tmiddles
★★★☆☆
(646)
HarveyH55 wrote:...there was never any way to accurately measure global anything, to make the correlation,...focus on eliminating CO2 production,
...
There have always been algae blooms,


Do you have anything to base your assertion that we can't accurately measure global anything? "Accurately" is based on the purpse and the need. We can be very confident of the temerature in a particular location and we have a wealth of location we are measuring for the past 100 years. We can be even more confident of CO2 concentrations than temperature actually because ice cores have been tested in the past decades to show that what's measured in the ice matches what is measured in the air. Science can do a lot more than measure temp and CO2! Come on that's easy. The "We can't measure" is just a way to dodge the debate.
how it's done
And no there is no controversy, just urban legend:
Is it in doubt? no
How far back can we go? obviously not that far as the modern thermometer was only invented in the 1700s and location data was limited. BUT we can compare our very accurate measurements from the last 50 years at least, along with the accurate measurements for the 75 years before that, with other data to get an idea of the temperature even millions of years ago.

If you're saying we don't know the global temperature today you don't have any well qualified company in that camp. Mine as well say the earth is flat (there is a group for that!).

The focus on elimination CO2 is a pity. Fossil fuel power plants do far more harm in reducing air quailty. The bad air kills several million people a year where nuclear energy kills almost no one.

I mentioned phosphorus algae blooms because that's a man made disaster of releasing something beneficial to life into an eco system. See here:
Algae blooms
I realize you know what they are : )
"can remove oxygen from the water, occasionally killing fish."



Edited on 27-07-2019 05:39
27-07-2019 06:59
GasGuzzler
★★★★☆
(1323)
L8112 wrote:
Yet oddly no one seems to realize that methane has 60 x the effect co2 does


Not odd. No way to tax farts, so doomsday is only CO2 related. Dude, wake up.


I think people screw me over because they don't want to see someone willing to put out the effort that they won't.~James~
27-07-2019 14:34
tmiddles
★★★☆☆
(646)
GasGuzzler wrote:Dude, wake up.


Oh the GRAND CONSPIRACY! Such a tired old cop out.

Make an argument.

This is a debate.

If there IS a grand conspiracy then you can expose it.


Page 1 of 212>





Join the debate Hottest day on record (going back to 1880s) in Paris:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Alaska, July, hottest month every recorded...119-08-2019 07:13
record high temp in france7808-07-2019 06:18
Wind, solar, storage and back-up system designer1605-07-2019 05:18
Temperatures leap 40 degrees above normal as the Arctic Ocean and Greenland ice sheet see record June mel318-06-2019 06:22
Global warming back to medieval warm period will increase Russia population 4 fold128-05-2019 19:30
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2019 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact