"Effects of climate change could accelerate by mid-century" Topic

""While this research was applied to New Hampshire, the approach can be generally applied, and a number of things that people care about will worsen due to climate change," said Wilfred Wollheim, associate professor in the department of natural resources and the environment and one of the study's authors. "For example, right now the average number of snow days is 60 per year, but in 20 to 30 years the models show that the number of snow days could be as low as 18 days per year."

The research, published recently in the journal Ecology and Society, used models bench marked to field measurements to evaluate the Merrimack River watershed in New Hampshire. They found that along with a decrease in snow cover in the winter, other potential impacts could include up to 70 hot summer days per year with temperatures of 90 degrees or more by the end of century, a greater probability of flooding, a considerable loss of cold water fish habitat, and accelerated nitrogen inputs to coastal areas which could lead to eutrophication, an abnormal amount of nutrients which can pollute the water and deplete fish species. Researchers say that the biggest impact will be around urban areas, near where people live…"
Main page
link

Amicalement
Armand

Here we go again…..

That's the problem with predicting doomsday, when the day comes and goes you need to pick a new date.

"….predicting doomsday."

Really? The article makes no such claim (explicit or implicit). Or did you even bother to read the thing before making such a 'weighty' comment? Obviously NOT…

Or not.

I reread it with new eyes. You're right it says the winters will be warmer with less snow storms and the summers will be much more pleasant.

Lol.

But does this mean that in the near future there will be more articles about "global warming" (aka "climate change", "man-made weather", etc.) than now, or will we see less of them?

Dan

And constant hurricanes all year.
And mild winters isn't a good thing. Mild winters usually mean ice ice and more ice.

I reread it with new eyes.

Your reading comprehension was just as bad with the old eyes.

Maybe if I read one more time I can get back to doomsday.

Perhaps if there were more charts that would help.

YouTube link

The latest meeting of the climate change association.

As usual, the denier crowd has no hard facts to bring to the table. But lots of mindless snark. Just more white noise from the cheap seats…

Davoust for the win!

Oh, I forgot …

Remember Doggerland!

Dan
TMP link

Davoust for the win!

What did he win? Besides the admiration of those who think a Hee Haw skit is some sort of response to the research in the first link. That's hardly a win.

And seriously, "climate change association"?

Remember Doggerland

Remember Doggerel!, you mean.

I'm old enough that I've lived through several dooms days. I feel privileged!

Sorry boys, sometimes I forget what a humorless group religious fanatics are.

Now I'm off to pick a fight with a Quaker.

(smile)

Amicalement
Armand

Sorry boys, sometimes I forget what a humorless group religious fanatics are.

Ya, you're a riot.

And I see you didn't grasp anything mandt2 was trying to explain to you on the other thread. Typical.

So, according to this article in 10,000 years, even if "we let it rip" the sea level will only be 170 feet:

link

Not too bad when compared to the sea rise in the past 10,000 years.

And that means that, if I hurry, I can buy property in the Austin or the Texas "Hill Country" area cheap, and my descendants will have easy access to the beach! Lol

Dan
PS. Or, if they really feel nostalgic about the ice, someone could devise a way to make giant snow cone machines to rebuild the glaciers. Man-made glaciers to make up for "man-made" global warming sounds fair. And if Antarctica is turned into the ultimate summer (or should that be winter?) destination for the rich and famous, the money will be there to make that happen. :)

The damage will be more than just rising ocean levels. Think about it.

PS. Or, if they really feel nostalgic about the ice, someone could devise a way to make giant snow cone machines to rebuild the glaciers. Man-made glaciers to make up for "man-made" global warming sounds fair. And if Antarctica is turned into the ultimate summer (or should that be winter?) destination for the rich and famous, the money will be there to make that happen. :)

But why the obsession with using a single snapshot in time as the standard for Earth for all time?

Guys, isn't it all about survival of the fittest, the ones best able to adapt? Aren't you guys always looking for ways to remove the chaff from the (gluten-free) wheat? :)

So who are we (you) to stop struggle and change (natural or man-made), and to impede human evolution?

Dan

That is what they have been saying for nearly 30 years now.

I really doubt another 30 years will have anything different than what we have been having for the past 30 years.

That is what they have been saying for nearly 30 years now. I really doubt another 30 years will have anything different than what we have been having for the past 30 years.

Then you'd be wrong, again.

"Core samples, tide gauge readings, and, most recently, satellite measurements tell us that over the past century, the Global Mean Sea Level (GMSL) has risen by 4 to 8 inches (10 to 20 centimeters). However, the annual rate of rise over the past 20 years has been 0.13 inches (3.2 millimeters) a year, roughly twice the average speed of the preceding 80 years."

link

Aren't you the one saying this is all a world wide, country by country, government by government, scientific agency by scientifc agency, university by university conspiracy, with just the Koch Brothers and Exxon standing up for truth and the rights of the little guy?

Oh wait, Exxon seems to be changing their mind. Here is their current policy statement:

link

Oops…….add them to the conspiracy too. As an aside, an interesting Wiki account of the role Exxon Mobil played in both AGW research and simultaneously funding anti-AGW disinformation:

link

Then you'd be wrong, again.

Well we are going to have to wait until 2050 to see who is wrong.

Climate science didn't begin only a few years ago. Just because you personally were unaware of changing ocean levels over the last century, doesn't mean others weren't. Since you didn't bother reading the link, I'll summarize: Measurements of the ocean levels (specifically the GMSL) go back at least a century and show an increase. Not only that, but the rate of increase is accelerating.

So we don't have to wait till 2050 to see that you are wrong. We are at least a century in to know that.

Since you didn't bother reading the link, I'll summarize: Measurements of the ocean levels (specifically the GMSL) go back at least a century and show an increase.

Wow a whole 100 years, well when you can provide data that goes back 3000 years get back with me.

Oh and I did read that link I just don't buy into what they are trying to sell.

When you have someone who is trying to push an Agenda they will focus only on that and disregard anything that goes against the Agenda that they are pushing.

When you have someone who is trying to push an Agenda they will focus only on that and disregard anything that goes against the Agenda that they are pushing.

The projection and epistemic closure is strong with this one.

Do you think that footprints are a good proxy for the presence of animals?
Do you acknowledge that analogue barometers use relationship between air pressure and altitude as a proxy for the aircraft altitude, even if there's no physical measurement?

Wow a whole 100 years, well when you can provide data that goes back 3000 years get back with me.

What an incredibly asinine comment. It's been over 100 years that scientists have been measuring the ocean levels on a continuous basis. And how does studying something only for 100 years invalidate any scientific conclusions drawn from it? The study of viruses is only a bit over 100 years old. Does that make all virology meaningless because we don't have 3000 years of study behind it? Getting back to the oceans, there were no scientists measuring this directly 3000 years ago. For that we use proxy measurements.

You don't seem to get this. Martin and I tried to explain this to you previously. Remember the altimeter and pulse oximeter explanations?

Oh and I did read that link I just don't buy into what they are trying to sell.

Selling?

So you are saying that Nihar R. Samal, Wilfred M. Wollheim, Shan Zuidema, Robert J. Stewart, Zaixing Zhou, Madeleine M. Mineau, Mark E. Borsuk, Kevin H. Gardner, Stanley Glidden, Tao Huang, David A. Lutz, Georgia Mavrommati, Alexandra M. Thorn, Cameron P. Wake, Matthew Huber and the University of New Hampshire are lying? And if they are just mistaken, what qualifies you to make this assessment? Are the oceans not rising? How do you "know" whether they are, or not?

Here, is the actual paper. Feel free to tell us where they are lying, selling or in error.

link

The projection and epistemic closure is strong with this one.

Lol. I'd call it something else.

It's easier to curse the darkness than build a fire…

It's easier to curse the darkness than build a fire…

Ahh, Martin………when you have someone who is trying to push a "fire" Agenda they will focus only on that and disregard anything that goes against the Agenda that they are pushing.

(You know it's a world wide conspiracy when the word agenda is capitalized!)

Questions for the science deniers

1) is CO2 a greenhouse gas? ie does it trap heat
2) Are we producing more than we did before the industrial revolution?
2a) if so, what has happened to the extra?

Does that make all virology meaningless because we don't have 3000 years of study behind it? Getting back to the oceans, there were no scientists measuring this directly 3000 years ago. For that we use proxy measurements.

It does when you got the media claiming records.

link

link

Record Cold, Record Heat, Record Rainfall, Record Snowfall.

Well I would bet you everything that those are not the records and that it has been colder, hotter, wetter and with more snow in the past.

You don't seem to get this. Martin and I tried to explain this to you previously. Remember the altimeter and pulse oximeter explanations?

Oh I get it both of you are die hard Global Warmers/Climate Changers.

Thing is I am not and there has been nothing yet to prove any of your points.

You base you data on made up Proxy measurements instead of "Real" data.

(You know it's a world wide conspiracy when the word agenda is capitalized!)

No not world wide since this is an Agenda of a small group of Elite Individuals who want to control everyone else.

Record Cold, Record Heat, Record Rainfall, Record Snowfall.

Well I would bet you everything that those are not the records and that it has been colder, hotter, wetter and with more snow in the past.

That's why they say that it's a record in Recorded History… As far as I know, nobody is claiming those temperatures to be an ABSOLUTE record.

It would be like saying all current MLB pitchers are bums compared to Cy Young and other dead ball era pitchers… (hell, if you're interested in counting stats, the 90s pitchers are head and shoulders above the current crop, but the current pitching environment is so different as to make direct comparison of counting stats meaningless.

You base you data on made up Proxy measurements instead of "Real" data.

Are barometric Altimeters made up?

It does when you got the media claiming records.

Media is your proof?

Nice dodge. So you are on record as saying virology is meaningless because there is only 100 years of data on it? Luckily if you show up at the hospital with viral meningitis, or hepatitis B, the doctors will disagree with you and have a treatment ready.

Let's look at your first link about record cold temperatures. I know of this quite well as I am living in that area. But you make the same mistake that many deniers make when you conflate weather with climate.

The second link shows how much snow has fallen on Erie Pennsylvania. First off, snowfall is inversely proportional to temperature. The colder the air gets, the less humid the air is, the less moisture can be supported in the air, and the less snowfall will occur. That's why very cold places, like Antarctica, have very little snowfall. It's a desert. Secondly, Erie is due south from me. I live above (north of) Lake Erie, and the city of Erie is on the southern coast of the lake. Erie always gets more snow than were I live. It's called the "Lake Effect". Look into it before you link to these stories as proof against global warming.

Oh I get it both of you are die hard Global Warmers/Climate Changers.

Dodge noted again. Thanks for not even taking the time to address our points.

Thing is I am not and there has been nothing yet to prove any of your points.

I'm not a climate scientist. I don't have any "points" nor do I produce any research into AGW. But thousands of scientists do. Many, many research papers show that the GMSL is rising. You have made a conscious decision to choose to ignore it. Simple as that.

You base you data on made up Proxy measurements instead of "Real" data.

Well, you have to say one incredibly stupid thing with every post. This is it. Is a pulse oximeter made up?

You know, due to the plates moving apart on either side of the Mid Atlantic Ridge, the Atlantic Ocean is getting bigger to the tune of about 10 cm/year. Do you honestly expect them to do a direct measurement with a very, very long floating measuring tape? Or do they know this by triangulation of lasers mounted on GPS satellites?

Do you think that subatomic particles were originally discovered by directly observing through some sort of super magic microscope? Or were they determined to exist by observing reactions within cloud and later bubble chambers? Proxy measurements come to the rescue again. In fact, some very smart men won a lot of Nobel prizes for this detective work.

link

Snark away, I guess none of this is "real data".

When you have someone who is trying to push an Agenda they will focus only on that and disregard anything that goes against the Agenda that they are pushing.

Which pretty much states YOUR position. Like most of the Denier crowd, you steadfastly reject the science in favor of some anti-AGW agenda. Whose pushing the "Agenda" now?

No not world wide since this is an Agenda of a small group of Elite Individuals who want to control everyone else.

And now we circle back to your favorite conspiracy rant. Do tell, who's behind this 'dark conspiracy'? The Illuminati? International Banking Conspiracy? Or the New World Order? Do tell us, please! Just who are these mysterious souls? More like the fevered ravings of the worst internet conspiracy hacks….

Perhaps it could be David Icke's Babylonian Brotherhood, a group of shapeshifting reptilian humanoids who are propelling humanity toward a global fascist state, or New World Order. The reptilians use the rings of Saturn and the Moon, all reptilian constructs, to broadcast our "five-sense prison": an "artificial sense of self and the world" that humans perceive as reality.

link

Needless to say, Icke is also an AGW denier

link

OMG! If ever there was a loonies looney, its Icke. He's so far out there, I swear he's about to hit the event horizon… He makes the geocentrists and flatearthers look positively rational..

David Icke is a perfectly level headed chap. Nothing wrong with him. Now the alien that has taken over his body trying to false flag that aliens are reptiles (when everybody knows aliens look like kangaroos), now he isn't quite right.

The aliens are raising the temp because they're terraforming Earth into a HOT planet.

Or … maybe they like it COLD so they want us all to believe that we need to stop a natural post-Ice Age warming cycle. They can't take the heat, so they want us to cool the planet for them before they take over. Makes perfect sense to me.

Either way, there are aliens involved in there somewhere.

Dan

The aliens are raising the temp because they're terraforming the planet.

Dan, that's the plot line from one of my favourite sci-fi movies of the 90's. Starring Charlie Sheen no less……..when he was still normal. The writer/director later went on to Pitch Black and the Riddick movies

link

Of course, he also wrote Waterworld.

Simultaneously hilarious and worrying at the same time.

" In a 2013 survey in the United States by Public Policy Polling, 4% believed that "'lizard people' control our societies."

Conspiracy Theory Poll Results", Public Policy Polling, 2 April 2013

Olga Oksman, "Conspiracy craze: why 12 million Americans believe alien lizards rule us", The Guardian, 7 April 2016.

Ben Guarino, "‘I am not a lizard': Mark Zuckerberg is latest celebrity asked about reptilian conspiracy", The Washington Post, 15 June 2016.

Dan, are there some Sci-Fi scenarios/ideas here?

You know, due to the plates moving apart on either side of the Mid Atlantic Ridge, the Atlantic Ocean is getting bigger to the tune of about 10 cm/year. Do you honestly expect them to do a direct measurement with a very, very long floating measuring tape? Or do they know this by triangulation of lasers mounted on GPS satellites?

Oh you forgot about the fact that we are not in the same position in the Milky Way as we were 100 years ago, 1000 years ago.

Just like we circle the Sun both the Sun and our Solar System is moving in the Milky Way.

But you are so sure about something using a very small set of data.

You really have no clue about what is happening but you are sure that the Coastal cities will be under water in 30 – 100 years.

Oh you forgot about the fact that we are not in the same position in the Milky Way as we were 100 years ago, 1000 years ago.

I certainly did not forget that. I also know that the fact that we are moving around the galaxy has nothing to do with the quote that you highlighted.

Just like we circle the Sun both the Sun and our Solar System is moving in the Milky Way

Thanks. I knew that too. Again, this has nothing to do with my quote that you thought to highlight.

My quote, since you clearly missed the point, was that proxied information and knowledge plays just as important a role in science as direct measured data does. We don't have direct measurements of our distance from the Sun. There is no tape measure that big. So we use proxy data, in this case parallax and trigonometry. That is why I mentioned the Mid Atlantic Ridge and bubble chambers. You have stated that this is not "real data". This is why Martin and I ask you about the validity of altimeters and pulse oximeters. Questions that you have yet to answer.

You really have no clue about what is happening but you are sure that the Coastal cities will be under water in 30 – 100 years.

Neither you and I are climate scientists. We are both laymen. What I am sure about is that the people who study ocean levels have been collecting data, going back at least 100 years, which all indicate that the levels are rising. In fact, their data is good enough to show that the increase is accelerating. They have a clue and I can read their research. You think they are lying and part of a world wide conspiracy. Occam's Razor is on my side.

Again, that data set for ocean measurements is as mature as our understanding of virology, sub-atomic physics, DNA and genetics, solid state electronics and other science that is younger than 100 years old. You can do all the hand waving, blanket negating and denial you want, but the evidence shows you are wrong.

Well,as Mithmee ignores what I write, because I'm just an (unpaid) AGW shill, perhaps he will listen to President Trump and the Pentagon.

About 3 weeks ago, the POTUS signed the National Defense Authorization Act, into law.

"The language recognizes previous statements by Secretary of Defense James Mattis on climate change, including:‘‘It is appropriate for the Combatant Commands to incorporate drivers of instability that impact the security environment in their areas into their planning.''

And

‘‘I agree that the effects of a changing climate — such as increased maritime access to the Arctic, rising sea levels, desertification, among others — impact our security situation.''

These quotes are at the start of Section 335 of the NDAA, entitled "Report on Effects of Climate Change on the Department of Defense." See starting Page 75 of the 740 page Act.

PDF link

While Mithmee thinks this is all "false data" and a conspiracy, apparently the Pentagon doesn't agree. Section 335 is only 2 pages long, and is an interesting read. For instance, on page 77 we find:

"A list of the ten most vulnerable military installations
within each service based on the effects of rising
sea tides, increased flooding, drought, desertification,
wildfires, thawing permafrost, and any other categories
the Secretary determines necessary."

Someone should warn the Pentagon about the "very small set of data".

proxied information

Is not real data/information

So we use proxy data,

I know

The thing is that due to the movement of the plates and our movement in the Milky Way things are changing but not for what you or those scientists think is the cause.

They got off of the Global Warming train (since they couldn't prove it) and now call it "Climate Change".

The Governor of Washington has for the past several years blame quite a few things on "Climate Change" even though there is no proof.

But to him and many others it is only important to state it and others will become true believers.

Sorry but I am not a true believer and can see that either the climate or weather is changing.

Oh and I doubt that those scientists are recording ocean levels around the world so they instead use, Proxy data/information.

but the evidence shows you are wrong

No it doesn't since when you use "Proxy Data/information" and have certain Groups/Individuals writing the reports to show just their bias views/points.

They want to shock individuals by using Statistical data that has been developed from "Proxy data/information".

How about this we wait 30 years and if New York City is under water they are right and if it is not…

Then they were wrong and I was right.

Time will be the judge not bias individuals with Agendas to push.

The thing is that due to the movement of the plates and our movement in the Milky Way things are changing but not for what you or those scientists think is the cause.

I have no idea WHAT you're referring to here….

proxied information
Is not real data/information

I think you'd be stunned by how much proxied information gathering is used in your day-to-day living. Especially in medicine.

No it doesn't since when you use "Proxy Data/information" and have certain Groups/Individuals writing the reports to show just their bias views/points.

And back to your favorite conspiracy rant… Too predictable by half…

Well it is articles like this one that shows just what they are pushing.

link

With things like:

Unforgiving Cold

Monster Storm

Bomb Cyclone

Mother Lode

Brutal Blasts

Yup they are really pushing it with this article, if you believe them than this has to be the worst storm ever to hit the Eastern Sea area.

Its not but to many it will be.

I'm sorry Mithmee, but it is painfully clear from your responses that you are not actually following the conversation. This is a good example:

The thing is that due to the movement of the plates and our movement in the Milky Way things are changing but not for what you or those scientists think is the cause.

You are bringing in plate tectonics and our flying around the Milky Way as an explanation of changes on the Earth such as global warming?

If you were actually following the conversation, I brought up the measurement of plate movements as a form of proxy data acquisition. Try to see the distinction.

Also you are quite ignorant of what goes on in science. To whit:

The Governor of Washington has for the past several years blame quite a few things on "Climate Change" even though there is no proof.

There is no "proof" in science. That only exists in mathematics. There is the weight of evidence, however. An example of a research paper is above (just one of hundreds). Besides just giving us a blanket denial, how about critiquing the paper?

or

Is not real data/information

Yes it is. Martin and I explained this to you. An analogue altimeter does not measure altitude, but proxies it by measuring changes in local air pressure. A pulse oximeter does not actually measure the oxygen content of your blood, but proxies it by measuring absorption of light through the tissue. We have asked you repeatedly (on two different threads) if the readings from these instruments give real data/information. Crickets.

Well it is articles like this one…….

Headlines from MSN are your evidence of "pushing an Agenda"? Looking through this thread, you have an unhealthy preoccupation with what the press says. That is not science.

How about this we wait 30 years and if New York City is under water they are right and if it is not…

I think you need more straw for that argument. The only person saying "New York city is under water" is you. And as for the Pentagon's concerns……more crickets.

Oh and I doubt that those scientists are recording ocean levels around the world so they instead use, Proxy data/information.

Well then you'd be wrong, once again. I see you didn't read the research paper I linked to. It looks like they do direct measurements of the water levels plus remote sensing. The observations also jive with the predictive models that they employed. "The research, published recently in the journal Ecology and Society, used models bench marked to field measurements to evaluate the Merrimack River watershed in New Hampshire." Note the highlighted area.

……that shows just what they are pushing.

I'm sorry, who is "they" again? I'm making my new