US coasts sea level rise 10 to 12 inches by 2050

[AllenRbrts]

Originally Posted by StuM

ALL land based animals. WIthou plants, none of them will survive since all land based animals either use plants for food or rely on other animals that use plants for food.
If CO2 were to drop below 150ppm all land based plants would die and consequently so would all land bsed animals.

It would also be very cold and dry.

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by StuM

ALL land based animals. WIthou plants, none of them will survive since all land based animals either use plants for food or rely on other animals that use plants for food.
If CO2 were to drop below 150ppm all land based plants would die and consequently so would all land bsed animals.

CO2 levels have never dropped to 150 ppm in Earth's history. Talk about alarmism.

[StuM]

Originally Posted by jackdale

CO2 levels have never dropped to 150 ppm in Earth's history. Talk about alarmism.

They will do eventually


Just the facts, ma'am.

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by StuM

They will do eventually


Just the facts, ma'am.

They never have. That is a fact.

Check out the Antarctic ice cores. That is what natural cycles look like.



They do not look like this.

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by AllenRbrts

It would also be very cold and dry.

Yep. Nothing to hold the heat energy and no driver for H2O amplification.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by jackdale

They never have. That is a fact.

Check out the Antarctic ice cores. That is what natural cycles look like.



They do not look like this.

What a bunch of hookum and fear porn in that second chart .
We will be a lot colder by 2100 but I won't be here to see it . Doubt I last much after 2065

[jackdale]

What astrophysicists say about cooling.

Ineson, S., Maycock, A., Gray, L. et al. Regional climate impacts of a possible future grand solar minimum. Nat Commun 6, 7535 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms8535

Any reduction in global mean near-surface temperature due to a future decline in solar activity is likely to be a small fraction of projected anthropogenic warming.

[seandepagnier]

Global dimming from aerosol pollution has reduced solar radiation by approximately 10%. This is less energy available for plants, and a significant factor in canceling the warming effect, but the effect is temporary unlike co2. If industrial pollution were to cease the temperatures would soar.

The suggestion to put satellites to block the sun may be a bad idea, but it won't stop some from attempting it. Further many billionares may sponsor programs to release particles from jet aircraft into the upper atmosphere to produce similar effects to volcanic eruptions similarly decreasing the available energy for photosynthesis.

Further exploits include dumping iron ore into the oceans to "fertilize" plankton, and pumping melt water from under glaciers during winter spraying it on the surface to refreeze it.

We should be careful to consider the overall effects due to unpredictable possible results such geoengineering experiments could easily do more harm than good. It won't stop people from trying anyway, and if they do fail and cause more harm will absolve themselves of any guilt simply because they tried to cancel the effects rather than the obvious solution of curbing emissions which to many is "unreasonable" because they might have to change their lifestyle which as may on this forum simply refuse to consider.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by seandepagnier

Global dimming from aerosol pollution has reduced solar radiation by approximately 10%. This is less energy available for plants, and a significant factor in canceling the warming effect, but the effect is temporary unlike co2. If industrial pollution were to cease the temperatures would soar.

The suggestion to put satellites to block the sun may be a bad idea, but it won't stop some from attempting it. Further many billionares may sponsor programs to release particles from jet aircraft into the upper atmosphere to produce similar effects to volcanic eruptions similarly decreasing the available energy for photosynthesis.



We should be careful to consider the overall effects due to unpredictable possible results such geoengineering experiments could easily do more harm than good. It won't stop people from trying anyway, and if they do fail and cause more harm will absolve themselves of any guilt simply because they tried to cancel the effects rather than the obvious solution of curbing emissions which to many is "unreasonable" because they might have to change their lifestyle which as may on this forum simply refuse to consider.

I have one word to explain my opinion about all that stupidity.

SNOWPIERCER. Movie and series.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by jackdale

What astrophysicists say about cooling.

Ineson, S., Maycock, A., Gray, L. et al. Regional climate impacts of a possible future grand solar minimum. Nat Commun 6, 7535 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms8535

Ok so who is the astrophysicist in the bunch?

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by newhaul

His [M. E. Mann] PhD is in geology. But my point is you can be knowledgeable in subjects that are not your doctoral specialty ...

Dr. Michael E. Mann received his undergraduate degrees in Physics, and Applied Math [University of California at Berkeley], an M.S. degree in Physics [Yale University], and a Ph.D. in Geology & Geophysics [Yale University].


Mann's career has been spent studying [& publishing] various aspects of climate.

He is is author of more than 200 peer-reviewed scientific publications, in areas of research, that include: reconstruction of past climate using climate paleoclimate proxy data, and model/data comparisons, aimed at understanding the long-term behavior of the climate system, and its relationship with possible external (including anthropogenic) forcings of climate. Other areas of active research include simulation of climate, using theoretical models, development of statistical methods, for climate signal detection, and investigations of the response of geophysical and ecological systems, to climate variability and climate change scenarios.
In short, he's a climatologist.

[seandepagnier]

the true reason why we do not detect extra terrestrial life is the amount of time technology is sufficient to do is not very long until the civilization destroys itself through extinction so the probability of is just extremely low, and even if we did detect some radio waves, whatever sent it would be long extinct by the time we received it.

[GordMay]

The Summary for Policymakers of the IPCC Working Group II report*, Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability was approved on Sunday, February 27 2022, by 195 member governments of the IPCC, through a virtual approval session that was held over two weeks starting on February 14.

Chapter 4 assesses current climate change impacts on the global water cycle, projected water-related risks for human and natural systems, and adaptation options and effectiveness.

Chapter 4: Water ➥ https://report.ipcc.ch/ar6wg2/pdf/IP..._Chapter04.pdf

* ➥ https://www.cruisersforum.com/forums...ml#post3583848

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by GordMay

Dr. Michael E. Mann received his undergraduate degrees in Physics, and Applied Math [University of California at Berkeley], an M.S. degree in Physics [Yale University], and a Ph.D. in Geology & Geophysics [Yale University].


Mann's career has been spent studying [& publishing] various aspects of climate.

He is is author of more than 200 peer-reviewed scientific publications, in areas of research, that include: reconstruction of past climate using climate paleoclimate proxy data, and model/data comparisons, aimed at understanding the long-term behavior of the climate system, and its relationship with possible external (including anthropogenic) forcings of climate. Other areas of active research include simulation of climate, using theoretical models, development of statistical methods, for climate signal detection, and investigations of the response of geophysical and ecological systems, to climate variability and climate change scenarios.
In short, he's a climatologist.

He is a geologist.
What is his PhD in?
What was his thesis in ? Who did he submit it to ? Who got his work to verify his findings?

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by seandepagnier

the true reason why we do not detect extra terrestrial life is the amount of time technology is sufficient to do is not very long until the civilization destroys itself through extinction so the probability of is just extremely low, and even if we did detect some radio waves, whatever sent it would be long extinct by the time we received it.

We have found extraterrestrial life already.
Now we just need to find intelligent life .