Congress to slash funding for Global Warming research at NASA

The Chevron doctrine is actually what keeps bureaucracy in check.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Wrong again.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

If the outlay and economic impact can't even guarantee any significant, positive outcome, it's just a waste.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

No scientific research program can guarantee its outcome - any outcome.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

So because they can't be certain they can fix it, they shouldn't even try... Yeah, cause doing nothing makes sense...

 

Well that makes sense doesn't it? If that were so, we would all be hunter gathers to this day with an average life expectancy of between 15 and 30 years. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...Grandparents-rare-breed-30-000-years-ago.html

That's not how science works comrade.

 

If the outcome is known in advance of the experiment/study, then :It ain't science!

 

I haven't seen any credible predictions that assert they can even make a moderate dent...especially without plunging the whole world into poverty. So yes, doing nothing is preferred to the cost in human life and happiness. If anyone ever comes up with a viable plan, then we can weigh the cost/benefits. Until then, it's all just a pipe dream.

 

...
https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

So, I think we can safely say it's A) Proven that humans have had an impact in climate change and that B) greenhouse gasses are a large part of it.

Thus, it would stand to reason that one of the best, and simplest, ways to, if nothing else, slow climate change would be to reduce greenhouse gas emissions...

So - viable plan - REDUCE GREENHOUSE GASSES.

https://climate.nasa.gov/solutions/adaptation-mitigation/

So... what is your major malfunction with this, Syne? You do understand that this is a rapidly accelerating runaway train - case in point, in the arctic areas, as the bright white sea ice continues to recede, more and more heat will be absorbed by the water, which results in a faster increase in overall heating, resulting in a faster decline in sea ice, resulting in more heat being absorbed, etc... certainly you can figure out the obvious problem there?

Meanwhile, Trump and his Cronies actively DENY that Climate Change has a manmade component at all:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/06/...climate-change-these-kids-die-of-it.html?_r=0

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/408977616926830592?ref_src=twsrc^tfw

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/265895292191248385?ref_src=twsrc^tfw

So... Tell me Syne... what are we to think of Trump and his cronies, hm? It's pretty evidence they are either utterly and blissfully ignorant of the evidence and the truth (which is a hard pill to swallow) OR they dont' give a good rats ass as they know they can PROFIT and will be dead long before the final effects are ours to deal with... ergo, they dont' give a FUCK about the next generation so long as they get to live like kings...

 

How? At what cost? To what effect?
A plan means having details we can compare to real world metrics.
The only plans I've seen require more than the world's GPD to merely slow the effects.

 

So pay better attention - your failure to see stuff is hardly an argument for anything.

Doing nothing is not a viable plan - it's not even a possibility: we don't get to do nothing, because it's an incoming something. Like falling out of a boat - you're might be sinking or swimming or floating in your life jacket, but you won't be sitting in a boat that isn't there.

Best find someplace to get your numbers from that hasn't been lying to you for the past twenty years about the warming in the first place.

 

I understand that I am old

Not old enough to remember the last ice age from personally being there though

However I did read a few articles about it

All of the articles were written by people who were also not personally present

They did say the Earth warmed up

Seems like it cycled a few times hot/cold without humans being present

Probably why not one of the articles mentioned man made activity causing the warming

The global warming seems to have morphed into climate change

Apart from the Sun warming our bed of roses Earth what other source of energy heats our planet?

Oh that's right the Greenhouse effect

OK hands up all those who have seen a melted greenhouse

No one?

Anybody care to say why?

OK here is why

The greenhouse will rise in temperature only to a certain level where the energy being applied is equal to the energy being radiated out

The Sun's input is reasonably steady

The greenhouse effect causes some warming

But the warming is counter balanced by the energy radiated out into space from the upper atmosphere

I haven't seen any studies which comment on the balance temperature point or why fluctuations occurred in the past with no humans being around to blame

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Problem is, as we increase the level of greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere, the planet warms up. As the planet continues to warm up, we risk additional greenhouse gasses being released:

https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2381/methane-emissions-in-arctic-cold-season-higher-than-expected/

Basically, as the permafrost thaws, more methane is released, which raises the temperature, which increases the methane release.

We cannot afford to not take action... because if we wait too long, we will be locked into an irreversible trend that ends with large areas of land (land that is heavily populated) flooded...

 

Please source this claim, as I have not seen a SINGLE plan that is out of reach for individual nations, so long as they are willing to put corporate greed aside.

 

Sure, just as soon as you source your claim that there is a "viable plan" that is not "out of reach for individual nations".

 

The Earth warms up, sea and land

The atmosphere warms up

More heat escapes into space

Any idea of the maximum balance temperature of the average from

• Earth land plus
• Earth sea plus
• Earth atmosphere

before the heat being radiated out stops?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Wrong answer... and not how this works.... you made the claim that it was out of reach for the GDP of the world - now support that claim. You have been warned.

 

Do I have an idea of that? No - I don't think the heat will ever stop being radiated out entirely. However, there is plenty of evidence that it has increased beyond historical maximums.

https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/carbon-dioxide/

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

You made that claim of a "viable plan" first. So you need to support your own claim first.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

EDIT: And why are you PMing me when it won't let me reply?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Thanks for the info and the chart indicating CO² levels

I'll take them at face value

I'll keep looking for the tipping temperature

Cheers

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

The change in vocabulary was largely the result of Frank Luntz's advice to Republicans and the rightwing media - he recommended using "climate change" because it sounded less alarming. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2003/mar/04/usnews.climatechange
As for past warmings, there have been many. They were all, except for the aftermath of giant meteor strikes, much slower. Even so, a couple of them are associated with major waves of extinction.

Yeah - you can read about that in every single IPCC summary report. It's a routine part of the analysis.

It doesn't have much to do with the problem of global warming, though - the eventual equilibrium temperature is not the worry. The worry is the rate of increase. The closest we have in the geological record is about 1/10 the current rate of increase, and even that rate seems to have caused extinctions. Meanwhile, we have good reason to fear that the rate of increase will itself increase in the near future - when the sea ice in the Arctic is knocked back beyond a certain currently unknown point. Imagine heating a pan of water with ice cubes floating in it - until the ice is melted, the temperature will not increase very fast. As soon as the ice is gone, the temperature will rapidly spike high.

And there have been ocean acidifications in the past, also - again: slower, even slower often causing extinctions and other major changes.