In less then 36 years, most of Richmond, YVR, some of Surrey, Langley will be under water. Middle East to become uninhabitable.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

1 hour ago, RUPERTKBD said:

Have there? Maybe you could post one. The only thing I remember off the top of my head was that silly 2012, Mayan calendar thing.

 

BTW: There have been plenty of devastating weather events in the past decade. What exactly are you waiting for? Something apocalyptic?

Al Gores Oscar winning documentary "An Inconvenient truth" in 2006 claimed that the polar ice caps would be completely melted by 2016, polar bears would be extinct and the earth would be a frying pan.

 

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/2006-al-gore-does-sundance/2/

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/25/AR2006012502230.html

 

 

[Kragar]

3 minutes ago, RUPERTKBD said:

It's interesting, because even though I searched for the original article from UNEP, it doesn't seem to exist, even though there are dozens of right wing online "sources" similar to yours that claim it does.

 

What I did find was this:

There's more if you care to read it: http://www.coveredinbees.org/node/346

 

BTW: I disagree with your claim that we've had "worse" long before this decade, outside of possibly isolated occurrences. How many Hurricanes did New York state endure in past decades? 

This link, from UNEP, refers to that article.  That article further claims that there are millions were displaced by climate events and "sudden onset natural disasters", but people moving because of drought, earthquakes, fires, etc. is nothing new.  And, how many move back, once the event has passed?

 

People like to point out the CA drought supporting the theory, but the dust bowl in the 30's was much worse: http://www.livescience.com/48301-dust-bowl-drought.html

Quote

But the current drought is just a small fry compared with the one in 1934, which marked the start of a severe dry spell that spanned a decade, and eventually earned the name the Dust Bowl.

 

"What made 1934 really exceptional was, one, how intense it was, but also how widespread it was," Cook told Live Science. "Normally when we have droughts in the West, like we have now, they're very regional. [In 1934], you had extreme drought pretty much covering three-quarters of the western United States."

And... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_New_York_hurricanes lists 4 other Category 3 hurricanes to hit NY prior to Sandy, the most recent was 78 years ago.

[RUPERTKBD]

Just now, ForsbergTheGreat said:

Al Gores Oscar winning documentary "An Inconvenient truth" in 2006 claimed that the polar ice caps would be completely melted by 2016, polar bears would be extinct and the earth would be a frying pan.

 

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/2006-al-gore-does-sundance/2/

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/25/AR2006012502230.html

Nowhere in those articles does it say what you claim. It says that by 2016, unless steps are taken to reduce greenhouse gases, the earth will reach a point of no return.

Quote

And politicians and corporations have been ignoring the issue for decades, to the point that unless drastic measures to reduce greenhouse gases are taken within the next 10 years, the world will reach a point of no return, Gore said.

The other cataclysmic events you mention are worst case scenarios, if politicians continue to deny climate science, but are given no actual date, other than a reference of "a few decades".

Quote

If the pace of pollution continues, Gore's projections for carbon-dioxide levels are off the charts within a few decades.

 

[ForsbergTheGreat]

5 minutes ago, RUPERTKBD said:

Nowhere in those articles does it say what you claim. It says that by 2016, unless steps are taken to reduce greenhouse gases, the earth will reach a point of no return.

The other cataclysmic events you mention are worst case scenarios, if politicians continue to deny climate science, but are given no actual date, other than a reference of "a few decades".

 

It was in the documentary. He also stated it when he made his speech at sun dance.

 

 

[RUPERTKBD]

6 minutes ago, Kragar said:

This link, from UNEP, refers to that article.  That article further claims that there are millions were displaced by climate events and "sudden onset natural disasters", but people moving because of drought, earthquakes, fires, etc. is nothing new.  And, how many move back, once the event has passed?

 

People like to point out the CA drought supporting the theory, but the dust bowl in the 30's was much worse: http://www.livescience.com/48301-dust-bowl-drought.html

And... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_New_York_hurricanes lists 4 other Category 3 hurricanes to hit NY prior to Sandy, the most recent was 78 years ago.

I'm not sure what the new article is supposed to address. This conversation started with you claiming multiple inaccurate predictions of CC disaster by specific dates. You posted a source, which I refuted.

 

Are you going to defend your original source, or provide something new that supports your claim.

 

Also, the dust bowl and a 78 year old hurricane are not indications of a trend. These types up incidents are happening with increased frequency and those of us who accept Climate Change as real believe this increase to be caused by greenhouse gas emissions caused by human beings.

 

[RUPERTKBD]

9 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

It was in the documentary. He also stated it when he made his speech at sun dance.

To quote Roger Clemens, I think you "misheard". More likely he was referring to the "point of no return" that I mentioned in the previous post.

[John Tortorella]

Climate has been changing i agree but to think i am going to trust the weather man on a 35 yesr projection when they get the weather locally wrong on a daily by day basis you have another thing coming. 

 

 

Ps global warming is better then the alternative and is part of the cycle, if we were cooling we would cool exponentially faster and we would get ice aged. 

[RUPERTKBD]

1 minute ago, John Tortorella said:

Climate has been changing i agree but to think i am going to trust the weather man on a 35 yesr projection when they get the weather locally wrong on a daily by day basis you have another thing coming. 

 

 

Ps global warming is better then the alternative and is part of the cycle, if we were cooling we would cool exponentially faster and we would get ice aged. 

This shows an almost stunning lack of understanding of what Climate Change is all about.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

20 minutes ago, RUPERTKBD said:

To quote Roger Clemens, I think you "misheard". More likely he was referring to the "point of no return" that I mentioned in the previous post.

I don't know how your trying to defend this.  It's a pretty well known and easy to look up...He's made a number of bold claimed.  He's also made a ton of money in grants to promote his BS.

 

 

[RUPERTKBD]

4 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

I don't know how your trying to defend this.  It's a pretty well known and easy to look up...He's made a number of bold claimed.  He's also made a ton of money in grants to promote his BS.

 

 

First of all, he's quoting a scientist who says that "some of the models" suggest to him that "There is a 75% chance of the ice being completely melted, during some of the summer months in 5-7 years". He also mentions the year 2030 and says that he'll leave it to Dr. Maslowsky to make that projection.

 

Hardly the same thing as your statement that he said: "The polar ice caps would be melted", (He actually only mentioned the north pole, btw) "polar bears would be extinct" and "the earth would be a frying pan".

 

I don't know why you continue to attempt to put words in his mouth, if it's so "easy" to look up...

[Jimayo]

11 hours ago, SamJamIam said:

Ah yes, the CBC.  Truly the cornerstone of liberal agenda.

 

This is how sea level rise works in relation to temperature: exponentially not linearly. There is a positive feedback loop here.  CO2 increases temperature which releases methane (a much more potent greenhouse gas) from permafrost. 

The exponential curve doesn't go on forever but because of the feedback mechanism, the stockpile on greenhouse gases in permafrost must be exhausted before the loop ends.  This means sea level rise doesn't stop until about the 2500s, at which point sea level rise (in meters) will be in the mid-double digits.

 

It probably won't take that long.  The worst case scenario from the 2000's didn't expect that feedback cycle to start until 2050.  Then it started in 2012.  Things are happening much faster than even the worst case scenario's predicted they would.

[RUPERTKBD]

Lets forget for a minute about what people's opinions are. Here are some hard statistics:

 

Even without El Niño, July 2016 heat sets records

For the 15th month straight, global temperatures have set a new record. According to NASA, NOAA and the Japanese Meteorological Agency, July 2016 was not only the hottest July ever recorded, but it was the hottest month, of any month, of any year, going back 137 years.

• July 2016 came in at +0.87^oC (+1.57^oF) above the 20th century average according to NOAA, +0.83^oC (+1.49^oF)according to NASA, and +0.78^oC (+1.4^oF) according to the JMA 

[Jimayo]

2 hours ago, RUPERTKBD said:

Have there? Maybe you could post one. The only thing I remember off the top of my head was that silly 2012, Mayan calendar thing.

 

BTW: There have been plenty of devastating weather events in the past decade. What exactly are you waiting for? Something apocalyptic?

I'd bet 20 bucks he's thinking about y2k which just serves to illustrate his ignorance.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

20 minutes ago, RUPERTKBD said:

First of all, he's quoting a scientist who says that "some of the models" suggest to him that "There is a 75% chance of the ice being completely melted, during some of the summer months in 5-7 years". He also mentions the year 2030 and says that he'll leave it to Dr. Maslowsky to make that projection.

 

Hardly the same thing as your statement that he said: "The polar ice caps would be melted", (He actually only mentioned the north pole, btw) "polar bears would be extinct" and "the earth would be a frying pan".

 

I don't know why you continue to attempt to put words in his mouth, if it's so "easy" to look up...

Seriously, your still trying to defend him.  In order to defend the him you might have to watch the movie.

 

https://climatesanity.wordpress.com/criticisms-or-al-gores-an-inconvenient-truth/

 

http://www.theblaze.com/contributions/8-highly-inconvenient-facts-for-al-gore-10-years-after-his-infamous-movie/

 

 

[Jimayo]

6 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

Seriously, your still trying to defend him.  In order to defend the him you might have to watch the movie.

 

https://climatesanity.wordpress.com/criticisms-or-al-gores-an-inconvenient-truth/

 

 

[RUPERTKBD]

Just now, ForsbergTheGreat said:

Seriously, your still trying to defend him.  In order to defend the him you might have to watch the movie.

 

https://climatesanity.wordpress.com/criticisms-or-al-gores-an-inconvenient-truth/

 

What I'm doing is refuting your claims that he said Polar Bears will be extinct in 2010, among other things. Doing some digging on sites that deal with things other than right-wing propaganda, I found this:

 

Quote

 

Here’s the transcript of what Gore actually said about polar bears in his documentary, which was released in 2006:

Right now, the Arctic ice cap acts like a giant mirror, all the sun’s rays bounce off, more than 90%. It keeps the Earth cooler, but as it melts, and the open ocean receives that sun’s energy instead, more than 90% is absorbed, so there is a faster buildup of heat here, at the North Pole, in the Arctic Ocean, and the Arctic generally than anywhere else on the planet. That’s not good for creatures like polar bears, who depend on the ice. They’re now, actually, looking for other ecological niches. It is sad what’s going on in the Arctic ecosystem.

 

 

[ForsbergTheGreat]

6 minutes ago, Jimayo said:

In your case, drinking will probably help your intellect. 

[inane]

This thread lol

[Kragar]

1 hour ago, RUPERTKBD said:

I'm not sure what the new article is supposed to address. This conversation started with you claiming multiple inaccurate predictions of CC disaster by specific dates. You posted a source, which I refuted.

 

Are you going to defend your original source, or provide something new that supports your claim.

 

Also, the dust bowl and a 78 year old hurricane are not indications of a trend. These types up incidents are happening with increased frequency and those of us who accept Climate Change as real believe this increase to be caused by greenhouse gas emissions caused by human beings.

 

The point of the UNEP post still stands, as mentioned in the UNEP link I provided.  Some people had taken the UNEP information, got hysterical over it, and as a result the UNEP pulled their info.  While people get displaced because of natural events, the displacement is temporary, and there are hardly millions of climate refugees as were claimed by people based on UNEP information.  

 

Who is to say that the link in the OP is not more similar hysterics?

 

And i see you haven't successfully refuted Obama's hyperbole that I pointed out.

 

The wikipedia link shows 5 Category 3 hurricanes in New York.  Two were in the 1800's, two were in the first half of 1900's.  The last was Sandy in 2012.  You asked how many hurricanes NY had had in previous decades, and I answered.  If they had 4 category storms in 70 years, and 78 years later they had one, please help me see how they are getting more frequent or more drastic.

[clam linguine]

12 hours ago, SamJamIam said:

Ah yes, the CBC.  Truly the cornerstone of liberal agenda.

 

This is how sea level rise works in relation to temperature: exponentially not linearly. There is a positive feedback loop here.  CO2 increases temperature which releases methane (a much more potent greenhouse gas) from permafrost. 

The exponential curve doesn't go on forever but because of the feedback mechanism, the stockpile on greenhouse gases in permafrost must be exhausted before the loop ends.  This means sea level rise doesn't stop until about the 2500s, at which point sea level rise (in meters) will be in the mid-double digits.

I provided a no spin graph of historical sea level rise.  This one has spin all over it.  There is no evidence of exponential rise in sea levels yet.