• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

What World Under Climate Change

Forums New posts

Free episodes:

Before we start everyone needs to understand that the very foundation of the global warming/climate change hypothesis is that human produced CO2 is catastrophically warming the planet. And because of this HUMAN produced CO2 NOT the NATURALLY produced CO2 from mother earth we need to create global policies and taxes to save the planet. THIS is the very foundation of the CAGW movement. (Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming) SO.. Tyger needs to show how much HUMAN generated CO2 has warmed the planet since the industrial revolution and how much a doubling of HUMAN CO2 would FURTHER warm the planet.
Ok tyger, in order to make your case you really must answer these questions:
  • how much human CO2 is present
  • how much natural CO2 is present
  • what is the minimum amount plant life requires to survive
  • what was the CO2 ppm before the industrial age
  • what is it now
  • how much warming has occurred to date since the industrial age
 
So there you have it. Tyger "has no interest" in debating his propaganda. This is typical of a political belief system. He is non scientific.
 
pixelsmith said:
Ok tyger, in order to make your case you really must answer these questions:
  • how much human CO2 is present
  • how much natural CO2 is present
  • what is the minimum amount plant life requires to survive
  • what was the CO2 ppm before the industrial age
  • what is it now
  • how much warming has occurred to date since the industrial age
Click to expand...

Tiresome. No, I do not have to answer the questions. What you need to do, is start getting a science education and expand your reading. It is not my job to educate you. I don't have the time. Got that? Probably not. Besides which, the answer to all your questions is out there on the world-wide-web. Start doing some intellectual heavy lifting. Think for yourself instead of parroting the canned message. Find someone who wants to talk with you. I don't.
 
Pixel, this subject has been debated over and over again. It's a discussion about the world under climate change, not a discussion as to whether you believe in climate change. Move elsewhere please or be relevant.
 
pixelsmith said:
So there you have it. Tyger "has no interest" in debating his propaganda. This is typical of a political belief system. He is non scientific.
Click to expand...

That's correct - no interest - not with you. My interest is to look at what is happening and how it is being reported. Full stop.

Here is evidence in spades that you just don't get it. Science is not political, nor is it propaganda. When science drives public policy it is political - and I think that's your issue. Debate that, because you are clueless when it comes to how science works. You actually are embarrassing yourself. You do it routinely when you engage the science. No one will debate you for a reason.
 
Ok I get it, you are unable to debate. got it. I dare you to come to the thread that ALLOWS debate.

That said, I will play nice here..

Climate change is always happening, it has to, it gets warm it gets cold. It is how all life evolves. Do we agree?
 
Lets follow your rules and talk about how it is reported then.. should we start with Al Gore and Michael Mann?
 
Note To Readers of this Thread -

This thread is called 'What World Under Climate Change'.

Pixel has just started a new thread called 'The World Under Climate Change.'

I think it's funny. Go figure. But be aware of the minor difference. :rolleyes:
 
From Australia -

A New Website Shows How Global Warming Could Change Your Town
April 9, 2015 | by Leanne Webb and Penny Whetton
LINK: A New Website Shows How Global Warming Could Change Your Town | IFLScience

TEXT: "What will Australia look like in 2050? Even if we significantly reduce our greenhouse gas emissions as under an intermediate scenario, Melbourne’s annual average climate could look more like that of Adelaide’s, and Adelaide’s climate could be more like that of Griffith in New South Wales.

"These changes are captured in a new Climate Analogues tool released by CSIRO today. It’s not just capital cities – you can find climate analogues for more than 400 towns around Australia, under various climate scenarios.

"Eastern Australian coastal sites could see a climate shift to those currently typical of locations hundreds of kilometres north along the coast. Sydney’s climate could resemble that of Port Macquarie, and Coffs Harbour’s climate resembling that of the Gold Coast (by 2050; intermediate emissions).

"Towns in major inland agricultural areas could have climates typical of inland areas further north, such as Griffith’s climate shifting to that of Cobar, a town around 300 km north (by 2050; intermediate emissions).

"The change in climate is much greater by 2090 and under a high emissions scenario. In this case Melbourne’s climate could then be more like that of Dubbo, Griffith’s more like that of Bourke (600 km away), Sydney’s more like Brisbane, and Coffs Harbour’s could be like Mackay.

"Australia’s Climate Future
"In January this year CSIRO and the Bureau of Meteorology released updated projections for Australia’s climate in the 21st century. All regions in Australia are expected to get warmer with, in general, inland regions warming at faster rates than the coast.

"By 2030, Australian annual average temperature is projected to increase by 0.6-1.3C above the climate of 1986-2005 with little difference between emissions scenarios.

"By 2050, the warming is around 0.7-2.1C for low emissions, 1.0-2.5C for intermediate emissions, and 1.5-3.0C for high emissions (the ranges expressed here indicate results from different model simulations).

"By 2090, Australian average temperature is projected to increase by 0.6 to 1.7C for low emissions, 1.4-2.7C for intermediate emissions, and 2.8 to 5.1C for high emissions.

"Projections for rainfall vary across the Australian continent, where southern areas are expected to get drier, while for northern areas rainfall may increase, decrease or remain the same in future. The magnitude of rainfall change is larger later in the century and for high emissions.

"What Will Your Town’s Climate Be Like?
"One way of showing this change is by using climate “analogues”. These are places that currently experience the climate another place will see in the future.

"Using analogues we can explore questions such as “What will the future climate of Melbourne be like in the year 2050 under a high emissions scenario?” or “What will Perth be like in a climate that’s 2C warmer and 10% drier?”.

"These analogues are built on the most up-to-date set of climate projections for Australia, and use the approach we developed for a previous discussion about Australia’s future climate.

"To find analogues, we first need to specify what climate scenario we’re looking at. In the tool these scenarios include:three time periods (2030, 2050, or 2090); emissions scenarios (low, intermediate, or high); differing regional results from global climate models (best or “least hot and wettest”, worst or “hottest and driest”, and most likely or “maximum consensus” of models).

"Alternatively we can specify an amount of temperature and rainfall change, regardless of year, emissions or climate model results, and let the website generate matching towns.

"The website then finds a matching town based on average rainfall and average maximum temperature.

"For example, in 2090, under high emissions and maximum model consensus, Melbourne’s future climate matches the current climate in Dubbo, Muswellbrook or Cowra in NSW, Warwick (Qld.), or Gawler (SA) for the climatic characteristics considered by the tool.

"Watch Out For The Seasonal Rains
"This simple approach to analogues works well with current and future climates which are broadly similar in annual maximum temperature and rainfall distribution. However, it is less appropriate when rain at the different locations falls at different times of the year.

"For example, by only considering annual rainfall totals, the Sydney climate could match that of current day Perth by 2090 under an intermediate emissions scenario and the hottest and driest case.

"However, unlike Sydney, Perth gets most of its rainfall in winter, so it doesn’t make a good match for Sydney. By using the climate analogues' “rainfall seasonality” adjustment we can set how much rain falls in the summer.

"Similarly, temperature varies with the seasons in different ways for different places, due to differences in latitude and proximity to the coast. So we can set how much temperature varies between summer and winter.

"For instance, Bendigo is an analogue town for Hobart in 2090 under a high emissions scenario (4C warmer and 10% drier), but Hobart is on the water, while Bendigo is inland. A better analogue may therefore be Port Lincoln (SA).

"Climate analogues can be useful for a number of purposes: agriculture, urban planning, or natural resource management. However there are some things that they can’t tell us: frost days, solar radiation, soils and other local climate influences. They can help us start to imagine what the future can look like, but we’d strongly caution against their direct use in decision-making where a more detailed assessment is advised.

"This article was co-authored by Tim Bedin, former Technical Scientist at CSIRO.

"This article is the first in a short series on climate change in Australia, coinciding with the release of new climate websites by CSIRO."​
 
Constance said:
This might have been posted here. If not, it seems relevant to the thread in terms of earth changes.

"Earth has shifted"-Inuit elders issue warning to NASA and the world - Indian Life Newspaper
Click to expand...

I'd seen that, Constance. I've read that some think they are describing the axial shift that happened with the Japanese earthquake - one idea, anyway.

As quoted in post#96 of this thread, regarding the loss of the Arctic ice cap and the apparent shifting of the Jet Stream: "What's happening--and I know this from first-hand experience from Arctic Alaska, that many human communities, indigenous communities, are now being forced to relocate. One example is, of course, Kivalina. Because of the reduced sea ice extent, you have more open water, more coastal erosion, combined with storms, as well as melting of the permafrost. These are all connected, happening."
 
Last edited:
Back
Top