I want to sue the republican party for willful denial of scientific evidence about climate change.

[Skins24]

There is no evidence that this is true. There is no reason that the planet can't and shouldn't maintain a relatively constant temperature currently (obviously there is going to be variation), especially in the context of decades.

The cycles that cause glaciation are very slow and you need centuries to observer their affects, and we aren't really in the middle of a change in a cycle anyway.

But even if you were, on the level of decades, climate could at least appear as a random walk.

Earth's climate has never remained constant nor is there evidence it can. Sure she can maintain a certain temperature for a few decades, but that is not "climate"...

[PeterMP]

It never has stayed constant, we are simply arguing rate of change.

 

The earth and company can change that rate much faster than man.

There have been long periods of time where there has been no significant change in the context of the current change that is/has happened.

 

How?

Edited March 20, 2015 by PeterMP

[PeterMP]

Earth's climate has never remained constant nor is there evidence it can. Sure she can maintain a certain temperature for a few decades, but that is not "climate"...

The standard working definition is actually a few decades (like about 30 years).

 

If you want to claim that climate is a few centuries, then you might be right.

 

But there are a whole lot of people out there when they talk about climate, they talk about the conditions for a few decades.

[Mad Mike]

Florida employee 'punished for using phrase climate change' | Environment | The Guardian

 

 

An employee of Florida’s environmental protection department was forced to take a leave of absence and seek a mental health evaluation for violating governor Rick Scott’s unwritten ban on using the phrases “climate change” or “global warming” under any circumstance, according to a complaint filed against the state.

 

 

 

Bibler was instructed to stay away from the office for two days and told he could return to work only after a mental health evaluation from his doctor verified his “fitness for duty”, the complaint said. In the letter to Florida’s inspector general, Candie Fuller, the state’s Peer director calls for a full investigation to the matter.

 

A mental health evaluation? Are you friggin kidding me? 

 

Here's the written reprimand

 

‎www.peer.org/assets/docs/fl/3_18_19_Reprimand.pdf

 

And here are the notes on the meeting in question....

 

https://coast.noaa.gov/czm/enhancement/media/fl3092011.pdf

 

 

 

Section 309 Enhancement Objective

Prevent or significantly reduce threats to life and property by eliminating development and redevelopment in high-hazard areas, managing development in other hazard areas, and anticipating and managing the effects of potential sea level rise and Great Lakes level change

Resource Characterization

Purpose: To determine the extent to which problems and opportunities exist with regard to the enhancement objective.

1. Characterize the level of risk in the coastal zone from the following coastal hazards: (Risk is defined as “the estimated impact that a hazard would have on people, services, facilities and structures in a community; the likelihood of a hazard event resulting in an adverse condition that causes injury or damage.” Understanding Your Risks: Identifying Hazards and Estimating Losses. FEMA 386-2. August 2001)

[twa]

There have been long periods of time where there has been no significant change in the context of the current change that is/has happened.

 

How?

 

some would say the present change is insignificant.

 

 

Teutonic movement with volcanism ? (not even a super caldera is needed)

 

a pole reversal maybe, most likely to alter currents

 

or we can await the next threat from space(objects or solar event)

 

add

 forgive the spelling,durn Germans

Edited March 20, 2015 by twa

[RedskinsFan44]

some would say the present change is insignificant.

 

 

Teutonic movement with volcanism ? (not even a super caldera is needed)

 

a pole reversal maybe, most likely to alter currents

 

or we can await the next threat from space(objects or solar event)

 

add

 forgive the spelling,durn Germans

And so it goes.

It's not getting warmer, it's just a fluctuation -->  It is getting warmer but the trend is just a natural shift (who, little old us cause climate change?) -->  it is getting warmer, and yeah, maybe we are causing some of it, but that's a good thing / insignificant / price of doing business.  Simultaneously the line that it is all a conspiracy to form a Socialist New World Order sells pretty well.

Edited March 20, 2015 by RedskinsFan44

[twa]

we certainly change the climate, but ya'lls solutions seem rather lacking imo

 

 

sell me

[PeterMP]

some would say the present change is insignificant.

 

 

Teutonic movement with volcanism ? (not even a super caldera is needed)

 

a pole reversal maybe, most likely to alter currents

 

or we can await the next threat from space(objects or solar event)

 

add

 forgive the spelling,durn Germans

 

 

And none of those things have happened and the climate is still changing and people generally consider those things to be bad.

[Sacks 'n' Stuff]

sell me

That seems to be a rather impossible task. Unless the goods are coming from the right of course. Then it is effortless. Edited March 20, 2015 by Sacks 'n' Stuff

[twa]

And none of those things have happened and the climate is still changing and people generally consider those things to be bad.

 

pretty sure plate movement and  volcanic activity are happening and have.....might even be a relevant factor on co2 and melting.(we learn more every day)

 

The climate continues to change,as does the world.....bad is a judgement.

[Skins24]

The standard working definition is actually a few decades (like about 30 years).

If you want to claim that climate is a few centuries, then you might be right.

But there are a whole lot of people out there when they talk about climate, they talk about the conditions for a few decades.

HAS to be >30 years as we have natural short-term cycles that last that long... Edited March 20, 2015 by Skins24

[twa]

That seems to be a rather impossible task. Unless the goods are coming from the right of course. Then it is effortless.

 

I refuse the Right all the time, just not much call for it on here anymore .....shoot I've even been called a liberal.

[Predicto]

That seems to be a rather impossible task. Unless the goods are coming from the right of course. Then it is effortless.

 

 

As the old joke goes...  twa is not here for the hunting.

I refuse the Right all the time, just not much call for it on here anymore .....shoot I've even been called a liberal.

 

What?  You've met Fred Phelps?   

[Sacks 'n' Stuff]

But you refuse to be sold by science and evidence.

[RedskinsFan44]

Correction on my mistaken belief that there was not sea ice extent data pre-1979

http://nsidc.org/icelights/2011/01/31/arctic-sea-ice-before-satellites/

[twa]

But you refuse to be sold by science and evidence.

 

it is under review.

 

The solutions and most projections seem suspect, the actions of many pushing them even more so.

[Sacks 'n' Stuff]

I mean, you keep throwing out all the right wing talking points with no real evidence and deny the commonly held beliefs of the vast, vast majority of actual scientists. I stick by my comment a few posts up.

[Predicto]

I mean, you keep throwing out all the right wing talking points with no real evidence and deny the commonly held beliefs of the vast, vast majority of actual scientists. I stick by my comment a few posts up.

 

How can you possibly have 1557 posts and just be meeting twa now?    

[twa]

I mean, you keep throwing out all the right wing talking points with no real evidence and deny the commonly held beliefs of the vast, vast majority of actual scientists. I stick by my comment a few posts up.

 

the commonly held beliefs?......science needs no belief, nor does it fear skeptics ......nor play political games

[Sacks 'n' Stuff]

the commonly held beliefs?......science needs no belief, nor does it fear skeptics ......nor play political games

Or so you say. But the Popsicles are in full bloom. The truth will be revealed when the double banjo playing **** crows 18 times in the grapefruit field on a moonless night.

[The Evil Genius]

Half Dome at Yosemite, 4 years ago yesterday.

 

 

 

Half Dome at Yosemite, 3 years ago yesterday.

 

 

Half Dome at Yosemite 2 years ago, yesterday.

 

 

 

Half Dome at Yosemite 1 year ago, yesterday.

 

 

 

Half Dome at Yosemite, yesterday.

 

Edited March 20, 2015 by The Evil Genius

[Predicto]

the commonly held beliefs?......science needs no belief, nor does it fear skeptics ......nor play political games

 

No, but political games certainly can be played to obscure and discredit science...  you of all people know that.  

[twa]

No, but political games certainly can be played to obscure and discredit science...  you of all people know that.  

 

Well I am certainly no scientist ,gotta do something for fun.

 

 

If science gets obscured or discredited it must be pretty weak and not open......how about some transparency?

 

add

Evil Genius ....is that your version of the snowball gimmick?

Edited March 20, 2015 by twa

[The Evil Genius]

No, it's to show a version of current climate change. 

 

The purpose of the pictures is to show what climate change actually looks like.

 

We can talk and argue about stats, projections, models, etc. until we are blue in the face. But I'd rather discuss actual current results of climate change and maybe how to avoid this elsewhere. 

Edited March 20, 2015 by The Evil Genius

[twa]

Pretty sure NOAA said that was weather not AGW climate change in my earlier link.