- Joined
- Feb 25, 2019
- Messages
- 51,923
- Reaction score
- 25,007
- Location
- Devonshire, England
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
I don't drive and never have done.Do you drive a gas vehicle?
I have posted many times on this board about changing to hybrids, EVs and EV/hybrid cars.
99% of the replies I receive to those posts is excuses on why they don't change their vehicle.
I bought the first hybrid in April 2001. I decided then to never buy a regular gas car again and I haven't. The one I have now is my fourth hybrid.
My next vehicle will be an EV/hybrid car.
If you care about climate change, change the vehicle you drive. Cars are one of the main causes of climate change.
Except that blaming it on climate change is guesswork.Barge traffic halted on Mississippi River by lowest water levels in a decade
New YorkCNN Business —
The lowest water levels in the Mississippi River in a decade, caused by a severe Midwest drought, have closed the vital channel to barge traffic at a crucial time of the year for the transport of crops from the nation’s heartland.
...
The region that feeds water into the Mississippi River has been hit especially hard by a regional drought since July, leading to sharply lower levels around Arkansas and Tennessee, according to data tracked by the US Geological Survey. The two highest levels of drought have recently expanded across the Midwest and the South, according to last week’s US Drought Monitor.
==============
Here is one for those who are still denying climate change. The mighty Mississippi is at the lowest level in a decade.
All of those methods are indeed improvements in the collection of data. Thing is, we are comparing them to data that was acquired in a much different and much less accurate manner. Thus making meaningful comparisons quite difficult. Extrapolating such a tiny slice of data and applying those trends to future data is pure guesswork.No doubt, but climate change and its impacts have been predicted since the 1890s. Models were inaccurate at first but have improved dramatically with the advent of computers, proxy record collection and analysis, satellite imagery, and big data.
Not to be rude, but I call bovine scat on that one. So many predictions have been remarkably inaccurate it would be hard to list them all.All of the temperature increases and climatic changes that were predicted 30 years ago have generally happened.
There are most definitely OTHER scientific explanations for temperature changes. I know this is simplistic, but true, correlation does not always equal causation.There is no other scientific explanation for earth's dramatic change in global mean temperatures over the last century. The temperature increases have coincided with rises in atmospheric carbon (ppm) and global wealth. You can say "Oh yeah, well the temperature increased during the Permian Period" Sure - there's a likely scientific explanation for that: volcanism. What is the scientific explanation for the recent climatic events?
Yes "global climate CHANGE", what is usually left out is the qualifier "human caused" climate change. Why is that?Really, nothing other than what scientists have said all along: global climate change.
All of those methods are indeed improvements in the collection of data. Thing is, we are comparing them to data that was acquired in a much different and much less accurate manner. Thus making meaningful comparisons quite difficult. Extrapolating such a tiny slice of data and applying those trends to future data is pure guesswork.
Not to be rude, but I call bovine scat on that one. So many predictions have been remarkably inaccurate it would be hard to list them all.
Comparing 2019 to 1970, Budyko predicted an increase in the global mean temperature of 1°C and the disappearance of about 50% of Arctic multiyear ice. Observations have borne out these trends, demonstrating that mean global temperature increased by 0.98°C over this period and that the extent of multiyear Arctic sea ice in September 2019 was about 46% smaller than in 1970 (Figure 1).
To conclude, a projection from 1981 for rising temperatures in a major science journal, at a time that the temperature rise was not yet obvious in the observations, has been found to agree well with the observations since then, underestimating the observed trend by about 30%, and easily beating naive predictions of no-change or a linear continuation of trends. It is also a nice example of a statement based on theory that could be falsified and up to now has withstood the test. The “global warming hypothesis” has been developed according to the principles of sound science.
There are most definitely OTHER scientific explanations for temperature changes. I know this is simplistic, but true, correlation does not always equal causation.
Yes "global climate CHANGE", what is usually left out is the qualifier "human caused" climate change. Why is that?
But it was classified...It's obvious, isn't it? Biden drained the Mississippi. Tweety told us this would happen, and if he didn't, he at least thought it.
That you, Mr. Tolkien?I don't drive and never have done.
Sperm counts not dropping near fast enough to save us here. Going to take action. But that will cause POC consternation and shouts of "Racist". Too bad. It's that or cook.Water disappearing like global sperm counts. All is well, nothing to see here.
Climate scientists are like economists. They've predicted 12 of the last 4 recessions.It's not, but you can believe it if it makes you sleep better.
A 50-Year-Old Global Warming Forecast That Still Holds Up - Eos
In 1972, Mikhail Ivanovich Budyko used a simple methodology to make climate predictions that remain surprisingly accurate today and that could serve as a new “business-as-usual” scenario.eos.org
RealClimate: Evaluating a 1981 temperature projection
RealClimate: Guest commentary from Geert Jan van Oldenborgh and Rein Haarsma, KNMI Sometimes it helps to take a step back from the everyday pressures of research (falling ill helps). It was in this way we stumbled across (pdf). In 1981 the first author of this post was in his first year at...www.realclimate.org
Those are just two papers that accurately predicted increases - there are more.
There is no explanation for the increase of atmospheric carbon and the rise in global mean temperature - at least not the significant, rapid increases that we've observed in just the last few decades. Solar cycles occur every 11 or so years. Volcanism doesn't account for it. There's one culprit: human industrial output.
Not left out, just assumed.
Climate scientists are like economists. They've predicted 12 of the last 4 recessions.
I remember scientists being horrified about the Concorde and SST; that their persistent high altitude contrails would accelerate Global Cooling and doom us.
Hindsight being 20/20, its easy to go back and pick prescient sages NOW.
However, warming Now seems to be well enough established to warrant action.
The only effective action involves birth control as one of its chief components.
Pretty much, yes! I lived in London most of my life and owning a car there is pointless when there's excellent public transport to be had, so I never bothered to learn to drive, and never really had the urge.That you, Mr. Tolkien?
Don't worry! Our president is begging countries to pump more oil. That'll fix this problem...
I am envious. Where I live in the States unreliable public transportation and urban sprawl means getting around without a car is a challenge.Pretty much, yes! I lived in London most of my life and owning a car there is pointless when there's excellent public transport to be had, so I never bothered to learn to drive, and never really had the urge.
I rode a bicycle around London while cars were stuck in jams. Kept myself fit and save a boatload of money at the same time.I am envious. Where I live in the States unreliable public transportation and urban sprawl means getting around without a car is a challenge.
Here in New Mexico, we have 2.1 million people spread over 300,000 square km. Most suggestions from urbanites are totally inapplicable. Better mileage WOULD be welcome.I rode a bicycle around London while cars were stuck in jams. Kept myself fit and save a boatload of money at the same time.
Perhaps! But it is very highly educated guesswork with a correspondingly high degree of certainty.Except that blaming it on climate change is guesswork.
"Bah! That science stuff is for pointy-headed Liberals. Education is for nerds. Wanna see me crush a beer can on my forehead?"Perhaps! But it is very highly educated guesswork with a correspondingly high degree of certainty.
Good one. Keep 'em coming."Bah! That science stuff is for pointy-headed Liberals. Education is for nerds. Wanna see me crush a beer can on my forehead?"
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?