Climate scientists - there are plenty of them out there being ignored or disregarded by mainstream media

[vegas giants]

Carbon dioxide (CO2) is the heat-trapping gas in our atmosphere responsible for most of the warming measured over the past several decades. It’s released during cement manufacturing and when coal, gas, and oil are burned—something humans started doing a great deal of during the Industrial Revolution through to today.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Climate science 101

Climate science encompasses a range of disciplines, from oceanography and meteorology, to chemistry, physics, biology and computer science.

Generally speaking, scientists working on climate change compare the climate patterns they observe with patterns developed using sophisticated models of Earth's systems (such as the atmosphere and ocean). By comparing the observed and modeled patterns, scientists can positively identify "human fingerprints” and attribute a proportion of observed warming to human activities.

No disagreement their, but I suspect your interpretation is one that others told you to believe.

There is no doubt that our prints are in the observations. I have never claimed otherwise.

 

[vegas giants]

The concentration of CO2 in the Earth’s atmosphere has increased dramatically over the last 150 years, from a pre-industrial era concentration of approximately 280 parts per million (ppm) to more than 410 ppm currently. CO2 concentration levels are unlikely to dip below these annual averages for hundreds of years.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Carbon dioxide (CO2) is the heat-trapping gas in our atmosphere responsible for most of the warming measured over the past several decades. It’s released during cement manufacturing and when coal, gas, and oil are burned—something humans started doing a great deal of during the Industrial Revolution through to today.

That statement is scientific malpractice.

Yes. CO2 is a heat trapping gas, that why it is classes as a greenhouse gas.

However, there is no way to claim it is responsible for most of the warming, without disobeying scientific methodology.

 

[Gordy327]

Yes, we are "part" of the problem. Can you quantify it past that?

Yes, approximately 8 billion. Otherwise, according to Climate.gov,

At present, humans are putting an estimated 9.5 billion metric tons of carbon into the atmosphere each year by burning fossil fuels, and another 1.5 billion through deforestation and other land cover changes. Of this human-produced carbon, forests and other vegetation absorb around 3.2 billion metric tons per year, while the ocean absorbs about 2.5 billion metric tons per year. A net 5 billion metric tons of human-produced carbon remain in the atmosphere each year, raising the global average carbon dioxide concentrations by about 2.3 parts per million per year. Since 1750, humans have increased the abundance of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere by nearly 50 percent.

Also, according to the EPA,

Scientists have pieced together a record of the earth’s climate by analyzing a number of indirect measures of climate, such as ice cores, tree rings, glacier lengths, pollen remains, and ocean sediments, and by studying changes in the earth’s orbit around the sun. This record shows that the climate varies naturally over a wide range of time scales, but this variability does not explain the observed warming since the 1950s. Rather, it is extremely likely (> 95%) that human activities have been the dominant cause of that warming.

 

[vegas giants]

That statement is scientific malpractice.

Yes. CO2 is a heat trapping gas, that why it is classes as a greenhouse gas.

However, there is no way to claim it is responsible for most of the warming, without disobeying scientific methodology.

It's cute you think your opinion counts. Lol

 

[watsup]

That statement is scientific malpractice.

Yes. CO2 is a heat trapping gas, that why it is classes as a greenhouse gas.

However, there is no way to claim it is responsible for most of the warming, without disobeying scientific methodology.

Another falsehood.

 

[KingLeo]

The 97% is only disputed when it is framed incorrectly. Correctly framed, is that 97% believe we have a significant effect on our environment. I forget the number with certainty, buy 12% comes to mind as the number that believe we are the primary cause.

Have not read anything, and I read a lot, that puts the number at 12% or anywhere near that.

 

[vegas giants]

Have not read anything, and I read a lot, that puts the number at 12% or anywhere near that.

That's because he made it up

 

[KingLeo]

Disputed by Forbes?

You realize this article was written by a Professor…..

…of Construction Management?

And he is not reviewing the climate science, he is reviewing how the 97% number is being deduced.

 

[Lord of Planar]

The concentration of CO2 in the Earth’s atmosphere has increased dramatically over the last 150 years, from a pre-industrial era concentration of approximately 280 parts per million (ppm) to more than 410 ppm currently. CO2 concentration levels are unlikely to dip below these annual averages for hundreds of years.

True. If we were to stop all CO2 emissions, it would take (my best guess) 80 years to drop to 300 ppm. 110 years to drop to 290 ppm, and about 300 years to get back to 280 ppm.

 

[vegas giants]

True. If we were to stop all CO2 emissions, it would take (my best guess) 80 years to drop to 300 ppm. 110 years to drop to 290 ppm, and about 300 years to get back to 280 ppm.

Awwww you have a guess. That is super cute

 

[Lord of Planar]

Yes, approximately 8 billion. Otherwise, according to Climate.gov,

At present, humans are putting an estimated 9.5 billion metric tons of carbon into the atmosphere each year by burning fossil fuels, and another 1.5 billion through deforestation and other land cover changes. Of this human-produced carbon, forests and other vegetation absorb around 3.2 billion metric tons per year, while the ocean absorbs about 2.5 billion metric tons per year. A net 5 billion metric tons of human-produced carbon remain in the atmosphere each year, raising the global average carbon dioxide concentrations by about 2.3 parts per million per year. Since 1750, humans have increased the abundance of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere by nearly 50 percent.

Also, according to the EPA,

Scientists have pieced together a record of the earth’s climate by analyzing a number of indirect measures of climate, such as ice cores, tree rings, glacier lengths, pollen remains, and ocean sediments, and by studying changes in the earth’s orbit around the sun. This record shows that the climate varies naturally over a wide range of time scales, but this variability does not explain the observed warming since the 1950s. Rather, it is extremely likely (> 95%) that human activities have been the dominant cause of that warming.

Statistics don't make facts. Besides, those statistics are based on incomplete data.

 

[vegas giants]

In fact, measurements from ancient ice cores show that CO2 is now at its highest levels in over 800,000 years.

 

[Gordy327]

Statistics don't make facts. Besides, those statistics are based on incomplete data.

Feel free to cite scientific articles/research to refute my sources.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Have not read anything, and I read a lot, that puts the number at 12% or anywhere near that.

One of the studies used to claim the 97%, added the top three categories of seven to get the 97%. My paraphrasing might not be accurate, but essentially, the first category was those who believed we were the dominant cause of the climate change. This is where I get the 12% which may be a little off as well. Without pulling up the study, I choose not to be firm on the number. The third category was only an implied agreement what we have an effect. The second category was somewhere in between.

They had to add these first three categories together, which is essentially claiming that 97% agree we have an effect. However, the lying media and pundits then claim the 97% as if all three categories were part of category 1.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Awwww you have a guess. That is super cute

It's a simple exponential decay.

 

[vegas giants]

It's s simple exponential decay.

Thank you doctor for your guess. Lol

 

[Lord of Planar]

In fact, measurements from ancient ice cores show that CO2 is now at its highest levels in over 800,000 years.

Ice cores show 410 ppm?

Where?

I agree. The lowest CO2 in ice core, extrapolating by proxy, is about 165 ppm. The highest in ice cores is about 300 ppm, which is higher than what we had before industrialization.

Ice cores show the CO2 response in the atmosphere based on the oceans ability to absorb it. The colder the surface of the ocean, the more the polar regions absorb CO2, and the less the equatorial regions emit it. As the oceans warm up, the polar regions absorb less, and the equatorial regions emit more.

This is simple first year chemistry, dealing with the temperature effect of a gas solubility in a fluid.

Once we started emitting CO2, we upset the natural balance that was ruled by ocean temperature.

 

[vegas giants]

Every single year since 1977 has been warmer than the 20th century average. Nineteen of the 20 warmest years have occurred since 2001. The period of 2015 to 2019 included the top five hottest years on record.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Feel free to cite scientific articles/research to refute my sources.

Why would I need to refute horse shit?

Extremely likely does not mean it is, and that simple statement doesn't elaborate enough to be anything but a joke. There are too many variables. When it comes to science, statistics are a guide as to what is probable, with the information on hand. Not a fact of a cause, especially when so many variables are still poorly understood. The results are no better than the worse data.

I can hypothesis likely reasons why natural causes are more dominant that given credit for.

In fact, the solar lag alone, where the sun peaked in TSI in 1958, easily puts the solar peak warming a minimum of 20 years out. Then we had coal plant reducing the atmospheric transparencies, blocking solar increases to the surface. Then when our skies started clearing in the 80's, and more sun hit the surface to warm it, we easily saw unprecedented warming.

 

[vegas giants]

Analysis of these trends strongly suggests that without the emissions from burning coal and oil, it is very unlikely that 13 out of the 15 warmest years on record would have occurred either on their own or in such quick succession. This also makes sense from the known causes.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Thank you doctor for your guess. Lol

My guess of a 2.3% decay between current level, and equalized level, will not be far off. An I did indicate it was a guess.

A lower percentage (sinking of excess) will stretch it out longer, a faster sinking response, will make it less years.

The methodology is valid within the error limits of any other aspect of the climate sciences.

 

[vegas giants]

My guess of a 2.3% decay between current level, and equalized level, will not be far off. An I did indicate it was a guess.

A lower percentage (sinking of excess) will stretch it out longer, a faster sinking response, will make it less years.

The methodology is valid within the error limits of any other aspect of the climate sciences.

My guess is you are not an expert in this year so no one cares about your guess. Lol

 

[Lord of Planar]

Every single year since 1977 has been warmer than the 20th century average. Nineteen of the 20 warmest years have occurred since 2001. The period of 2015 to 2019 included the top five hottest years on record.

Yes, and how much cleaner are the skies now than they were in the mid 70's?

The more you open your living room shades, the more sunlight comes in.

When we started clearing the skies by pollution control regulations of the 70's, other nations followed our lead, and more sunshine now strikes the surface than in the 70's.