Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Comments

top

Antarctic Ice Loss Big Enough To Cause Measurable Shift In Earth's Gravity

Truth_Quark Re:The last sentence in the summary... (214 comments)

I mean if everyone who was worried about AGW reduced and sequestored carbon, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

There is a limit to current sequestration technologies. You can't keep planting trees, because you run out of space.
To achieve the 80-90% reductions required to halt the growth of atmospheric CO2, in the medium term, you need to clean the grid, and use electricity for transportation.
And the latter does very little without the former.
An individual cannot clean fossil fuel power generation off the grid. Government has to be involved.

13 hours ago
top

Antarctic Ice Loss Big Enough To Cause Measurable Shift In Earth's Gravity

Truth_Quark Re:The last sentence in the summary... (214 comments)

As far as "displaced tens of millions of people per year" goes, this includes Syrian refugees who were forced off of their farms due to climate-change induced drought; triggering the Syrian civil war.

I think you might be mistaken about that.
The 2014 report doesn't mention Syria at all.

yesterday
top

Antarctic Ice Loss Big Enough To Cause Measurable Shift In Earth's Gravity

Truth_Quark Re:The last sentence in the summary... (214 comments)

I've been bothered by this claim each time I see it. If you're willing to move big rocks for nothing but beer, are you any better than a slave?

This is not the case with Egyptian Artisans. They were working for a salary or as part of their tax.

But to answer the question, yes, willing voluntary work is better than being a slave.

yesterday
top

Antarctic Ice Loss Big Enough To Cause Measurable Shift In Earth's Gravity

Truth_Quark Re:Chicken Little Global Warming nuts (214 comments)

This study doesn't show a thinning of the sea ice, but of the ice sheet. It would be tricky to measure the thickness of sea ice using gravity variations, because in only barely floats.

The reason the deniers are wrong about sea ice extent is because they're choosing to only look at the southern hemisphere, where there is nearly no sea ice. The global trend in sea ice is downwards. I think that that does count as cherry picking.

yesterday
top

Antarctic Ice Loss Big Enough To Cause Measurable Shift In Earth's Gravity

Truth_Quark Re: Getting kinda tired.... (214 comments)

Al Gore isn't sequestering anything.

No, he's buying offsets from companies that are sequestering.

He's running a scam to increase his wealth.

He made a lot of money from when he was working for Apple. And the movie was a bit of a blockbuster. He has made some savvy investments in green companies too, but he's also donated millions to the Alliance for Climate Protection.

yesterday
top

Why did Microsoft skip Windows 9?

Truth_Quark Nein! (227 comments)

Almost impossible to market in Germany.

yesterday
top

Antarctic Ice Loss Big Enough To Cause Measurable Shift In Earth's Gravity

Truth_Quark Re:The last sentence in the summary... (214 comments)

No, see, that tiny patch of the globe representing southern canada and northeastern US where the temperature trendline is actually slightly negative is storing so much hidden cold it completely contradicts any observations that the average temperature of the rest of the planet.

Reading between the lines, you have two points to make. One that you could argue that there isn't global warming while the ice sheets are melting so long as there is a large cooling elsewhere. And two that you don't find that this is a very compelling argument because there isn't such a cooling.

And sure. Ice sheet mass loss is indicative of regional warming, not global warming. 500 cubic kilometres represents about 46 trillion kilowatt hours. Incidentally, at current average Australian electricity prices, that would cost about the same as the GDP of the entire country for about 6.8 years.

It also represents about 0.01 W/m^2 for one year for the entire surface of the earth, or about 1-2% of the total energy imbalance. Possible to hide in other places, in principle, but you'd probably notice. And continued sea level rise is a bit of a cincher.

yesterday
top

Antarctic Ice Loss Big Enough To Cause Measurable Shift In Earth's Gravity

Truth_Quark Re: Getting kinda tired.... (214 comments)

Lost it when you said you believe Gore is "carbon neutral."

Thanks for reading the whole thing, but that wasn't the most important point. I hope you also noted how we know that it is the enhanced greenhouse effect and not the sun that is causing the current warming. Perhaps you even noticed that some of your language is the same as that developed by PR groups with a counter-scientific agenda to market.

Just because one buys carbon credits doesn't mean that all the carbon one released magically goes away!

No, it doesn't go away. But if you sequester the same amount of CO2 that you emit, then the net effect on the atmospheric concentration of CO2 is zero.

Hahahahaha. You are seriously a dumbass to swallow that shit.

...

yesterday
top

Antarctic Ice Loss Big Enough To Cause Measurable Shift In Earth's Gravity

Truth_Quark Re:The last sentence in the summary... (214 comments)

At the time the scientists were saying that a 5,000 year old ice shelf had broken off. Okay if it was 5,000 years old what broke it off the last time? the egyptians using slave labor to build the pyramids?

Really?

1) Larson B had been a stable ice shelf 200 metres thick with a surface area of 3,250 square kilometres for at least 10,000 years. (source)
2) Even if that wasn't the case you can still attribute climate change to a cause, and that cause doesn't have to be the same cause as previous climate change.
2 b) Climate change one to two orders of magnitude slower than the current climate change would not be expected to have the same mechanism.
3) It is not believed that Egyptians used slaves to construct the pyramids.

The weather changes it goes up and down and side to side.

Yes. And the current going up is primarily due to the enhanced greenhouse effect.

looking for a .01 degree change is like looking for a penny to pay a $1,000 bar tab. it matters yes but come on.

On the other hand a 0.8 degree rise has put a number of species at extinction risk, has displaced tens of millions of people per year, and kills about 150,000 people annually.

yesterday
top

Antarctic Ice Loss Big Enough To Cause Measurable Shift In Earth's Gravity

Truth_Quark Re:The last sentence in the summary... (214 comments)

The article does pre-suppose that any melting of ice would be the result of climate change. You could certainly argue against that assumption.

How?

Surely from energy considerations, melting ice implies that there's an energy imbalance?

yesterday
top

Antarctic Ice Loss Big Enough To Cause Measurable Shift In Earth's Gravity

Truth_Quark Re:Ugh... (214 comments)

Honestly, when the fuck are people going to be done banging the fucking global warming bell?

Do you have a problem with us using our best understanding to make decisions?

We've gone from global warming to global climate change to global wow the ice caps are bigger than we remember from last 10 years.

Both the terms global warming and global climate change are in current use in the literature. The ice caps are smaller now than they have been in the recent past, as studies like this one show.

Give it a fucking rest already.

It is kind of important. If Antarctic ice sheet mass loss is accelerating, it is critical to know how fast, as it is closely related to sea level rise, which in turn takes large engineering projects to adapt to.

The damn naturally occuring volcanoes give off more greenhouse gasses in a week than 50 years of modern innovation has ever produced.

This would be bullshit.
The burning of fossil fuels and changes in land use results in the emission into the atmosphere of approximately 30 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide per year worldwide, according to the EIA. The fossil fuels emissions numbers are about 100 times bigger than even the maximum estimated volcanic CO2 fluxes.
Atmospheric CO2 does not even blink at large volcanic eruptions.

Honestly.

That would help. But truthfully is more important, and for that you'd have to know what you're taking about.

Enough. Tired of it now. Can I vote against you all? Somehow? I want to. Seriously.

If you've got enough mod points you can.

yesterday
top

Antarctic Ice Loss Big Enough To Cause Measurable Shift In Earth's Gravity

Truth_Quark Re:so which is it? (214 comments)

I read just the other day that Antarctica has more ice than ever!

I suspect you read that there the sea ice around Antarctica is more than ever. Antarctica has been losing huge volumes of ice for some decades.

yesterday
top

Antarctic Ice Loss Big Enough To Cause Measurable Shift In Earth's Gravity

Truth_Quark Re:Loss? (214 comments)

Here's wapo [washingtonpost.com] two weeks ago telling me Antarctic ice is increasing — because of AGW.

I think you are confusing sea ice with the ice sheet.

The Antarctic Sea ice is the ice that is floating on the sea around Antarctica. It grows in winter, and nearly disappears in summer, because there's a big continent where the pole is.

The Antarctic Ice sheet is the much larger slab of ice sitting on Antarctica. It is about 60% of all the fresh water on the planet, and consists of 26.5 million cubic km of ice. This is losing mass at an accelerating rate. The study in the OP finds that it is currently losing 125 cubic kilometres a year.

Fuck off with your head games.

It's not that bad. Sea ice sits on the sea. Ice sheets cover the land.

yesterday
top

Antarctic Ice Loss Big Enough To Cause Measurable Shift In Earth's Gravity

Truth_Quark Re:Getting kinda tired.... (214 comments)

I'm getting kinda tired of the Global Warming doomsday cult

Good marketing there, mate. The PR professionals of the denialist movement like to throw around words like "cult" or "religion" for the scientific movement that they are trying to attack.

Casting the scientific position as religious attacks it's greatest strength, that it is scientific, and therefore our best guess of truth.

While I don't ignore the fact that man can alter the weather to some degree.

Okay.

I'm getting tired of hearing about how all life on Earth will end in a few years unless we vote for just one political party and their pet doomsday cult.

The article is about ice loss on the Antarctic. It doesn't discuss who you should vote for. It doesn't even assume the reader is in any country or democratic precinct.

Apparently, the sun has nothing to do with climate.

The current warming is not due to the sun. This can be shown because the current warming is occurring more in winter and night, as you would expect from greenhouse warming which slows the rate of heat loss. The sun would warm more when it is shining.
It can also be shown by the cooling of the stratosphere, showing that less heat is reaching the stratosphere from below. The sun would increase the temperature of the whole atmosphere.

But also Solar activity does not correlate with the current warming.

Also, all global warming and ice age events for that last 100 million years were caused by present day American pollution but non-American pollution doesn't do anything....especially is it comes from China and India.

I think that this would be wrong.
Do you have a source?

So just remember, Al Gore has a carbon footprint 10000 times larger than you and is swimming in millions of oil dollars from the Middle East.

I believe that Al Gore is carbon neutral.

yesterday
top

Antarctic Ice Loss Big Enough To Cause Measurable Shift In Earth's Gravity

Truth_Quark Re:Chicken Little Global Warming nuts (214 comments)

In complete denial of the FACT that Antarctic sea ice is at the HIGHEST LEVEL in decades, these Global warming cult members keep spreading the blatantly false propaganda.

This would be wrong. It has been known from the older GRACE satellites that Antarctic Ice has been losing mass from the ice sheet.

In Antarctica the mass loss increased from 104 Gt/yr in 2002–2006 to 246 Gt/yr in 2006–2009, i.e., an acceleration of 26 ± 14 Gt/yr2 in 2002–2009. (Increasing rates of ice mass loss from the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets revealed by GRACE, I. Velicogna, Geophysical Research Letters, (2009))

You might be thinking of the Antarctic Sea Ice.

Now they are saying that if I don't drive a Prius, that the earths gravity will fail.

I don't think that that's what they're saying.

My reading of it is that they're saying that Antarctica and Greenland together are now losing 500 cubic kilometers of ice per year. They don't mention what will be the effect on that of you driving a prius, but I suspect not a lot.

This was measured using Gravity. I don't think that they say that gravity is failing.

yesterday
top

Emma Watson Leaked Photo Threat Was a Plot To Attack 4chan

Truth_Quark Re:Emma Watson is full of it (590 comments)

> Indeed - they make more money [wsj.com] than their male colleagues. No, they're earning less than their male colleagues. They're earning more as graduates than male blue collar workers who just lost their job.

That study did correct for job or education. From your link:

These women have gotten a leg up for several reasons. They are more likely than men to attend college, raising their earning potential.
Between 2006 and 2008, 32.7% of women between 25 and 34 had a bachelor's degree or higher, compared with 25.8% of men, according to the Census.
And men have been disproportionately hit by heavy job losses in blue-collar industries.
[...]
At every education level, from high-school dropouts to Ph.D.s, women continue to earn less than their male peers.

about a week ago
top

Emma Watson Leaked Photo Threat Was a Plot To Attack 4chan

Truth_Quark Re:Emma Watson is full of it (590 comments)

> And you don't think there might be some factors that might contribute to that number not being zero other than lack of opportunity? How about the fact that a significant number of women still care more about building a family than a career? The studies still show the discrepancy if you only count women who don't have a family.

about a week ago
top

Study Links Pacific Coastal Warming To Changing Winds

Truth_Quark Re:The simple fact that we can't talk about this.. (207 comments)

Most of the research being done in the US at the moment is being done by post-docs.

They're not ordained climate scientists, but many of them get published.

You're going to need a broader reason why all the climate scientists have come to agreement. (I suggest, that's what all the evidence shows).

about a week ago
top

Study Links Pacific Coastal Warming To Changing Winds

Truth_Quark Re:Most rational people never believe in AGW (207 comments)

This is why ENSO in the south Pacific is so important: by moving heat around it changes global circulation patterns, which changes the overall energy balance of the Earth.

Not directly. To change the energy balance of the Earth you have to move energy on or off the planet. Not around the oceans.

about a week ago
top

Study Links Pacific Coastal Warming To Changing Winds

Truth_Quark Re:Most rational people never believe in AGW (207 comments)

Since a critical component of the evidence for ACC is the regional variation of the predicted warming, this should at least give one pause.

Really?

When I looked at it, my understanding was that models reproduce the global mean surface temperature very well, but regional climate change is expected to be more affected by systems that originate on scales smaller than the cells of current climate models.

Where do you get this claim that the regional variation is a critical component of the evidence for ACC?

about a week ago

Submissions

Truth_Quark hasn't submitted any stories.

Journals

top

A Response to "Once More: Why "Climate Change" Alarmism Is Not Science"

Truth_Quark Truth_Quark writes  |  about three weeks ago

This is a Reply to "Once More: Why âoeClimate Changeâ Alarmism Is Not Science"

The scientific method is pretty simple: you suggest a hypothesis, calculate what facts in the real world must be true if the hypothesis is correct, and then check the hypothesis against reality. If the hypothesis implies false propositions of fact, it is wrong. Case closed.

It never actually works like that. This is from a school text-book on an idealized scientific method.

The claim that people throw out hypothesis because they don't explain all of reality is simply false. There is no Quantum theory of gravitation and no space-time theory of the strong force.

Do we abandon the theory of gravitation that we do have, and the quantum theory that we do have, "case closed"?

No, that would be stupid.

Climate alarmists stand the scientific method on its head.

...

When their theories, as expressed in climate models, conflict with reality, they conclude that something must be wrong with reality.

This is also wrong. Everyone knows that without improvements in resolution climate models won't reproduce all phenomena in the climate system. No one is concluding that observed phenomena are wrong. It is known that the models are imperfect.

What they do do is enlighten us on the cause of those phenomena that the models do reproduce, and to some extent allow us to understand some average consequences of changing climate.

The heat that their models hypothesize must be âoehidingâ deep in the oceans, or whatever.

Okay, the heat that is hypothesized is not from a GCM. This is from radiative transfer models. We use these to calculate what happens to the radiative energy incident on the top of the atmosphere. Those models are much more accurate. We do know that there is an energy imbalance by these models and our theory of optics.

And the temperature observations from Argo floats do confirm that the oceans are what has been warming faster than expected these last couple of decades.

This isnâ(TM)t science: it is a combination of politics and religion. A proposition that cannot be falsified by experience is not a scientific proposition.

Current observations appear to match established theory, that's not "cannot be falsified", that's confirmation.

That doesn't mean you shouldn't try to falsify if you want, but you need a competing theory that does a better job.

The Science and Environmental Policy Project does a good job of explaining this fundamental point in its Climate Fears and Finance:

This is very ironic when juxtaposed with "This isnâ(TM)t science: it is a combination of politics and religion." SEPP is an advocacy group.

We can see below the direct comparison between 102 model runs and observations.

The mid troposphere is one of the regions that current climate models do not well reproduce. This and the double intertropical convergence zone problem probably need high resolution models to unwrap.

The models on which climate alarmists rely are simply wrong.

No, they're merely inaccurate, particularly on mid troposphere temperatures. (And Southern Hemisphere Tropical rainfall).

Do we conclude that therefore the world isn't warming, because CO2 is no longer a greenhouse gas?

No, that would be stupid.

Do we conclude that although the world is warming, assuming no feedback would be a better estimate of ECS than the feedback from climate models?

No, the climate models cover a lot of phenomena, and so their estimate would still be better, despite their imperfection.

(And there are independent estimates of climate sensitivity from paleoclimate reconstructions, and from neural nets, and from observations of the consequences on temperature subsequent to volcanic forcing, that put the climate sensitivity in the ball park of models)

Much like the theory of gravitation, we are not going to throw out a useful theory, when there is no better one, merely because it doesn't work in one circumstance. The idea is to try to advance our knowledge of the climate, because this should affect policy. Abandoning policy because the science is too hard is antithetical to scientific, technological and sociological progress.

top

Infilling of the HadCRU temperature data.

Truth_Quark Truth_Quark writes  |  about a year ago

Researchers (with an interest in climate science communication) have produced a temperature data set that includes the sophisticated (compared to NASA) sea surface temperatures, but with estimated global coverage (As NASA does, but HadCRU doesn't).

The result is a greater warming since 1997 than has been previously estimated.

Global warming since 1997 more than twice as fast as previously estimated, new study shows

The paper is titled "Coverage bias in the HadCRUT4 temperature series and its impact on recent temperature trends". (Abstract only)

top

World one century from being the hottest in 3M years - NASA

Truth_Quark Truth_Quark writes  |  about 8 years ago http://news.mongabay.com/2006/0925-nasa.html

With the globe warming at a rate of 0.2C per decade over the past 30 years, and with current temperatures within 1C of being the higest since the middle Pliocene, when sea level was estimated to have been about 25 meters higher than today.

Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?