The Climate Change Thread

There are lots of ideas for tackling this problem. I've seen a few documentaries with ideas like the one you described. There is lots of talk about potential solutions, just not enough actual work being done. But at the end of the day the best solution is to slow down our pollution, not try and mask it. (you could mask it, but continuing to increase pollution levels at the same time would be stupid)

It might not make sense to you, it doesn't make much sense to anyone who doesn't extensively understand the physics involved (me included). But the researchers around the world who do understand how the climate works historically/and today just follow the facts and publish what they find. It seems pretty clear to them that we are heading down the wrong track.

One part of climate science that really made me think was when I realized how much impact the greenhouse effect has on the climate. Without it, the earth would be a ball of ice. So you can kind of imagine how slightly adjusting it could impact the global climate system over relatively short periods of time. Of course the greenhouse effect is changing all the time, and it's just another factor in all the massive energy equations, but without something to cancel it's increase out the only way for temperature to go is up really.

http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/enso/history/La-Nina-2010-12.pdf

I've only just discovered this thread, I thought G&GR was all about rugby, didn't have any side boards.I'm both fairly passionate and extremely well informed about climate science, I'm not a climatologist but I am an ecologist that keeps up with the literature. I'm always happy to debate (politely and respectfully) and to help inform other people.

Now I am not going to read 44 pages of discussion, but I've skimmed a few and can I just say, as per my previous understanding, rugby fans are unequivocally amongst the most intelligent and thoughtful sports fans in the world? I have detected hardly a whiff of bullshit denialist claptrap and those zombie ideas that have been disproved a thousand times over.

Well done green and gold rugby!

Today I listened to Naomi Oreskes in Conversations with Richard Fidler:
http://www.abc.net.au/local/stories/2012/06/08/3521382.htm

More here:
http://www.skepticalscience.com/naomi-oreskes-consensus-on-global-warming.htm

China is building 500 new coal power staions. We probably have 20.

Apparently we can cool the earth by pumping sulphur dioxide into the high atmosphere. no worries.

If you don't want to do anything about this problem, that is fine, it's up to you and how you think society should operate.

However, it doesn't change the fact climate science is based on solid physics.

Geez, here I was thinking it was based on computer modelling with the answer already known and the user changing the variables to ensure the correct anser is met. :fishing:

lol, but the sad part is that people actually think like that.

I am not a climate sceptic about climate change. The reasons may well not be all man. However, climate modellers use the same computer based models that are being used by Treasurery to say we are about to have a surplus is a concern. The last 7 budgets have been in the range of 80 to 100% incorrect.
So it could be much better or worse than the models show.

I wouldn't blame the computers Runner : its Swans data entry thats the problem.
Garbage in garbage out

A) it's not all about the models, it actually quite a lot about evidence. Such as the fact that it's hotter than any time in the last 2000 years.
B) complain about the models, but have you got a spare planet to test hypotheses out?
c) global climate models have a pretty awesome predictive ability in fact.
D) if you're scared of models, don't fly a modern plane, they were all modelled before a single piece was made.

Have a read: http://www.skepticalscience.com/climate-models-intermediate.htm

An interesting documentary on the political effort against climate science. Most of these people are quite open and clear about their goals. And they literally don't see a significant difference between the science and politics.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/climate-of-doubt/

Read the next issue of Nature about Temperature and Climate change.

Those sun spots must be at it again. (or natural variability, I forget whatever it is that is supposed to be the real cause)

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/338/6111/1138.summary

http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Ice_Sheet_Loss_At_Both_Poles_Increasing_Study_Finds_999.html


Ice sheets? Meh, they come and go all the time.

Four to six degrees by the end of the century: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-12-03/annual-report-shows-carbon-emissions-continue-to-grow/4403778