Is global warming a serious problem?

[Don M.]

Interesting. What is going to happen to cause the oceans to rise so dramatically. Where is the extra water to come from? So far the rise is well within the norm.

You need to broaden your horizons a bit...the world is a tad bit larger than your immediate area. Regarding "water"....If/when the landlocked ice in Greenland melts, it will raise the oceans, globally, by about 20 feet. If Antarctica were to ever melt, the ocean rise would be around 200 feet. In either scenario, hundreds of millions of people living near the oceans would be displaced, and dozens of major metro areas would be inundated and uninhabitable. These planetary temperature cycles often last thousands of years, and we are just on the doorstep of what strongly appears to be yet another earthly warming. It's almost a mute issue as to whether human activity is/is not responsible for this new cycle, and there is little or nothing humans can do, at this point, to have any meaningful impact. I suppose if we ceased all transportation activity, and shut down all power plants, that might have a miniscule effect on delaying what increasingly appears to be inevitable.

 

[Camper6]

You think that 97% of scientists are either wrong or have personal agendas, and 3% are accurate or truthful? Wow.

No. It's the claim that 97% of scientists believe humans are the cause of global warming or climate change or whatever the term you want to use is.

That's not accurate.

 

[Camper6]

You need to broaden your horizons a bit...the world is a tad bit larger than your immediate area. Regarding "water"....If/when the landlocked ice in Greenland melts, it will raise the oceans, globally, by about 20 feet. If Antarctica were to ever melt, the ocean rise would be around 200 feet. In either scenario, hundreds of millions of people living near the oceans would be displaced, and dozens of major metro areas would be inundated and uninhabitable. These planetary temperature cycles often last thousands of years, and we are just on the doorstep of what strongly appears to be yet another earthly warming. It's almost a mute issue as to whether human activity is/is not responsible for this new cycle, and there is little or nothing humans can do, at this point, to have any meaningful impact. I suppose if we ceased all transportation activity, and shut down all power plants, that might have a miniscule effect on delaying what increasingly appears to be inevitable.

Tell you what. The ice that melts in Greenland is formed again. It's minimal. You are right. You can't stop nature no matter what you do. I have already posted that the Earth has been warming for at least 10,000 years.

The Earth has a molten core. I don't think Al Gore has sold his beachfront property yet.

 

[Camper6]

A reasonable request. NASA's website seems a good place to start.

"Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals[SUP]1[/SUP] show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree*: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities. In addition, most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position. The following is a partial list of these organizations, along with links to their published statements and a selection of related resources."

https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

We can trade websites till the cows come home. And NASA has done their share of polluting as well with space rockets.

Fact Checking The Claim Of 97% Consensus On Anthropogenic ...


https://www.forbes.com/.../fact-checking-the-97-consensus-on-anthropogenic-climate-...



Dec 14, 2016 - Belief in the scientific community in human-caused climate change is ... as indicating 100% agreement and used as support for the 97% figure. ... change is happening and that human activity is largely responsible. ... In the strict sense, the 97% consensus is false, even when limited to climate scientists.

 

[fmdog44]

Look at this year's farmlands as they are flooded more than ever before on record i.e., no food.

 

[RadishRose]

I heard CA lost a lot of crops recently due those heavy rains.

 

[StarSong]

We can trade websites till the cows come home. And NASA has done their share of polluting as well with space rockets.

Fact Checking The Claim Of 97% Consensus On Anthropogenic ...


https://www.forbes.com/.../fact-checking-the-97-consensus-on-anthropogenic-climate-...



Dec 14, 2016 - Belief in the scientific community in human-caused climate change is ... as indicating 100% agreement and used as support for the 97% figure. ... change is happening and that human activity is largely responsible. ... In the strict sense, the 97% consensus is false, even when limited to climate scientists.

Here is the bio on the author of the article you cited:
"Earl J. Ritchie is a retired energy executive and teaches a course on the oil and gas industry at the University of Houston. He has 35 years’ experience in the industry. He started as a geophysicist with Mobil Oil and subsequently worked in a variety of management and technical positions with several independent exploration and production companies. Ritchie retired as Vice President and General Manager of the offshore division of EOG Resources in 2007. Prior to his experience in the oil industry, he served at the US Air Force Special Weapons Center, providing geologic and geophysical support to nuclear research activities."

Hardly an unbiased opinion. Even so, he never makes a claim in this article that less than 84% of actively publishing climate scientists agree that humans are extremely likely due to human activities.

Believe what you want. I'm tapping out of this conversation.

 

[Camper6]

Look at this year's farmlands as they are flooded more than ever before on record i.e., no food.

The cause? Perhaps too much snow?

 

[Camper6]

Here is the bio on the author of the article you cited:
"Earl J. Ritchie is a retired energy executive and teaches a course on the oil and gas industry at the University of Houston. He has 35 years’ experience in the industry. He started as a geophysicist with Mobil Oil and subsequently worked in a variety of management and technical positions with several independent exploration and production companies. Ritchie retired as Vice President and General Manager of the offshore division of EOG Resources in 2007. Prior to his experience in the oil industry, he served at the US Air Force Special Weapons Center, providing geologic and geophysical support to nuclear research activities."

Hardly an unbiased opinion. Even so, he never makes a claim in this article that less than 84% of actively publishing climate scientists agree that humans are extremely likely due to human activities.

Believe what you want. I'm tapping out of this conversation.

I can give you a hundred more websites saying the same thing. Attack the source but not the content.

How about personal observations?

 

[Don M.]

The ice that melts in Greenland is formed again./QUOTE]

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/...-times-faster-than-thought-raising-sea-level/

 

[DaveA]

It has little to do with the actual weather. It's more dependent on what TV and radio you listen to on a regular basis. If it's Fox, Rush, or any of the Sinclair stations, you haven't got a thing to worry about. Other than those folks, the rest do have concerns, some founded and probably a few unfounded. Pretty pathetic but that's where we are as a country today.

 

[Camper6]

The ice that melts in Greenland is formed again./QUOTE]

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/...-times-faster-than-thought-raising-sea-level/

Don. I didn't read your link and you don't have to read mine. I was a fan of National Geographic and subscribed for many years.

I quit when they put a picture of the Statue of Liberty on the cover with water up to her hips. That's pure propaganda.

Here's my link. As I said before we can trade links forever. The point is who do you trust? The article reveals the same type of claim about Greenland in 1939. That's 80 years ago.

In fact, if Greenland melts entirely, none of us will be around to see the soup. Real Science blogger Steven Goddard says "it would take 15,000 years for the ice sheet to melt " at the rates claimed.




"That accounts for a sea level rise of about one hundredth of an inch per year," he adds.




While Greenland is melting away in the New York Times, it is, in reality, "blowing away all records for ice gain this year," reports Goddard.




It has "gained almost 200 billion tons of snow and ice over the past two months, which is more than 50% above normal. The surface of the ice gained more than 200 billion tons during the previous 12 months."


https://www.investors.com/politics/...-sheet-melting-away-just-like-it-did-in-1939/


You see Don a lot of people are skeptical because they haven't seen it happening around them. They need hard evidence instead of faith in scientists who have been wrong before in predicting the future.

So what are your personal observations? Has the average temperature where you live increased dramatically over the years?

Where I live we still get 6 months of cold weather and a couple of months are unbearable.

Lake Superior is up this year almost to record levels and the reason is that we had an abnormal amount of snow.

However, the level of the Great Lakes is controlled by an international commission of both Canada and the U.S.

Now. I do believe that humans have contributed to the process of warming but not to the extremes claimed and it doesn't deserve the gloom and doom scenarios.