Gee, off topic again. We’re talking about rate of change because you said you knew what it was....the slopes on every graph on climate change temperature all indicate a greater slope during the industrial revolution. more woo woo. Your post is just a mish mash of unrelated ideas. We’re talking about rate of change.
So, shown to be entirely relying on pretty superficial information, you have not comment, or ability to continue to justify it. Brava.
You’re off topic with no evidence. Then you bloviate with more woo woo. I’ll take that as, “ you don’t know anything about rate of change and slopes.” This is the IR alone. Notice the slope appears to be less as the scale of the data changes. So the longer the time, the greater the rate of change is.
Because in most cases you would be wrong. The thing happened indicates it will continue to happen unless something changes it. Just as we know Co2 keeps our planet cosy, so we know more Co2 makes it more cosy. We know heat converted into kinetic energy creates storms and more heat makes bigger or more frequent storms. Other things can mitigate this, but to assume they will is to be deliberately stupid,
You've documented yet again ~1C. Significance is a real issue with you isn't it. Demonstrate that your slope is continuous. Show any fact based evidence that future projections are going to be accurate. And the worst cases aren't being met in the models, and yet folks like you aren't being honest about that. Try being serious.
LOL... hmm.. nope. A thing that happens doesn't create any expectation that it will continue. More, you clearly cannot prove until those might happen that they did.
Really. . You’re pretending to be smarter then every university and science research facility in the world. Try being informative. Average temperature readings are discrete, not continuous. The math model is continuous. By differentiation we can find any other value on the graph; it’s the model that’s continuous. Not only that, we can find the slope at any point on the graph using the derivative of the position function representing the data points. This is high school math stuff. The modeling of this type has been used since the 1600-1700 s by Newton and others. Are you really thinking it’s old stuff. Are you really pretending this is a Democratic hoax ?
Honesty. Who is being honest by pretending they know more then every science institute in our gov. , every major corporation and every university in the world. Really, who is dishonest ?
I asked you if you knew what slope represented. I assumed you were being honest. You say you did, then went on to prove you didn’t.
I can't prove I'll get hit if I sit on the freeway until it happens, but I wont be joining you there. I'll look at the evidence and extrapolate what's likely to happen, just like the scientists do.
Yes it does. The world turns on its axis and unless something stops it we expect it to continue to turn. Co2 keeps the planet warm, we expect more Co2 to make it warmer. We don't wait and see if the world dies an then go "Ooh yeah it did get warmer didn't it"
Deniers all have one thing in common. The gift to gab and say little. Really, they have no desire to learn anything. Their motivation isn’t to know the truth, it’s to just stir the pot. They figure that liberals will take care of them in their old age.
I used to think they represented oil companies or the like, but no self respecting carbon producer would employ such idiotic arguments
For sure... Even though officially, ALL fossil fuel companies are in with AGW, behind the scenes they are donating monies to people who keep their bottom line in tact. If that means denial of AGW on the part of those they support, they’re in with it. but they never go on record supporting ignorance. Really, how can you trust Exxon to maintain your oil furnace if the are are against science.
I was surprised to read our state is 1/4 wind, 36% hydroelectric and 1/4 wood waste. Not much left for oil. And, we’re the third coldest state in the Union. Texas regulators are incompetent.
Indeed, America is doing far better than the world news portraits. All we heard was Trump pulling out of the Paris accord. Interestingly, a lot of climate deniers are pointing out how much cheaper coal is than renewable, but its only that cheap because demand has fallen because of renewable :Lol:
Either you see yourself as smarter than the experts or you have to start giving credance to what experts in the field are stating. Which is it. This makes a difference in that if you actually believe you are smarter than the experts in the field, then THAT becomes the only actual issue.
You don't seem to understand what the main driver of planetary warmth is, do you. Water. There you learned something new.
So... the personal attack approach. Got it. I cannot evaluate comparative intelligence, but what I can observe is the behavior that drives folks to mischaracterize information to their financial benefits. Not rocket science today. And when the data must be so modified to output the narrative that much of the climate science cabal are publishing, well, that's really the issue, not my observation of it.
Do you understand water is in the atmosphere because of heat? And warm air holds more water than cold air?
@Tigger2 @dagosa Comprende Oceanic Thermal Conveyors? Shut them down and, Viola, a great cool down. Dumping fresh water at the polar regions is a way to shut them down or why would & Antarctica be so invested in it? Beyond the mirth, I one of yous reply with some demonstration of comprehension regarding Fresh Water at the polar latitudes is a means to the next Cool Down / Ice Age. Of course there are other factors such as volcanoes, geothermal events in the oceans, etc. Moi Climate changes just like the weather
