Home > Environment


  • Which country are you from?

    38 answers 2 days ago Other - Environment
  • Why is the "inaccuracy" of models such a popular talking point?

    Best answer: Personally, I've always thought the models were overemphasized. I have a book on numerical analysis by Richard Hamming and at the beginning of the book it starts off with what has come to be known as "Hamming's Motto":

    "The purpose of computing is insight, not numbers"

    Looking back at Hansen's models from more than 30 years ago, I'm impressed by the remarkable prescience and how well he did, considering the state of computing and amount of data that was available then. Newer models can be run at higher resolution and assimilate more data, but they're telling us the same basic story: add greenhouse gases to the atmosphere and the planet warms.

    It's easy to get down in the mud and worry about the fine details and whether a particularly model is running a tenth of a degree too high or too low, but models will always be models, which brings us to what George Box said:

    "All models are wrong, but some are useful"

    Go back a few years and people were worrying about all the models running hot, but after the past three remarkable years of record global surface temperatures, they don't look so hot anymore. There is a lot of inherent internal variability that is not accounted for in the models, and since year-to-year estimates of global temperature have high variability, sometimes the models will run warm and sometimes they'll run cold, even if in the long run they are perfect.

    While the GCMs are useful, we don't need them to tell us that if we had greenhouse gases to the atmosphere, the temperature will go up. We've known that for a hundred years or more. The data have confirmed this.

    Why is model inaccuracy a talking point? Because deniers will use anything they can, whether or not it's correct, to back up their denial. Look at them, in the past couple of weeks I've caught Zippi62 in multiple mathematical errors and other obvious scientific blunders. Kano asked a question where he gave us a link to one of the garbage websites that he reads that was presenting a bunch of papers with low estimates of climate sensitivity. Most of these "papers" were not published in journals. Kano called out one in particular, and when I looked at it I found that the author had assumed an isothermal atmosphere in his calculations, which would completely kill any greenhouse effect! When I pointed this out, the first thing Kano said was "What about the other papers?" It didn't seem to bother him in the least that the author of the paper he'd called out had made a blunder, and I don't think it made him question his source at all.

    Solar Wind had made many ridiculous claims over the past couple of weeks, including ones that say that the atmosphere and Earth's surface don't emit radiation, that the greenhouse effect violates the first and second laws of thermodynamics, etc. When I challenge him on this, he can't answer me, but eventually he did referred me to a link with another unpublished paper. When I looked at that paper, on the very first page it was clear that the author didn't even understand where the factor of 4 comes from when the solar flux outside the atmosphere is averaged over the Earth's surface. That is a lack of understanding at the most basic level.

    Another anonymous denier that blocks me asked why the Atlantic hurricane season has been "so average". The funny thing was that he even provided a link that disproved the premise of his question! That spurred me on to repeat the question. It didn't matter that the data said otherwise, Kano, graphicconception and others just couldn't bring themselves to say "No, this hurricane season has not been average, you're wrong."

    I call out deniers a lot for lying--which they are--but I think they're lying as much to themselves as they are to other people. So they convince themselves that the models bad, even when they're pretty close to reality.
    19 answers 2 days ago Global Warming
  • Is it sexy for a guy to be a bird watcher?

    Best answer: As a female birder, I think it is sexy. Mostly because it shows you have passions and pursue your interests, which takes dedication outside of work or school. Understanding and appreciating the natural world is vital in our time! And, the only person who really needs to think it's sexy, is yourself. Don't let other people's opinions or criticisms change what you care about.
    47 answers 4 days ago Other - Environment
  • Is climate change really caused by the sun having odd activity?

    Somebody told me that. Try researching this. I'm somebody who believes that climate change is caused by humans and we should change, however someone brought up a point (about the sun being very active at this point in time) that I do not know much about. What can you all tell me?
    35 answers 4 days ago Global Warming
  • Do you think the people in the 3rd world care about global warming?

    I got a feeling when they come to the 1st world they don't care either.
    17 answers 2 days ago Global Warming
  • Do you think it is a possibility that man-made climate change deniers are a result of us not practicing eugenics?

    23 answers 3 days ago Global Warming
  • With mounting environmental catastrophes, have so called climate alarmists undersold things?

    Best answer: I don't know if I would say that. While pollution may still be killing large numbers, great strides have been made against water and air pollution over the past 40 years. I know where I live the improvement is quite remarkable in air quality, and I think in those areas where water pollution was a problem that has improved tremendously, too.

    The developing and totalitarian countries (e.g. Russian and China) still have a long way to go. I think it's very important that as we help the developing countries to advance we make sure to address the problems of "ordinary" pollution and greenhouse gas pollution simultaneously, so that we don't make one problem worse while improving the other.
    11 answers 22 hours ago Global Warming
  • If Climate change is real how come the biggest promoters of it are also invested or making money with it?

    Isn't this highly suspicious. Somebody is going to make money. Where is the neutrality of honest science if somebody stands to profiteer somehow?
    13 answers 2 days ago Global Warming
  • Why is climate change a controversial issue?

    25 answers 4 days ago Global Warming
  • Is this a symbol of the end of global warming alarmism?

    8 answers 11 hours ago Global Warming
  • Humanity will not last long?

    Humanity is doomed. Climate change, millions of tonnes of waste not properly disposed that impacts badly the environments, great pacific waste patch, water,land, air pollution, destruction of environmental habitat, animal extinctions. The worse thing is that we do very little about it. One of the big cause of the acceleration of climate change and water pollution is livestock farming. Not only most of the livestock animals live under terrible welfare conditions along with the genes artificially modified and who don't even see the not even once the sunlight.We won't change our diet over this because we value so much the taste pleasure of meats. We delude ourselves into thinking that solar panels, wind power will solve air pollution, climate change while ignoring livestock farming which is the big elephant in the room. People don't make the little effort to sort out their waste for recycling. Billions of dollars are invested to research ways on developing weapons, smartphones, cars, planes but very little in developing environmental solutions.People somehow think that technological utopianism will solve everything instead of taking their responsibilities. People still think somehow that civilisation will get better and they last long, bunch of morons you know what? it's ok. mother eath willl somehow survive through all the human acitivities. as george calin stated: "The Planet is Fine.The People are [F]ucked"
    9 answers 1 day ago Global Warming
  • Are any deniers dumb enough to believe that the 2017 hurricane season has been "average"?

    Best answer: Oh yes, never underestimate a denier on what they believe
    14 answers 2 days ago Global Warming
  • Does Michael Mann have "Global Warming Legal Standing" with his "Hockey Stick Graph" or is it still "Scientific Opinion"?

    Here's a "Judgement Order" in Michael Mann's lawsuit against National Review that gives precedential treatment to FREE SPEECH no matter what Mann's scientific opinion is : https://junkscience.com/wp-content/uploa...
    14 answers 5 days ago Global Warming
  • What is your special ability?

    12 answers 2 days ago Green Living
  • Why are there so many climate hypocrites out there?

    Best answer: I think it may be that it is more about belonging than it is about believing. They are wacko leftists and they are like a church or a cult and there are certain things that they have to express to belong, to continue to gain favor from their fellow cultists. They like to play lip service but they aren't really about sacrificing anything themselves but they don't mind telling others to do those things. They are elitists, better than others, and they are saving the planet or at least they can tell that others in their leftist church.
    18 answers 3 days ago Global Warming
  • Is it a good idea to reform EPA's science advisory boards?

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/10/18/w... Too often the members of the boards were receiving grants from EPA.
    7 answers 11 hours ago Global Warming
  • What actions can a person take to learn more about the facts of climate change?

    15 answers 4 days ago Global Warming
  • Are these papers on global warming wrong?

    Best answer: No fewer than 21 scientific studies from no fewer than 21 scientists (usually takes more than 3 scientists to derive a conclusion, so 63 scientists would be a better estimate) who show a lesser climate sensitivity than the UNIPCC.

    Of course, poster "James" will cry "FOUL!".

    Does this mean they are confirming that CO2 levels are causing atmospheric warming? Of course they are. They are completely verifying it, yet ALARMISTS want increased CO2 levels to be ALARMING, and that doesn't work into their theory. They want their "Hockey Stick" to be realized.

    They're like dealing with children in a sandbox. The alarmists will ALL simply pee and poop in it and deal with the smell later in order to get everyone to leave the sandbox. They call it "GOOD SCIENTIFIC PROGRESSIVISM". Poop and pee in the sandbox and then rub that same sand in the people's faces that don't agree with them.
    12 answers 4 days ago Global Warming
  • Why was the 2017 hurricane season so average?

    Best answer: 2016 was actually worse than 2017 in the Atlantic/Eastern Pacific, but we didn't hear anything about it in the LAME STREAM MEDIA.

    2016 : 18 Tropical Storms/Depressions - 20 NAMED Hurricanes

    2017 : 12 Tropical Storms/Depressions - 17 NAMED Hurricanes

    3 hurricanes make landfall and all is forgotten, I guess.
    11 answers 3 days ago Global Warming
  • Is CO2 making life on Earth better?

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/10/10/w... Reposted because of malicious movement to Mental Health.
    6 answers 11 hours ago Global Warming