Is this from an Onion article?

[burrrton]

A degree of temperature, figured as a global average, represents a MASSIVE amount of energy and can have a dramatic effect on weather conditions.

We've been in a warming trend for, what, 50+ years, and our weather conditions are no different. A degree or two is not going to have a noticeable effect.

[RiverDog]

A degree of temperature, figured as a global average, represents a MASSIVE amount of energy and can have a dramatic effect on weather conditions.

We've been in a warming trend for, what, 50+ years, and our weather conditions are no different. A degree or two is not going to have a noticeable effect.

It took 5,000 years for global temperatures to raise 4 to 7 degrees C coming out of the last ice age. Since 1901, they've risen 0.7-0.9 C and the rate of increase has nearly doubled since 1975. The 10 warmest years on record have occurred since 1998, and the 4 warmest since 2014.

As far as "noticeable effects" goes, some are arguing that the wildfires we've experienced over the past few years are related to global warming. Certainly a trip to Mt. Rainier NP and looking at how far the glaciers have retreated over the past 50 years is noticeable.

Don't get hung up on the scale used to measure global warming.

[Hawktawk]

It took 5,000 years for global temperatures to raise 4 to 7 degrees C coming out of the last ice age. Since 1901, they've risen 0.7-0.9 C and the rate of increase has nearly doubled since 1975.

As far as "noticeable effects" goes, some are arguing that the wildfires we've experienced over the past few years are related to global warming. Certainly a trip to Mt. Rainier NP and looking at how far the glaciers have retreated over the past 50 years is noticeable.

Don't get hung up on the scale used to measure global warming.

I just go up on the wall above coulee city and look at where I used to hunt geese and ducks in the little wetlands that were everywhere. Not a one remains, just dry cracked earth where they used to be. I've also heard it said that the whacky winter weather we've had with killer cold throughout much of the nation several times last winter is related to climate change. I'm not sure we can do a lot about it but we need to do what we can. I used to be a complete climate change denier but that was when I had my head under the rock known as Rush Limbaugh and Fox news.

Something is changing, its undeniable.

[RiverDog]

It took 5,000 years for global temperatures to raise 4 to 7 degrees C coming out of the last ice age. Since 1901, they've risen 0.7-0.9 C and the rate of increase has nearly doubled since 1975.

As far as "noticeable effects" goes, some are arguing that the wildfires we've experienced over the past few years are related to global warming. Certainly a trip to Mt. Rainier NP and looking at how far the glaciers have retreated over the past 50 years is noticeable.

Don't get hung up on the scale used to measure global warming.

I just go up on the wall above coulee city and look at where I used to hunt geese and ducks in the little wetlands that were everywhere. Not a one remains, just dry cracked earth where they used to be. I've also heard it said that the whacky winter weather we've had with killer cold throughout much of the nation several times last winter is related to climate change. I'm not sure we can do a lot about it but we need to do what we can. I used to be a complete climate change denier but that was when I had my head under the rock known as Rush Limbaugh and Fox news.

Something is changing, its undeniable.

As far as your former wetlands goes, a drop in the water table, the most likely cause of the disappearance, isn't necessarily evidence of global warming. There's other possible causes, such as more wells.

I don't agree with much of the left's doomsday scenarios or their solutions, which in some cases would be returning us to the stone age, but it is undeniable that the Earth is warming, and at an unprecedented rate. You can't always see visual evidence of it from one day to another, one year to another, or even one decade to another. It's like putting a frog in a pot of cold water and slowly turning up the temperature.

[burrrton]

As far as "noticeable effects" goes, some are arguing that the wildfires we've experienced over the past few years are related to global warming.

RD, they've literally said the same thing about snowfall, lack of snow, drought, rainfall, early spring, late spring, heatwave, cold snap, immigration crisis, lack of immigrants, poor hunger, poor malnutrition, etc etc etc and so on to infinity.

That's why nobody gives a sh*t about it anymore.

Certainly a trip to Mt. Rainier NP and looking at how far the glaciers have retreated over the past 50 years is noticeable.

One more time: proof of warming is not proof of armageddon being 12 years away.

[idhawkman]

It took 5,000 years for global temperatures to raise 4 to 7 degrees C coming out of the last ice age. Since 1901, they've risen 0.7-0.9 C and the rate of increase has nearly doubled since 1975. The 10 warmest years on record have occurred since 1998, and the 4 warmest since 2014.

As far as "noticeable effects" goes, some are arguing that the wildfires we've experienced over the past few years are related to global warming. Certainly a trip to Mt. Rainier NP and looking at how far the glaciers have retreated over the past 50 years is noticeable.

Don't get hung up on the scale used to measure global warming.

Responsible logging and clearing of underbrush would reduce the forest fires and when they do start would restrict the fuel for them. But hey, lets not get into the laws that allow the problem to be furthered.

[idhawkman]

We've been keeping temperature records for about 150 years now but I wonder why in the era of "GLobal Warming" we still see record highs and lows from the 30s.

Regarding the wetlands being gone, I'm sure people said the same thing in the dust bowl days.

[RiverDog]

Certainly a trip to Mt. Rainier NP and looking at how far the glaciers have retreated over the past 50 years is noticeable.

One more time: proof of warming is not proof of armageddon being 12 years away.

Oh, for Crissakes! How many times have I said that I don't subscribe to the left's zany worst case scenario predictions, yet you continually lump me into that crowd of moonbats? Do you have such poor confidence in your argument that you have to resort to gross mischaracterizations and inaccurate descriptions of my position in order to prop up your own?

You said that you hadn't noticed any changes in our climate, so I was simply offering tangible, visible evidence of the gradual melting of the ice pack in the form of the retreat of the glaciers at Mt. Rainier. I said nothing that could even remotely be considered as being 12 years away from Armageddon.

You and Idahawk get hung up on the scale of measurement. Do you act that way when a doctor tells you that your child has a fever of 103, or "just" 5 degrees above normal? After all, I can't tell the difference walking outside in 98 degree temps vs. 103, so why should that make a difference in the human body?

When global temperatures rose just 4-7 degrees in 5,000 years coming out of the last ice age, one degree in the past 120 years is a significant increase in the rate of warming. You guys are smart enough to where I shouldn't have to explain that to you.

[burrrton]

Oh, for Crissakes! How many times have I said that I don't subscribe to the left's zany worst case scenario predictions, yet you continually lump me into that crowd of moonbats?

Then quit pointing out indications of a warming trend when that's not what's being argued.

You said that you hadn't noticed any changes in our climate

*sigh* You used that as a counterpoint to my (correct) statement that our weather patterns haven't changed, and a melting glacier isn't weather.

You guys are smart enough to where I shouldn't have to explain that to you.

You're smart enough to know that a 1C tick over 120 years is nothing but a blip.

You want to b**** and moan about geological timescales? Take your own advice.

[idhawkman]

You and Idahawk get hung up on the scale of measurement. Do you act that way when a doctor tells you that your child has a fever of 103, or "just" 5 degrees above normal? After all, I can't tell the difference walking outside in 98 degree temps vs. 103, so why should that make a difference in the human body?

When global temperatures rose just 4-7 degrees in 5,000 years coming out of the last ice age, one degree in the past 120 years is a significant increase in the rate of warming. You guys are smart enough to where I shouldn't have to explain that to you.

I wasn't going to respond to this until you drug me into this. You are the one who wanted to lump me in with the deniers just a few posts ago. I made my position very clear and you wanted me to clarify again for you so I did. Now you are upset that someone is asking you to clarify again.

I guess you don't see anyone being able to make a discover over the next 120 years that will change human life on Earth. I have more faith than that.

[RiverDog]

Then quit pointing out indications of a warming trend when that's not what's being argued.

So then what IS your argument?

You said that you hadn't noticed any changes in our climate

*sigh* You used that as a counterpoint to my (correct) statement that our weather patterns haven't changed, and a melting glacier isn't weather.

I'm not sure which "weather patterns" you claim haven't changed, and over the course of what period of time. Are you talking about Al Gore's hurricane predictions? Local precipitation? The weather most certainly has changed at Mt. Rainier, at least one component of the weather, ie average air temperature, and the melting glaciers are proof of that warming.

You guys are smart enough to where I shouldn't have to explain that to you.

You're smart enough to know that a 1C tick over 120 years is nothing but a blip.

*sigh* Here's the math:

From 5,000 years ago as we were coming out of the last ice age, average global temps increased from 4-7 degrees C. Since 1901, they have increased by 1 degree C. Hopefully we can agree on those facts.

5.5 degrees divided by 5,000 years equals .0011

1 degree divided by 120 years equals .0083

That's roughly 8 times the rate of increase. More than a blip. And it looks even worse if you shorten up the time frame to the last 50 years, and worse yet if you shorten it to the past 20.

[burrrton]

That's roughly 8 times the rate of increase.

Over the course of 120 years. I'm sorry, but on geological scales, I'm being kind even calling it a blip.

I'm not sure which "weather patterns" you claim haven't changed, and over the course of what period of time.

You have this weird idea in your head that a single degree variation over a tiny sliver of time is something we should be Very Concerned™ about- I'm telling you we have no reason to think it's something we need to be concerned about.

Maybe we should, maybe we shouldn't- what I can tell you is nobody knows the answer to that with anything approaching the certainty they display. They've been fcking up these predictions for all of both our lives.

And it looks even worse if you shorten up the time frame to the last 50 years, and worse yet if you shorten it to the past 20.

And if 2020 is warmer than 2019, it's even worse, because it's only over ONE!!!@!!11

This is getting old. I'm out.

[idhawkman]

*sigh* Here's the math:

From 5,000 years ago as we were coming out of the last ice age, average global temps increased from 4-7 degrees C.

Recorded by whom? Where's the stones they scribed this info into? I'm not sure but I THINK You are asking us to trust records that don't exist and no one was around to record if you are talking 5,000 years ago.

Since 1901, they have increased by 1 degree C. Hopefully we can agree on those facts.

Nope, not for me. Who recorded them and where in the world did they record them? Norway, Thailand? That's a huge leap to trust the recording devices and even the math from 1901. Would you rely on a telephone made in 1901? Just asking.

5.5 degrees divided by 5,000 years equals .0011

1 degree divided by 120 years equals .0083

That's roughly 8 times the rate of increase. More than a blip. And it looks even worse if you shorten up the time frame to the last 50 years, and worse yet if you shorten it to the past 20.

Hmmm.... I might as well fill up my bathtubs with water so I can survive the coming apocolypse. Seriously though, the more the sun heats up, the more evaporation from the seas and the more rain we will have to cool things off. At some point, I'm sure the earth's axis will shift again and the whole ecosystem will be upset. Not much we can do about it though.

[RiverDog]

I'm not sure which "weather patterns" you claim haven't changed, and over the course of what period of time.

You have this weird idea in your head that a single degree variation over a tiny sliver of time is something we should be Very Concerned™ about- I'm telling you we have no reason to think it's something we need to be concerned about.

And you have this weird idea in your head that you can refer to the same scale of measurement for global averages as you can for your local daily forecasts, hence your use of the term "single" degree of variance. And sorry, but variances move both up and down from an average. Call it what it is...an increase. You're playing these little word games to try to make the issue appear more benign.

Maybe we should, maybe we shouldn't- what I can tell you is nobody knows the answer to that with anything approaching the certainty they display. They've been fcking up these prediction for all of both our lives.

Once again, I am not talking about ANY predictions, nor have I said a word about solutions. All I am saying is that the Earth is warming, and warming at an increasing rate.

This is getting old. I'm out.

If we could ever get over the hurdle of these observations and trends, we might be able to have a decent discussion.

[idhawkman]

And if 2020 is warmer than 2019, it's even worse, because it's only over ONE!!!@!!11

Yes, but if it is cooler, then the world is going through such wild swings in weather caused by humans of course (oh, and cow farts). Its a built in self fulfilling prophecy no matter what the climate actually does. If it is a little hotter, "GLOBAL WARMING" at record pace. If its a little cooler, "GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE SWINGS" at record pace. Either way, we dirty humans are to blame and we should all go back to the stone age and repent from our sins.

On another note, I did see where the University of Colorado had snow ball fights at their graduation this weekend. It seems they had to sweep a couple inches of snow off their seats and from the stadiums seats for the guests to have a place to sit. Crazy, isn't it.

And you have this weird idea in your head that you can refer to the same scale of measurement for global averages as you can for your local daily forecasts, hence your use of the term "single" degree of variance. And sorry, but variances move both up and down from an average. Call it what it is...an increase. You're playing these little word games to try to make the issue appear more benign.

Wait a minute, aren't you asking us to trust local forecasts in your analogy of the past 5,000 years. I mean, just 1,000 years ago the earth only had a few populated places to keep any kind of records at all. So wouldn't the science be based off those recordings in their local area?

[burrrton]

You're playing these little word games to try to make the issue appear more benign.

Once again, I am not talking about ANY predictions

So you know it's not benign, but you're not making any predictions. Got it.

This is the same bullsh*t that got kalibane muted when he was still here.

[RiverDog]

You're playing these little word games to try to make the issue appear more benign.

Once again, I am not talking about ANY predictions

So you know it's not benign, but you're not making any predictions. Got it.

I guess I don't see how recognizing a fact about an observation but being unable to make a confident prediction of how it will affect our future makes it a contradiction. All I am doing is defining a problem.

This is the same bullsh*t that got kalibane muted when he was still here.

I called you out because of some of the terms you were using, such as "variance" in lieu of "increase," indicated to me that you were marginalizing the facts I was presenting and making them seem more like some sort an anomaly. It's completely inaccurate to call the exponential function I was describing a "variance," which is a deviation above or below an average or trend, and that's clearly not how my argument can be described. Outside of that remark, I don't think I've said anything that could be taken personally. If there's something else eating at you, let's hear it. I've always had a lot of respect for your opinion.

[burrrton]

All I am doing is defining a problem.

And you know it's a problem why? Because it's heading toward something very bad in the future- that's a prediction (even though I do acknowledge you're not in the AOC nuttery camp).

I called you out because of some of the terms you were using, such as "variance" in lieu of "increase," indicated to me that you were marginalizing the facts I was presenting and making them seem more like some sort an anomaly.

I presented them as what they are. A degree rise over a tiny period of time may be a "problem", it may not be- the point is nobody knows for sure, and they're not entirely sure what's causing it (see how much more of a factor water vapor is now acknowledged to be, for instance).

[edit]

Outside of that remark, I don't think I've said anything that could be taken personally.

You didn't, and that was an over-reaction on my part.

[RiverDog]

All I am doing is defining a problem.

And you know it's a problem why?

You said below that it "may" be a problem, so it seems like we're using pretty close to the same term to define this riddle.

I called you out because of some of the terms you were using, such as "variance" in lieu of "increase," indicated to me that you were marginalizing the facts I was presenting and making them seem more like some sort an anomaly.

I presented them as what they are. A degree variation over a tiny period of time may be a "problem", it may not be- the point is nobody knows for sure.

Honest question: Over the past 5,000 years, is the warming trend the Earth has experience a straight line function or has it been subjected to the types of 100-150 year 1 degree C temperature "variations" that we've seen since the turn of the last century?

I can't tell you for sure as I haven't seen all the data or know whether or not they can discern 1 degree changes in a 100-150 year period of time over the past 5,000 years. As far as I can tell and from all the information I've read on the subject, it's a straight line function and I assume that they could identify 100 year 1 degree temperature spikes if it were to have happened. But if you can prove to me that there's been other centuries in Earth's past 5,000 years where the planet has experienced a 1 degree "variation" over a similar period of time, then I'll concede to your interpretation of this "problem", ie that it's just a blip.

[idhawkman]

Honest question: Over the past 5,000 years, is the warming trend the Earth has experience a straight line function or has it been subjected to the types of 100-150 year 1 degree C temperature "variations" that we've seen since the turn of the last century?

I can't tell you for sure as I haven't seen all the data or know whether or not they can discern 1 degree changes in a 100-150 year period of time over the past 5,000 years. As far as I can tell and from all the information I've read on the subject, it's a straight line function and I assume that they could identify 100 year 1 degree temperature spikes if it were to have happened. But if you can prove to me that there's been other centuries in Earth's past 5,000 years where the planet has experienced a 1 degree "variation" over a similar period of time, then I'll concede to your interpretation of this "problem", ie that it's just a blip.

Why limit it to the past 5,000 years? The Earth has been here for millions of years. I can't imagine that there's not a few examples of 1 degree or maybe even more variance over a 100-150 year period in those millions of years.

[burrrton]

Honest question: Over the past 5,000 years, is the warming trend the Earth has experience a straight line function or has it been subjected to the types of 100-150 year 1 degree C temperature "variations" that we've seen since the turn of the last century?

Near as we can tell (which isn't saying much), the latter, and when you take the MOE into account when relying on things like tree rings rather than direct measurements, who knows how big (or small) tiny-period swings have been.