Climate scientists baffled at La Nina's frequency and endurance. "The models predict more El Ninos"....

the24fan

HR All-American
Jul 30, 2007
3,403
3,650
113
49
Global warming is real. Doomsday is not. Yes, we should reduce carbon emissions in the long-term. No, we’re not all going to die if we don’t immediately change everything we’re doing.
We’re not right away no, but other species who share this planet will blink out, coral reefs go which causes more extinction in the oceans , affecting the natural food chain for bigger fish and mammals such as whales , polar bears, etc. once the kickback loops start is starts a cascading effect that will be hard to stop .
The two biggest carbon scrubbers: the ocean and rain forest are under major attack. We’re crossing a threshold that we won’t be able to walk back on….it’s amazing there is so much debate over what people see happening around the planet .
 

Scott559

HR Heisman
Gold Member
Mar 16, 2010
7,466
18,210
113
Central Iowa
Who cares!

I want to know more about these models that are making climate predictions!


Beautiful-Weather-Girls.jpg



yanet-garcia-1.jpg


yanet-garcia.jpg


WEATHERGIRL-STRIPS-ON-AIR-686133


maxresdefault.jpg



x1080

weather_forecast_willy.gif
 

The Tradition

HR King
Apr 23, 2002
110,301
82,949
113
With the planet and future of humanity on the line, wouldnt that be a good time to be pro-active? Should we feel any obligation to protect the planet for future generations?

You could use that argument for virtually anything.

Cost-benefit analysis is a lost art, apparently...
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Kelsers

LuciousBDragon

HR Heisman
Gold Member
Aug 31, 2017
7,781
9,929
113
The American Southwest
Cost-benefit analysis is a lost art, apparently...
Agreed. We just put inflation on a stratorspheric trajectory and wrecked our own supply chains for everything including essential goods & services over a bad case of respiratory flu.

Humans have a tendency to overreact. The children’s tale of “Chicken Little” has not sunk in yet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Tradition
Dec 25, 2020
1,059
1,623
113
Agreed. We just put inflation on a stratorspheric trajectory and wrecked our own supply chains for everything including essential goods & services over a bad case of respiratory flu.

Humans have a tendency to overreact. The children’s tale of “Chicken Little” has not sunk in yet.
.... and the alternative costs that you are ignoring?
 

fsu1jreed

HR Legend
Apr 1, 2002
48,243
4,992
113
Laugh all you want Trad, you're the moron who brought up cost benefit analysis...how can you do such an analysis on anything like this when the outcomes can never be known?

Perhaps if you ever took a Complexity Theory class, you wouldn't be talking out of your ass with respect to such scientific topics.
 

The Tradition

HR King
Apr 23, 2002
110,301
82,949
113
Laugh all you want Trad, you're the moron who brought up cost benefit analysis...how can you do such an analysis on anything like this when the outcomes can never be known?

Perhaps if you ever took a Complexity Theory class, you wouldn't be talking out of your ass with respect to such scientific topics.

This reply reminds me of the old days in the Locker Room! Legendary good times!
 
  • Love
Reactions: seminoleed

State of Iowa

Scout Team
Aug 26, 2018
126
152
43
You could use that argument for virtually anything.

Cost-benefit analysis is a lost art, apparently...
So is understanding data and models, apparently.

Never mind that there are cost-benefit analyses favoring “greening” our energy. I don’t think you do much real investigative reading… on anything, really.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joes Place

Joes Place

HR King
Aug 28, 2003
121,441
114,129
113
Here's the shocking truth.

Climate change is natural and has happened for eons.

Except what's happening now is not "natural".

We're geoengineering our climate. Something people think will be super-easy on Mars, but it's actually pretty hard to do. But releasing gigatonnes of CO2 over decades and decades does the job and it's amazingly difficult to reverse in a short timeframe.


But Trad's post seems to have served its purpose - muddy the waters on the basic fact we are messing our climate up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: State of Iowa

Joes Place

HR King
Aug 28, 2003
121,441
114,129
113
Scientists quoted in the story be like, "I don't want to say the models are wrong, but the models are wrong."

The models are imperfect.

However, they have accurately portrayed the warming we're seeing. And the can ONLY do that if they include the anthropogenic contributions. No "natural" forcing is capable of explaining what is observed.

Scientists also cannot correctly model "gravity". But we have a pretty good handle on how it works for most practical applications.
 

State of Iowa

Scout Team
Aug 26, 2018
126
152
43
The models are imperfect.

However, they have accurately portrayed the warming we're seeing. And the can ONLY do that if they include the anthropogenic contributions. No "natural" forcing is capable of explaining what is observed.

Scientists also cannot correctly model "gravity". But we have a pretty good handle on how it works for most practical applications.
This is what’s truly sad about how @The Tradition is interpreting this, especially while he purports to understand cost-benefit analyses (which are also models). The models are predictive, but hardly with exact crystal-ball accuracy. Same with cost-benefit analyses.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joes Place

Kelsers

HR MVP
Gold Member
Feb 5, 2003
2,115
630
113
So is understanding data and models, apparently.

Never mind that there are cost-benefit analyses favoring “greening” our energy. I don’t think you do much real investigative reading… on anything, really.
He does "investigative reading" on food and cooking and seems somewhat intelligent. Most anything else he sounds like a moron.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joes Place

83Hawk

HR Legend
Sep 17, 2002
20,327
13,963
113
We paid it anyway. Unhealthy people died sooner than expected. I Don think we need to quickly, but smartly, transition to nuclear energy.
Oh no….can’t use nuclear energy. Uh-uh. Even though it makes sense and will go a long way towards solving the problem, can’t do it. Because…..nuclear!

People would probably be more receptive to global warming talk if they didn’t see hypocrites like Al Gore jetting all over the world.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 23 so far

State of Iowa

Scout Team
Aug 26, 2018
126
152
43
Oh no….can’t use nuclear energy. Uh-uh. Even though it makes sense and will go a long way towards solving the problem, can’t do it. Because…..nuclear!

People would probably be more receptive to global warming talk if they didn’t see hypocrites like Al Gore jetting all over the world.
The Al Gore deflect. Always useful. Always ridiculously dumb, too.
 

State of Iowa

Scout Team
Aug 26, 2018
126
152
43
Not really. I’m just making an observation. You have zero idea what my stance on global warming is.
So why bother with Al Gote? Whether anyone deems him a hypocrite or not is really immaterial to the issue, and those people easily distracted by “Al Gore” and how many miles he flies or the square footage of his home—they’re choosing childish emotion-dropping silliness.