Making it better

Heated discussions on a hot topic.
User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 13361
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Making it better

Post by Lance Kennedy » Wed Mar 13, 2019 9:25 pm

I think Laustens statement illustrates very clearly what landrew and I have been saying. There are global warming enthusiasts, including Lausten and Bobbo, who simply exaggerate the situation to the point of absurdity. It is just as well there are a few rational people around who can pull them back down to Earth.

User avatar
landrew
Has No Life
Posts: 11747
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: Making it better

Post by landrew » Wed Mar 13, 2019 9:26 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 9:25 pm
I think Laustens statement illustrates very clearly what landrew and I have been saying. There are global warming enthusiasts, including Lausten and Bobbo, who simply exaggerate the situation to the point of absurdity. It is just as well there are a few rational people around who can pull them back down to Earth.
Who can?
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 13361
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Making it better

Post by Lance Kennedy » Wed Mar 13, 2019 9:28 pm

Well, we try.

User avatar
Lausten
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3930
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:33 pm
Location: Northern Minnesota

Re: Making it better

Post by Lausten » Wed Mar 13, 2019 9:56 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 7:13 pm
Lausten wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 11:25 am

Are you really that stupid? There is only so much ice. It's not a question of it it will melt, only how quickly. Obviously the quicker it happens, the less time we will have to react. Elementary school children are learning this now.
Wow !

What a truly uneducated thing to say. I cannot believe someone who thinks he knows his subject should reveal so much ignorance.

For your information, most of the ice in Antarctica comes in massive sheets more than two kilometers thick, in areas where the air temperature averages minus 50 Celsius. Some of that ice is more than four kilometers thick. Do you really think that a global air temperature rise of a few degrees is going to melt all that ice ?

Now truly, do you believe that ALL of that ice will melt ?.

I suggest if you are going to make ridiculous statements, you do a little research first.
I've never been called ignorant by someone so ignorant. Did I say all of the ice in Antarctica it will melt? No. I said ice is quantifiable, and since you can do it, pretty sure any idiot could. And then you did one of the most common mistakes global warming deniers do. The rise in temperature of a few degrees is a global annual average. To get an average, there will be more days above freezing and more record highs in the future, just like we have been experiencing for the last couple decades. Just like they predicted.
A sermon helper that doesn't tell you what to believe: http://www.milepost100.com

User avatar
landrew
Has No Life
Posts: 11747
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: Making it better

Post by landrew » Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:03 pm

Lausten wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 9:56 pm
And then you did one of the most common mistakes global warming deniers do. The rise in temperature of a few degrees is a global annual average. To get an average, there will be more days above freezing and more record highs in the future, just like we have been experiencing for the last couple decades. Just like they predicted.
Did you just call him a denier? Is that how you define someone who chooses not to be hysterical and alarmist? This is EXACTLY the straw-manning I have been talking about. It doesn't gain you any points, and only diminishes your credibility.

And surely you can do better than this: "it going to be the way we predict, because that's how it will be."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming_hiatus
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 13361
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Making it better

Post by Lance Kennedy » Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:08 pm

Lausten

You said : " There is only so much ice. It is not a question of if it will melt. Only how quickly. "

That is a clear statement that you believe it will all melt. Well, have I got news for you ! The vast bulk of ice in this planet is in Antarctica, and it will not melt due to global warming. It may melt next time continental drift sends Antarctica north, in many millions of years. But not before. Only a tiny part of the total amount of ice in Antarctica is in danger of melting before then.

Repeat. AGW will NOT, repeat NOT, melt more than a small fraction of the total amount of ice.

User avatar
landrew
Has No Life
Posts: 11747
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: Making it better

Post by landrew » Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:17 pm

Eight centimeters in twenty years? How can you make yourself alarmed at that? Surely you know that sea level has never been stationary, and neither is climate.

Image
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 13361
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Making it better

Post by Lance Kennedy » Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:49 pm

Actually, landrew, I am not so sanguine about sea level rise. Sure, it is only 3.2 mm per year right now but a few decades back it was 2 mm per year. It has increased and may increase further.

Mind you, I do not believe the extremists on this, who predict multiple meters of sea level rise by 2100. But even a small increase will see a sea level rise of half to one meter (the IPCC prediction), and that would be expensive. Even while rejecting the claims of those who exaggerate, it is clear that we need to carry out serious action to mitigate global warming.

But none of this is going to result in megadeaths or the fall of civilisation.

MikeN
Regular Poster
Posts: 665
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2018 4:41 am

Re: Making it better

Post by MikeN » Wed Mar 13, 2019 11:53 pm

The threat of Antarctic ice melting is low. The scientists have switched to saying the ice sheet is so massive that warmer water may form fissures that will cause large blocks or perhaps an entire ice sheet to slide into the ocean.

Sea level rise from global warming is not caused by ice melting. As Lance said, it is too cold for the ice to melt in Antarctica. Instead warmer ocean water evaporates and this falls as snow and eventually forms ice in Antarctica, possibly increasing the total amount of ice.

And of course Arctic ice won't raise sea level because it is not on land. The land below Greenland glaciers are bowl shaped, so the amount of ice melt into the sea is low.

Sea level rise is happening because water expands as it gets warmer.

A few mm of sea rise per year is adaptable. At the time of Paul Revere's ride, much of modern day Boston was underwater. This is why Fanueil Hail and Quincy Market are pretty far from the ocean now.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 13361
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Making it better

Post by Lance Kennedy » Wed Mar 13, 2019 11:57 pm

Mike

Warming seas can melt only ice close to the shoreline. Since Antarctica is a continent almost twice the size of Australia, only a tiny part of the ice is close to the shoreline. The vast bulk of its ice will not melt.

You are correct in that some water will precipitate as snow in Antarctica, and be trapped that way. Not sure it will be enough to make a measurable difference, though. Antarctica has the lowest precipitation of any place in the world. Certainly, climate scientists do not think so, and they have done the data collecting.

User avatar
Lausten
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3930
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:33 pm
Location: Northern Minnesota

Re: Making it better

Post by Lausten » Thu Mar 14, 2019 2:10 am

landrew wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:03 pm
Lausten wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 9:56 pm
And then you did one of the most common mistakes global warming deniers do. The rise in temperature of a few degrees is a global annual average. To get an average, there will be more days above freezing and more record highs in the future, just like we have been experiencing for the last couple decades. Just like they predicted.
Did you just call him a denier? Is that how you define someone who chooses not to be hysterical and alarmist? This is EXACTLY the straw-manning I have been talking about. It doesn't gain you any points, and only diminishes your credibility.

And surely you can do better than this: "it going to be the way we predict, because that's how it will be."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming_hiatus
No, I didn't call him a denier. I said he made a common mistake that deniers make. That is neither hysterical or alarmist or straw man. Note how you go to name calling instead of responding to the mistake itself. Credibility, diminished. And I didn't say what you put in quotes, I pointed out that past predictions came true. Talk about a straw man.
Last edited by Lausten on Thu Mar 14, 2019 2:17 am, edited 1 time in total.
A sermon helper that doesn't tell you what to believe: http://www.milepost100.com

User avatar
Lausten
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3930
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:33 pm
Location: Northern Minnesota

Re: Making it better

Post by Lausten » Thu Mar 14, 2019 2:12 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:08 pm
That is a clear statement that you believe it will all melt.
That you bother to explain why you think I said something that I didn't say shows how unwilling you are to engage in conversation. You could accuse me of being unclear, but to say I clearly believe something that I have said I don't believe, that's just trying to make an argument where there isn't one.
Last edited by Lausten on Thu Mar 14, 2019 2:16 am, edited 1 time in total.
A sermon helper that doesn't tell you what to believe: http://www.milepost100.com

User avatar
Lausten
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3930
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:33 pm
Location: Northern Minnesota

Re: Making it better

Post by Lausten » Thu Mar 14, 2019 2:15 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:
Wed Mar 13, 2019 11:57 pm
Since Antarctica is a continent almost twice the size of Australia, only a tiny part of the ice is close to the shoreline.
You'll just keep moving into corners until the water starts coming up to your chin won't you? Fine, all of Antarctica won't melt. That's not going make much difference to the 70% of the world that lives on coast land that isn't Antarctica.
A sermon helper that doesn't tell you what to believe: http://www.milepost100.com

MikeN
Regular Poster
Posts: 665
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2018 4:41 am

Re: Making it better

Post by MikeN » Thu Mar 14, 2019 2:29 am

Lance, Antarctic ice melt would produce about 100 m of sea level rise. If only 10% is at risk because of close to shoreline, that is 10m. There is also a factor of sea ice in Antarctica that is anchored to the land ice. This can raise sea level.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 13361
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Making it better

Post by Lance Kennedy » Thu Mar 14, 2019 2:46 am

Antarctic ice would deliver about 60 meters. But 98% of that is inland. The ice near the coast would deliver way less than you think.

The IPCC is closer in suggesting half to one meter by 2100. Any suggestion of more than that is being hysterical.

User avatar
landrew
Has No Life
Posts: 11747
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: Making it better

Post by landrew » Thu Mar 14, 2019 3:01 am

I'm not saying ocean rise is good, but human habitation generally moves faster than shorelines.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

User avatar
Lausten
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3930
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:33 pm
Location: Northern Minnesota

Re: Making it better

Post by Lausten » Thu Mar 14, 2019 1:50 pm

landrew wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 3:01 am
I'm not saying ocean rise is good, but human habitation generally moves faster than shorelines.
When has a major port city moved all of its major ports? The docks and stuff, the things that make it a port.
A sermon helper that doesn't tell you what to believe: http://www.milepost100.com

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19760
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Making it better

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Mar 14, 2019 1:57 pm

Just how fast does the Empire State Building move?
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
landrew
Has No Life
Posts: 11747
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: Making it better

Post by landrew » Thu Mar 14, 2019 3:05 pm

Lausten wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 1:50 pm
landrew wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 3:01 am
I'm not saying ocean rise is good, but human habitation generally moves faster than shorelines.
When has a major port city moved all of its major ports? The docks and stuff, the things that make it a port.
Old facilities get demolished or renovated, new facilities get built elsewhere. It's all happening faster nowadays than ever before. This is not denialism, just a more realistic view of how things will probably shape up as we gradually get a handle on climate change.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

User avatar
Lausten
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3930
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:33 pm
Location: Northern Minnesota

Re: Making it better

Post by Lausten » Thu Mar 14, 2019 3:31 pm

landrew wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 3:05 pm
Lausten wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 1:50 pm
landrew wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 3:01 am
I'm not saying ocean rise is good, but human habitation generally moves faster than shorelines.
When has a major port city moved all of its major ports? The docks and stuff, the things that make it a port.
Old facilities get demolished or renovated, new facilities get built elsewhere. It's all happening faster nowadays than ever before. This is not denialism, just a more realistic view of how things will probably shape up as we gradually get a handle on climate change.
You should be able to find two pictures, one from 50 years ago, one from today, showing movement. If it happens regularly, I'm sure someone has already photoshopped this for you and put it in an article in a local newspaper somewhere. Let me know how that goes.
A sermon helper that doesn't tell you what to believe: http://www.milepost100.com

User avatar
landrew
Has No Life
Posts: 11747
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: Making it better

Post by landrew » Thu Mar 14, 2019 4:10 pm

Lausten wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 3:31 pm
landrew wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 3:05 pm
Lausten wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 1:50 pm
landrew wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 3:01 am
I'm not saying ocean rise is good, but human habitation generally moves faster than shorelines.
When has a major port city moved all of its major ports? The docks and stuff, the things that make it a port.
Old facilities get demolished or renovated, new facilities get built elsewhere. It's all happening faster nowadays than ever before. This is not denialism, just a more realistic view of how things will probably shape up as we gradually get a handle on climate change.
You should be able to find two pictures, one from 50 years ago, one from today, showing movement. If it happens regularly, I'm sure someone has already photoshopped this for you and put it in an article in a local newspaper somewhere. Let me know how that goes.
Hundreds of years ago, structures were built to last hundreds of years. No longer. Developers are impatient, and sometimes 30 years seems like long enough before it needs to be torn down and replaced. Human habitation is moving at an increasing pace. Shorelines and river banks in some places are eroding much faster than coastlines are encroaching, and property owners cope with the changes.

None of this is good, and I'm not denying climate change or ocean rise, but I always seem to get the impression of massive disasters, oceans inundating cities and drowning people by the millions when I read the alarmist rhetoric. Humankind is facing many problems, and we never address them fast enough, but the solution is never to "freak out" and paint hysterically dire and unrealistic scenarios.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19760
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Making it better

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Mar 14, 2019 4:12 pm

landrew: ok.......lets not freak out. Now..what will be the impact on coastal cities in the next 200 years due to ocean rise? Simple cost effective reaction of moving "uphill"...or something more difficult/foundation shaking to deal with?
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
landrew
Has No Life
Posts: 11747
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: Making it better

Post by landrew » Thu Mar 14, 2019 4:42 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 4:12 pm
landrew: ok.......lets not freak out. Now..what will be the impact on coastal cities in the next 200 years due to ocean rise? Simple cost effective reaction of moving "uphill"...or something more difficult/foundation shaking to deal with?
You seem to have more faith in linear regression than I do. None of us have the "radar" to see the peaks and valleys ahead. We have trouble predicting the weather more than 5 days out.

But I see your point; "what if..." Suppose we never have another global warming hiatus, as we had from 1998 to 2013, and all the current future predictions have none of the failures of the ones made in the past, and all of them prove to be accurate, and the world has stalled in reducing carbon emissions, and we continue to carry on, doing nothing to mitigate climate change...

I dunno, I expect humankind will muddle through, as it always has.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19760
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Making it better

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Mar 14, 2019 4:46 pm

So.............the chemistry, physics, and common sense notwithstanding, you think hoomans will escape the 99.9999 % of all species

going extinct? Because.................................... why?

I know why: "The Magic of Science."
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
landrew
Has No Life
Posts: 11747
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: Making it better

Post by landrew » Thu Mar 14, 2019 4:58 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 4:46 pm
So.............the chemistry, physics, and common sense notwithstanding, you think hoomans will escape the 99.9999 % of all species

going extinct? Because.................................... why?

I know why: "The Magic of Science."
Yeah Bobbo, I do think humans won't be going extinct any time soon from climate change. We've been through worse before, and we're a lot smarter now.

Can we avoid the effects of global warming painlessly? Probably.
Will we? Doubtful. It's just not our way to get together globally and take all the right and prudent actions.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

MikeN
Regular Poster
Posts: 665
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2018 4:41 am

Re: Making it better

Post by MikeN » Thu Mar 14, 2019 5:28 pm

Lance, the IPCC's number is not from Antarctic ice melt. This is why some activists declare the IPCC 'too conservative'. I agree it's hysterical, but there are climate scientists who say the land ice falling in by sliding into the ocean is a threat. The Chicago Museum of Science put up an Extreme Ice exhibit that has global warming propaganda as its core mission.

User avatar
landrew
Has No Life
Posts: 11747
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: Making it better

Post by landrew » Thu Mar 14, 2019 5:45 pm

It's not only about ice-packs melting into the sea and raising sea level. Land-based glaciers have been shrinking since the end of the last ice age. Water tables have dropped world-wide, due to wells pumping down the groundwater. and wetlands being drained to create farmland. Many wetlands exist at the level of the water table, therefore draining them lowers the entire water table in the area. Hundreds and thousands of lakes and ponds left in the wake of the receding continental glaciers after the ice age, are slowly being displaced by peat bogs through the process of eutrophication.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19760
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Making it better

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Mar 14, 2019 6:34 pm

landrew wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 4:58 pm
bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 4:46 pm
So.............the chemistry, physics, and common sense notwithstanding, you think hoomans will escape the 99.9999 % of all species

going extinct? Because.................................... why?

I know why: "The Magic of Science."
Yeah Bobbo, I do think humans won't be going extinct any time soon from climate change. We've been through worse before, and we're a lot smarter now.

Can we avoid the effects of global warming painlessly? Probably.
Will we? Doubtful. It's just not our way to get together globally and take all the right and prudent actions.
Its already painful........but still avoidable.........which is why we have too many denialist, sadly in positions of power taking payoffs from Fossil Fuels to keep lying to you and me.

Its already painful.......the future to be moreso.....all depending on how fast in feet per decande fast you think the Empire State Building is.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
landrew
Has No Life
Posts: 11747
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: Making it better

Post by landrew » Thu Mar 14, 2019 6:41 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 6:34 pm
Its already painful.......the future to be moreso.....all depending on how fast in feet per decande fast you think the Empire State Building is.
You're obviously much more sensitive to pain than I.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19760
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Making it better

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Mar 14, 2019 6:44 pm

Our own pain?.................or the pain of others????
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
landrew
Has No Life
Posts: 11747
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: Making it better

Post by landrew » Thu Mar 14, 2019 6:59 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 6:44 pm
Our own pain?.................or the pain of others????
You don't seem sensitive to my pain, in trying to reason against hysteria.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 19760
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: After being pimped comes-----

Re: Making it better

Post by bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Mar 14, 2019 7:13 pm

I pity the man who feels pain on being presented with ideas/facts he hasn't come to grips with. What a miserable life...........absent denial.
Real Name: bobbo the contrarian existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
landrew
Has No Life
Posts: 11747
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: Making it better

Post by landrew » Thu Mar 14, 2019 7:39 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 7:13 pm
I pity the man who feels pain on being presented with ideas/facts he hasn't come to grips with. What a miserable life...........absent denial.
I pity the man who believes that all his opinions constitute the status of "fact."
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 13361
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Making it better

Post by Lance Kennedy » Thu Mar 14, 2019 7:41 pm

On sea level rise.
Current rate is 3.2 mm per year. If it continues at that rate, there will be a further quarter meter rise by 2100. A lot of climate scientists think that the rate will increase, and the IPCC has given a 'probable' rise of half to one meter by 2100. That is very, very uncertain. We cannot be sure of anything, but it appears very probable that the sea level rise in 80 years will be less than one meter. That much can be allowed for, and adapted to.

Beyond 2100, things get even more uncertain, and anyone making predictions (safe in the knowledge that they will be dead and gone before they can be proven wrong) will almost certainly be wrong. Humans might mitigate warming. Sea level rise may stop, or go faster. Either way, we cannot know right now, and our descendants will have to adapt.

Note to Bobbo about extinctions. It is true that the average life of a species is one million years. Homo sapiens is about 350,000 years old, meaning we may have another 650,000 years. I personally doubt it. I think we will change. Many of those "extinctions" that Bobbo is referring to are simply one species evolving into a new species. My view is that humanity will change quite quickly due to expansion off planet Earth and the help of genetic modification. So we will not go extinct. Instead, we will have many descendant species.

User avatar
landrew
Has No Life
Posts: 11747
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: Making it better

Post by landrew » Thu Mar 14, 2019 7:58 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 7:41 pm
On sea level rise.
Current rate is 3.2 mm per year. If it continues at that rate, there will be a further quarter meter rise by 2100. A lot of climate scientists think that the rate will increase, and the IPCC has given a 'probable' rise of half to one meter by 2100. That is very, very uncertain. We cannot be sure of anything, but it appears very probable that the sea level rise in 80 years will be less than one meter. That much can be allowed for, and adapted to.
Unfortunately we have to plan for the future using imperfect information. We have to use 3.2 mm per year as a baseline, even though it is sure to change. An example of how to do it wrong is the way some cities blow their snow-clearing budget every time they have a higher than average amount of snowfall. They base their budget predictions based on the last few years, which leaves them unprepared for the variation.
Lance Kennedy wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 7:41 pm
Beyond 2100, things get even more uncertain, and anyone making predictions (safe in the knowledge that they will be dead and gone before they can be proven wrong) will almost certainly be wrong. Humans might mitigate warming. Sea level rise may stop, or go faster. Either way, we cannot know right now, and our descendants will have to adapt.
It's impossible to talk about anything that far in the future. Things are evolving and changing much too unpredictably. Technology alone is a massive wildcard that no one seems to see coming.
Lance Kennedy wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 7:41 pm
Note to Bobbo about extinctions. It is true that the average life of a species is one million years. Homo sapiens is about 350,000 years old, meaning we may have another 650,000 years. I personally doubt it. I think we will change. Many of those "extinctions" that Bobbo is referring to are simply one species evolving into a new species. My view is that humanity will change quite quickly due to expansion off planet Earth and the help of genetic modification. So we will not go extinct. Instead, we will have many descendant species.
We have less time than that, due to a genetic anomaly unique to humans. Due to degeneration of the male chromosome, we have only about 125,000 years left as a species. This was described by geneticist Bryan Sykes in the book, Adam's Curse. but I am sure we will solve this problem with technology long before that happens.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

MikeN
Regular Poster
Posts: 665
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2018 4:41 am

Re: Making it better

Post by MikeN » Thu Mar 14, 2019 8:34 pm

Global warmers keep claiming that solar and wind power are cheaper than fossil fuels, or they will be in the near future.

In this case, global warming is nothing to worry about, as the problem will take care of itself.
Countries are not going to use more expensive energy technologies just to emit CO2.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 13361
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Making it better

Post by Lance Kennedy » Thu Mar 14, 2019 10:08 pm

The degeneration of the Y chromosome is just a myth. Evolution works to conserve that which does the required task. The Y chromosome will not degenerate since those people in whom that happens will be selected out of the gene pool.

So even if technology is not the answer there, evolution will prevent it happening anyway.

User avatar
landrew
Has No Life
Posts: 11747
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: Making it better

Post by landrew » Thu Mar 14, 2019 11:03 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 10:08 pm
The degeneration of the Y chromosome is just a myth. Evolution works to conserve that which does the required task. The Y chromosome will not degenerate since those people in whom that happens will be selected out of the gene pool.

So even if technology is not the answer there, evolution will prevent it happening anyway.
Read the book. Bryan Sykes is one of the best geneticists in the world.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 13361
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Making it better

Post by Lance Kennedy » Thu Mar 14, 2019 11:56 pm

Landrew

I really do not care how good a geneticist he is. Think about it. We have 125,000 years left ? How old is the Y chromosome ? 100 million years, maybe ? Probably a lot more. And yet it is going to all die in 125,000. What is the probability ? Kinda low, I would say. Reminiscent of a whole lot of other dubious doomsday prophecies.

User avatar
landrew
Has No Life
Posts: 11747
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 5:51 am
Location: Fox Meadows

Re: Making it better

Post by landrew » Fri Mar 15, 2019 5:31 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:
Thu Mar 14, 2019 11:56 pm
Landrew

I really do not care how good a geneticist he is. Think about it. We have 125,000 years left ? How old is the Y chromosome ? 100 million years, maybe ? Probably a lot more. And yet it is going to all die in 125,000. What is the probability ? Kinda low, I would say. Reminiscent of a whole lot of other dubious doomsday prophecies.
I studied genetics at the graduate level, worked in a genetics facility and I have been well-read on the subject for years, but I don't consider myself a geneticist. I do however, feel qualified to judge Bryan Sykes' theories about genetics to be based on much more knowledge and data than either you or I will ever know. I've studied the theory and I find it quite plausible. But I'm sure we will be able to engineer a solution to our genetic problems long before 125,000 years from now.
The job of a skeptic is to investigate the unexplained; not to explain the uninvestigated.