patrick.net

Automan Empire says

Onvacation says

When do your sources say the arctic will be ice free?

The question presupposes a number of things in a manner counter to my understanding of climate science and global warming effects claims.

yup

Automan Empire says

Looking forward to addressing any sensible good faith questions you may furnish.

OK. What about the "wetbulb"?

My predictions that water would come from land and not from the sea has been far more correct than any Global Warming, Climate Change, Sea rise bullshit.
The ocean is peaked out at 30K feet deep. It just can't give any more. The pressure pumps the water back into the crust, it shifts plates and creates more volcanos and earthquakes around the world. Fishers are opening up as the crust is rising from the extra water of the ice melt. Extinct rivers are coming back to life, new rivers are being created, old lakes are springing back to life, and existing lakes are drying up. As the water source it once had, is being redirected or cut off from all of the crust activity. Still no fucking sea level rise.
I can take you all over the fucking world and the geological changes since Al Gores Propaganda film that you hold to like a damned religion, where changes can actually be seen and measured. Where you can't show me one single coast line that has experienced sea level rise. Not one! There's been erosion, but mostly because humans have cleared the protective marshes, coastal marshes, and mangrove barriers. That has nothing to do with Cow Farts and neither does the extra inland water. That is also being displaced by a very active Atlantic thunderstorm season. it's getting everything nice and wet from the African West coast to the whole of the US Midwest. Again creating more measurable inland geological activity, than even one iota of sea level rise.
Just the earth doing what it de doing for millions of years. Sometimes coral and shit be white.
Know what I'm sayin'?

Tenpoundbass says

All of those Pseudo Scientist that was here on Patnet from 2007 - 2015 assuring us all that Global warming was real and we were stupid for not following the science.

They have it backwards as usual. Stupid people are those that follow "THE SCIENCE". Smart people follow Science.

Onvacation says

OK. What about the "wetbulb"?

What ever happened to the "WETBULB DUDE"?

HunterTits says

You forgot 2020: The signs at Glacier National Park warning that its signature glaciers would be gone by 2020 are being changed.

The signs in the Montana park were added more than a decade ago to reflect climate change forecasts at the time by the US Geological Survey, park spokeswoman Gina Kurzmen told CNN.
In 2017, the park was told by the agency that the complete melting off of the glaciers was no longer expected to take place so quickly due to changes in the forecast model, Kurzmen said. But tight maintenance budgets made it impossible for the park to immediately change the sign

Automan Empire says

I see plenty of evidence the earth is warming rapidly, and that human activity is a big driver.

Yes, in the same way that a Creation Science type sees plenty of evidence that Noah's arc existed and included dinosaurs as passengers.

CO2 is a trace element in the atmosphere. Human activity has made CO2 a slightly higher trace element at best. It is also heavier than air. When more CO2 is introduced, plants tend to grow faster. That has been demonstrated in simple "AP High School" type environments.

280 ppm to around 410 since 1800. Just how did they measure atmospheric CO2 in 1800?

HeadSet says

280 ppm to around 410 since 1800. Just how did they measure atmospheric CO2 in 1800?

I'm uncertain, but I know ice cores have been used in the past to estimate it. I bet you could even do radiocarbon dating on it. From what (admittedly) little I know, I believe it's done by finding air bubbles in ice cores.

There's issues with the ice cores. It's believed there may be outgassing when the ice first forms: It occasionally melts here and there before finally freezing and staying frozen. Something to do with Ammonia Concentration, and near-equator ocean vs. polar ocean chemical content.

Of course, the global CO2 levels were much, much higher in the past and life was absolutely prevalent in all ecosystems.




Just 5 MYA, as late as when mammals became dominant, the CO2 levels were about double today's. It's been well over 2000 at least twice, again during plentiful life and higher order (and really, the largest) land and sea animals. We also know life is fine and dandy in times of no ice caps, too.

Global cooling is far worse, but we've known that during the existence of homo sapiens, when much of Europe was under a glacier. Later, modern humans could walk from Germany to Scotland to Norway without getting their feet wet and the Thames flowed into the Rhine.

richwicks says

we've had far FAR higher concentrations of CO2 in this atmosphere before. It, paradoxically, appears to be greening the planet, not killing life. It's gone up from 280 ppm to around 410 since 1800

It's not paradoxical - CO2 concentrations less than 200 ppm are nearly fatal to plants. During ice ages they get way too low to support plant life.

The below link on badtube from Dan Britt is an excellent talk on paleoclimatology. TLDR: Ice ages (excepting snowball earth due to the great oxygenation catastrophe back about 1 billion years ago) have only been occurring for the last 50 million or so years. The reason is that the Indian subcontinent collided with Asia, raising the Himalayas and the Tibetan Plateau. This caused ferocious amounts of rock weathering, which depletes atmospheric CO2. This makes the Earth's climate susceptible to the variations in insolation caused by the Malankovitch cycles. In fact, based on the current phase of the Malankovitch cycles, we should already be in the early stages of the next glaciation period. Fossil fuels are in fact saving the planet from the next ice age.

Dan Britt - Orbits and Ice Ages: The History of Climate
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yze1YAz_LYM

Ceffer says

Are the coral reefs due for their boosters yet?

Why do you want to kill off coral reefs?

Who fucking cares? Let's just make shit more efficient. We'd do it naturally anyway, just don't force it on businesses and people. The reality is we need less people. CO2, science, etc. don't matter in the conversation at all. I don't care if warming is or isn't happing. It doesn't matter. This isn't a science debate. It's a human life debate.

That said, if I or my kids or eventually great grandkids die from global warming, who fucking cares? You're dead. Enjoy the life you have. Pollute as little as possible, be clean, otherwise have as much fucking fun as you can. We cannot control climate and never will be able to. We have boat captains that cannot even anchor a boat without hitting a marked pipeline.

stereotomy says

CO2 concentrations less than 200 ppm are nearly fatal to plants. During ice ages they get way too low to support plant life.

Yes, and this leads to a paradox. During the North American ice age, the continent was heavily populated with large herbivores like woolly mammoths, mastodons, rhinos, and horses. How did an ice environment support enough plants to feed all these giants?

Another mystery comes from the fossil of a dragonfly with a 4 foot wing span. Since insects breath through spiracles, they are size limited by how much oxygen they can infuse through what is essentially a tunnel to cells. So how could such a large insect exist? On a PBS "Eons" show, the lady explained that the atmosphere had twice as much oxygen at the time that could support that dragonfly and many other giant insects. If that is so, where did that oxygen go? It did not convert to CO2, since CO2 is so rare in today's atmosphere that if all the CO2 was broken down into carbon and oxygen, it would not release enough oxygen to to increase oxygen levels by even 1%. And if the atmosphere was 40% oxygen, imagine the epic forest fires, unless the plants of the era were very damp club mosses or very damp pithy structures.

HeadSet says

the fossil of a dragonfly with a 4 foot wing span

Can you imagine that hitting your windshield of getting stuck in your radiator or AC condenser?

WookieMan says

Who fucking cares? Let's just make shit more efficient.

Yes in the 80's it was all about fuel conservation to preserve energy for future generations. But the problem with that, it didn't divide people, or give the sensible people mental wedgies as they navigated the lies. As there were none, it was all based on science, facts and economics.

Global Warming Larping, turned out to be a great way to get bottom feeding Libtard morons, on board to okeydoke everything that Stupid dumb fuck Al Gore said in his Larpamentary.

NDrLoR says

HeadSet says

the fossil of a dragonfly with a 4 foot wing span

Can you imagine that hitting your windshield of getting stuck in your radiator or AC condenser?

I would be worried of it stealing my kids!

NDrLoR says

HeadSet says

the fossil of a dragonfly with a 4 foot wing span

Can you imagine that hitting your windshield of getting stuck in your radiator or AC condenser?

Today's dragonflies feast on mosquitos. I would be more worried about the mosquitos a 4 foot wingspan dragonfly would eat.

A conspiracy theory:

Plants can not use CO2 if its concentration falls below ca. 100 ppm in atmosphere, and they suffer even at somewhat higher levels. These lower levels were approached in recent geologic times (minimum of ca. 180 ppm). If plants die, all multi-cellular life will likely die.

May be plants and/or aliens farm us so we would increase CO2 levels in atmosphere???

Remember quote from Kurt Vonnegut:

“Kilgore Trout once wrote a short story which was a dialogue between two pieces of yeast. They were discussing the possible purposes of life as they ate sugar and suffocated in their own excrement. Because of their limited intelligence, they never came close to guessing that they were making champagne.”

Bd6r says

Plants can not use CO2 if its concentration falls below ca. 100 ppm in atmosphere,

Yes. Now notice how Venus and Mars have atmospheres that are nearly totally CO2. The young Earth was likely that way as well. Photosynthesis over the millions of years has pulled all that CO2 out and gave us the 20% Oxygen atmosphere. All that oil/coal/gas in the ground is composed of carbon that was once CO2 in the atmosphere.

HeadSet says

And if the atmosphere was 40% oxygen, imagine the epic forest fires,

I've seen 25% oxygen declared the level of fires till there's no damp fuel left to reach or the oxygen is burned back down. Not to mention, such concentrations of oxygen are harmful to life long term. It's past a point of diminishing returns for air breathing life and well into biologically overwhelming free radical territory.

Tenpoundbass says

My predictions that water would come from land and not from the sea has been far more correct than any Global Warming, Climate Change, Sea rise bullshit.
The ocean is peaked out at 30K feet deep. It just can't give any more. The pressure pumps the water back into the crust,

You are not even wrong.

HeadSet says

es, in the same way that a Creation Science type sees plenty of evidence that Noah's arc existed

Except, NOT in the same way at freaking ALL. There is no "because God/Al Gore/Greta Asperg says" in my worldview. I'm nothing if not an iconoclast, willing to attack even "my side's" own sacred cows toward the goal of removing BS. People who are actual allies always seem to mistake this as "being totally bought in to the other side's rhetoric" and double down on weak claims that work against our important common goals. The post concluding the girl who died of an aneurysm was 100% certainly caused by the covid vax is a fine example of this.

Automan Empire says

The post concluding the girl who died of an aneurysm was 100% certainly caused by the covid vax is a fine example of this.

With what percentage of certainty do you think the healthy young woman who died shortly after the jab was caused by the jab?

Not expecting a cogent answer.

Onvacation says

Automan Empire says

The post concluding the girl who died of an aneurysm was 100% certainly caused by the covid vax is a fine example of this.

With what percentage of certainty do you think the healthy young woman who died shortly after the jab was caused by the jab?

Not expecting a cogent answer.

I laid it out pretty plainly upthread that there is no info to go on, other than what has been copypasted to 3 websites. Researching the woman herself doesn't yield any new covid-related information, and doesn't show anyone who knew her personally hanging on the question of whether the VAX caused it. It COULD have been ruptured by sequelae of the vax, it could have been completely independent. THERE IS NO FURTHER INFORMATION TO WORK TOWARD A DIFFERENTIAL ON THIS QUESTION. Therefore, I don't assign ANY percentage to it. Like many complex and uncertain issues, I imagine constellations of probabilities. Arbitrarily assigning a 0-100 precentage of certainty introduces bias to the consideration of the matter internally, and communicates a nonexistent level of certainty, and a suite of presuppositions freight on board, to anyone who hears such a number expressed.

Some people can't seem to live with any level of uncertainty. They'll settle on uncertain answers because the cognitive dissonance of feeling uncertain is to THEIR VALUES somehow less bad than the cognitive dissonance of realizing one has incorporated a falsehood as true, which has far reaching epistemic implications toward everything else one believes as "true."

SIDE NOTE TO PATRICK about the site. The quote function here is better than many websites. If possible, can you someday add bold, italic, and underline buttons, even just to drop HTML tags at the cursor, to make all modalities of emphasis as expedient as all caps in the heat of typing? Thanks.

Automan Empire says

If possible, can you someday add bold, italic, and underline buttons, even just to drop HTML tags at the cursor, to make all modalities of emphasis as expedient as all caps in the heat of typing? Thanks.

you know there is the ability to do this. Just XML.

<i>italics</i>
<u>underline</u>
<b>bold</b>

I also fucking hate XML if you regard this as a poor solution. XML is the stupidest, most cumbersome markup there is. When you close a tag, you MUST close the last tag you opened, so there's needless redundancy, and for some fucking stupid reason, 60 years ago (about when SGML was created) this was thought it's less likely to create errors, instead of more.

Automan Empire says

SIDE NOTE TO PATRICK about the site. The quote function here is better than many websites. If possible, can you someday add bold, italic, and underline buttons, even just to drop HTML tags at the cursor, to make all modalities of emphasis as expedient as all caps in the heat of typing? Thanks.

Thanks, I've had this on my list for a long time. I'll bump up its priority.

Of course CO2 is a greenhouse gas. People pump it into their green houses all-the-time!

Automan Empire says

I've seen 25% oxygen declared the level of fires till there's no damp fuel left to reach or the oxygen is burned back down. Not to mention, such concentrations of oxygen are harmful to life long term. It's past a point of diminishing returns for air breathing life and well into biologically overwhelming free radical territory.

35% Oxygen Atmosphere in the Carboniferous, largest flora ever recorded. Trees were often 100+ feet tall, some approaching 150 feet.

Thanks for the lignite, Stigmaria!

Fire played an extensive role in Carboniferous era ecosystems:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0031018294900051

... and the high prevalence of oxygen made large creatures (reptiles with inefficient lung systems) metabolism more viable. The decline in oxygen, which was rather sudden, is often suspected as one of the main reasons for the reduction for the mass extinction event following the end of the Pennsylvanian Epoch and the beginning of the Permian

The South Pole has just recorded the coldest season ever recorded.