Washington Fly Fishing Forum banner

Climate change has run it's course...

11K views 222 replies 46 participants last post by  Gard Nale 
#1 ·
#61 ·
Because the surface of the earth absorbs heat during the day and releases that heat at night, the coldest part of each day is just prior to sunrise, hmm.
K Klick, what you're describing is what happens on the moon, which effectively has no atmosphere. It heats up to about ~260 degrees (f) in the sun, and drops to about -280 at night. Earth is only suitable for life because of our lovely, lovely atmosphere, which not only reflects some of the incoming solar energy (keeping us from frying), but it also keeps some of that heat in at night, which prevents us from turning in to popsicles. If it were as simple as heat-in, heat-out, we'd be in deep trouble. The tardigrades would probably be fine.
Plant Organism Grass Toy Reptile
 
#62 ·
K Klick, what you're describing is what happens on the moon, which effectively has no atmosphere. It heats up to about ~260 degrees (f) in the sun, and drops to about -280 at night. Earth is only suitable for life because of our lovely, lovely atmosphere, which not only reflects some of the incoming solar energy (keeping us from frying), but it also keeps some of that heat in at night, which prevents us from turning in to popsicles. If it were as simple as heat-in, heat-out, we'd be in deep trouble. The tardigrades would probably be fine.
View attachment 171078
Crazy to think those are on our faces right now.
 
#63 ·
My late uncle Frank was a Tardigrade Commander. He had the hat, the scarf, the badge and everything.

TC
 
#67 ·
Then why does our government subsidize fossil fuel production?

I have to disagree that there isn't opposition. We've had numerous discussions here where folks flat out said they don't want wind and solar power because it's ugly, kills birds, or whatever else. And I don't see how anyone can support pulling out of the Paris Climate Agreement while saying they aren't opposed to alternative energy sources. The entire thing is based on the goal of reducing emissions and our dependency on fossil fuels by divesting from it's production and investing in alternatives. I didn't see any of Trump's base crying foul when he did that, so I think there's a pretty good chunk of Americans who are against it. "Green" initiatives are always met with opposition.
Because if they didn't everything would crash. People would burn the forests to stay warm they'd catch and kill every fish and animal for food and millions would die.
 
#70 · (Edited)
I'll admit to a poor choice of wording. Here it is again though slightly different so you can understand it.
The normal house lid is not opaque, zero opacity. A greenhouse cover is almost clear and easily allows solar energy inside to warm it.

If governments were seriously worried about sea level rise they'd have begun plans for moving cities and people in danger over a decade ago. Why haven't they?

Here, learn a little more about the south pole> http://dailycaller.com/2018/06/15/antarctica-ice-sheets

https://www.cato.org/blog/impossibility-ultimate-climate-catasrophe

http://notrickszone.com/2018/06/17/...stical-torture-fraught-with-huge-uncertainty/
 
#76 ·
I'll admit to a poor choice of wording. Here it is again though slightly different so you can understand it.
The normal house lid is not opaque, zero opacity.
This statement is just flat-out wrong.

By the way, the normal house has zero opacity, no light passes through it's lid. A greenhouse has serious opacity, it allows passage of visible solar energy. My IQ just slipped up to 37.
At what number does one learn the meaning of the words "opaque," "transparent," and "translucent"?
 
#71 ·
I ignore this theory of feedback and/or forcing because they are unsupported arguments. We know water vapor is the most effective heat absorber in all wave lengths. Let's start very simply.

We all know heat rises in the troposphere. We also agree we're talking about surface temps, not temps 10 miles into the atmosphere. We all know where the heat goes when we're sitting next to a campfire, "up, out and up". Heat does not radiate down from the atmosphere above, heat moves upward toward cooler air, it always goes up and cools at it does. This is not debatable. The atmosphere never radiates heat back down to the surface. Heat escapes up at night and heat escapes up during a fire. Without an actual surface there is no such thing as a greenhouse effect. Without the barrier of a surface film the air is always rising when it's warming. Heat never re-radiates back down to the surface, the energy of the warmer air column below disallows it. Simple
This is completely wrong.Heat does not necessarily go upwards,it expands to wherever it can.We view it as going upward because colder air is denser and thus weighs more forcing the more energetic molecules of the warmer air to move where they may.Now,realize that the only difference between the two is the activity level of the molecules,when the warmer air molecules transfer their energy to the cooler air,it is in effect warming downwards.This is what happens when people who think they understand closed systems,really don't.
 
#73 · (Edited)
It's not a closed system. Warmth moves to where ever it can, which is always up from the surface. Energetic molecules may warm less energic molecules but the effect is up regardless. I've already addressed this in previous posts. Sounds like we agree on the physics but not on the result. Heat moves up and cools as it does so. Heat is released to cooler parcels of air as it happens until it ends up at 0 Kelvin. That is the temp in cold deep space and that's where the search for equilibrium ends because it's the temp with no heat.
 
#75 ·
If that's all true, then how do you explain this:

Lots of the wind we experience in the mid Columbia area is caused by differential heating, hot air rises and cooler air rushes in to fill the void, =wind.
If, as you contend, Earth's atmosphere is an open system in which thermal irradiance moves upward unimpeded until it reaches outer space and cools to absolute zero, then you should never feel a cool breeze on the Earth's surface, right?
 
#74 ·
I still maintain that those tardigrades are alien land rovers, with little green beings at the controls. Just like I've always known that common house flies are actually survey craft, also with tiny aliens at the controls. They seem friendly, like they want to communicate, and be my buddy. The question remains...are they from the same source, and allied.....or do they represent competing interests who are surveying our world for eventual takeover? Huh?:D
 
#79 ·
The more I read this thread, the more confused I get. Sorry for the additional questions, but I am hoping we can clear up a few things.

When I am sitting next to a campfire, I get warm. How is that possible if heat only moves upward?

When I go inside my house during the winter, I am warmer than I was when I was outside. If cooler objects cannot add heat to warmer objects, then how can the 67 degree air in my house warm my 98.6 degree body?
Good question.1:The 67° temperature indoors is more than the say 40° outside and 2:body heat is internally generated and loses less of it's heat to external sources therefore you feel warmer.This explains why wind chill makes us feel colder although the actual temperature is unchanged.Your body temp creates a layer of warmth,when the wind contacts this layer it reduces it's thickness thus making it seem colder than it would otherwise.
 
#82 ·
ok so lets operate on the assumption that climate change is real, it's man made, it has catastrophic consequences and man can alter the outcome..

What are the solutions.. we have been going around and around on this issue for years and as of yet no one has offered any solutions NONE!

So unless you can tell us how to solve this problem without killing millions of people or taking away freedoms what do you propose to do. If you cannot answer that question with straight forward concrete answers then you have nothing to say on the issue.
no links to studies, no blaming anyone no we need to study it more none of that nonsense.

it's been long enough if we haven;t found a solution then there isn't one. and if their isn't one then it's time for the crying wolf to end.
 
#83 ·
ok so lets operate on the assumption that climate change is real, it's man made, it has catastrophic consequences and man can alter the outcome..

What are the solutions.. we have been going around and around on this issue for years and as of yet no one has offered any solutions NONE!

So unless you can tell us how to solve this problem without killing millions of people or taking away freedoms what do you propose to do. If you cannot answer that question with straight forward concrete answers then you have nothing to say on the issue.
no links to studies, no blaming anyone no we need to study it more none of that nonsense.

it's been long enough if we haven;t found a solution then there isn't one. and if their isn't one then it's time for the crying wolf to end.
You have an interesting thought process, its unique and obtuse.
Mankind should probably stop searching for the cure to cancer too.
 
#87 ·
Well since people are getting sicker and sicker i guess what they are teaching in medical school needs some revising and the whole medical community has lost it's credibility. This also has nothing to do with global warming.

I suggest you look into massive vitamin c doses and it's effect on the immune system to fight cancer.
 
#90 ·
The first step is acknowledging there is a problem.This has been accomplished to a small extent by environmental laws but we,and I mean the entire world,need to work together on this.The largest problem to overcome is ignorance.The fact that the scientific community is united on this makes it critical that people be informed that climate change is real and it's here.Instead,we have turned our schools into shooting galleries and day care centers and our heroes are religious figures,entertainers,athletes,and soldiers.There's a general feeling of apathy,that we should let it all burn down and start over,but we have accomplished too many good things and it would render the sacrifices of our ancestors wasted which I find unbearably sad.Frankly,I don't believe we have it in us but I have been surprised before.The problem with sticking your head in the sand is that you don't see the world coming when it comes to bite your ass.
 
#92 ·
1. If all your solutions affect other peoples life and liberty which is far more important than the health of the planet then your solutions are worthless and you need to quit telling people what they need to be doing.

2. I am glad some people are passionate and doing what they can, fact is everyone on the planet is passionate about something and they are doing things to promote that cause. The cause for most people is themselves and those are the problems they are trying to solve and that is the way we must allow it to be in order to ensure liberty. Yes people have the right to be selfish idiots and that right MUST be protected because if we don't well then we lose all our freedom.

3. I agree that the term hero is tossed around far too much. I define a hero as someone who puts their own life in immediate danger in order to save another life who is also in imminent danger. Lots of people who are generally thought of as heroes are NOT! For instance there is no such thing as a sports hero there is certainly no such thing as a scientific hero. Examples of Heroes Bob Pardo and Dan Hampton. I can only think of one religious hero. Problems have their best solutions when people passionate about the issue are free to try to solve them. and to that end there are no issues with this in America right now. No one is prevented by the government from pursuing their dreams. What is a problem is when you start forcing the government to pay for your passion. As soon as the government gets involved things get screwed up.

4. I am not denying the problem. I am denying that anyone has a right to force me to worry about the problem or to tell me how to live in light of the problem.

5. the scientific community is not united that has been demonstrated time and time again. The fact that you don't like the people who are skeptical of the majority viewpoint does not allow you the opportunity to throw them out of the scientific community. While we are at it here is how climate change science became so wide spread. It was taught as fact in our universities for 20 years so all of the scientists who have graduated in that time were taught climate change as fact and that those who skeptical of it aren't real scientists. same with the theory of evolution it has been taught as fact for 50 years in-spite of it only being a theory with only circumstantial evidence.

5. ahh there you just did it you completely discounted the dissenting viewpoint without even considering the fact that you might be wrong.

6. i also bought the most fuel efficient car that i could because i believe that whether climate change is real or not whether it's man made or not, whether it's catastrophic or not, it's a good idea to burn less gas.
 
#93 ·
If all your solutions affect other peoples life and liberty which is far more important than the health of the planet then your solutions are worthless and you need to quit telling people what they need to be doing.
None of the things I listed affect anyone's liberty, nor are they forcing anything on anyone. Also, by your logic, if I wanted to dump poison into the Seattle water supply, I should be able to, because the laws against it are ruining my way of life and my liberty to do whatever the hell I want.
The health of the planet IS more important than some liberties, because without our planet there won't be any people.
 
#95 ·
Climate Change. I sure wish us here in Montana had a chance at a change in the weather. While you are all cooking in the heat we have had 8 days of rain and 45 to 50 degree weather. Still more rain in site. It's coming out of Canada. I sure with like hell that it would just stay up there. I would like a little sun and some dryness so I could mow my wheat
field. Grass is starting to get a little long.
 
#100 ·
Oh,I wanted to add to the reply to the first statement,specifically the last part;I suggest following your own advise and quit telling me what to do.I'm sure everyone can get a good laugh out of the irony of that.

I am also stating these will be my last words on this subject.Have a good life,everyone.
 
#102 ·
Calling someone an idiot, who is an idiot, is both appropriate and in these days, necessary....idiots get away with too much when their bullshit is allowed to stand unchallenged....

As an idiot, I can see where you'd be unable to grasp that Rob, but I'll throw it out there anyways.

The rest of the non idiot world gets it.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top