Climate Change

[Mike]

For some related and potential trout fisheries impacts, see the Pickering Creek discussion in the Stream Reports section of the forum.

 

[troutbert]

tomgamber wrote:
Just something I saw today:

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/12/even-50-year-old-climate-models-correctly-predicted-global-warming?utm_source=Nature+Briefing&utm_campaign=db676999a2-briefing-dy-20191205&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_c9dfd39373-db676999a2-43961237

From the article: "Climate scientists first began to use computers to predict future global temperatures in the early 1970s."

I remember my college geology teacher saying in 1975 that the climate was warming and would continue to warm.

And this has turned out to be true.

 

[Tigereye]

OOOOPS!!!!!!


https://nypost.com/2020/01/10/the-telling-tale-of-glacier-national-parks-gone-by-2020-signs/

 

[afishinado]

Tigereye wrote:
OOOOPS!!!!!!


https://nypost.com/2020/01/10/the-telling-tale-of-glacier-national-parks-gone-by-2020-signs/

The New York post article was written by James Delingpole >

Delingpole has engaged in climate change denialism; in 2009 he wrote of "The conspiracy behind the Anthropogenic Global Warming myth".[6] He says he does not dispute that global warming has occurred, but doubts the extent to which it is man-made ("anthropogenic") or catastrophic.[27][28][29][30] Hence, Delingpole has disputed the findings of climate science on global warming for a number of years. He has written "I am not a scientist and have never claimed to be,"[31] and that he does not have a science degree, but is "a believer in empiricism and not spending taxpayers' money on a problem that may well not exist."[6] In a BBC Horizon documentary, "Science under Attack", Delingpole responded to Paul Nurse's discussion of the scientific consensus on global warming by saying that the idea of a consensus is unscientific; and in response to Nurse's question as to whether he had read any peer-reviewed papers, he maintained that as a journalist "it is not my job" to read peer reviewed papers, but to be "an interpreter of interpretations."

From the NASA site here are the actual scientific organizations that believe climate change is happening > https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

Read and believe what you will.....

But I suggest you take some time to research your sources and check their credibility.

 

[Tigereye]

With all due respect, the point of the post was that, again, alarmism had NPS place signs up claiming the glaciers would be gone. That the glaciers are still there is testament to the validity of that claim and the credibility of the NPS who placed the signs

Another article, from CNN no less, stating the signs were coming down.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/08/us/glaciers-national-park-2020-trnd/index.html

A far cry from a right leaning source. Checking the web there are various other articles confirming the signs are being removed.

 

[afishinado]

Tigereye wrote:
With all due respect, the point of the post was that, again, alarmism had NPS place signs up claiming the glaciers would be gone. That the glaciers are still there is testament to the validity of that claim and the credibility of the NPS who placed the signs

Another article, from CNN no less, stating the signs were coming down.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/08/us/glaciers-national-park-2020-trnd/index.html

A far cry from a right leaning source. Checking the web there are various other articles confirming the signs are being removed.

This is from the CNN article you posted above >

Humans are responsible, scientist says
In 2017, a study released by USGS and Portland State University said that in the past half century, some of the ice formations in Montana had lost 85% of their size and the average shrinkage was 39%.
"In several decades they will be mostly gone. They will grow so small that they will disappear. They will certainly be gone before the end of the century," Dan Fagre, the study's lead scientist, had said.
And humans are responsible, Fagre said after the study's release.
"There are variations in the climate but it is humans that have made all those variations warmer," he said. "The glaciers have been here for 7,000 years and will be gone in decades. This is not part of the natural cycle."
The melting of these structures is "all atmospherically driven," he added.
But the park isn't a unique case -- glaciers are shrinking across the globe, experts say.

 

[tomgamber]

There's a big difference between being dumb enough to try and predict a timeline on this and it not being backed up by science and data. i don't appreciate the sensationalism of any topic but discounting the basis of the idea because someone wanted to bet on it is naive.

The baby with the bathwater crowd gets old after a while. Its like they're afraid to think for themselves.

 

[afishinado]

Interesting article about climate change predictions for the future >

https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-clearer-climate-picture-emerges-11579530420