Subscribe: Comments for RealClimate
Preview: Comments for RealClimate

Comments for RealClimate

Climate science from climate scientists...

Last Build Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 03:40:22 +0000


Comment on Unforced Variations: Jan 2018 by Mr. Know It All

Wed, 17 Jan 2018 03:40:22 +0000

110 - wili To summarize the article: It's going to get hot! May give a new meaning to the word he11hole. I think I'd plan to: 1) stay away from those places or else: 2) hang out in the local river, lake, ocean - preferably in the shade 3) have a minimum of 2 water coolers in each home (in case 1 fails) 4) drink lots of that cool water, or spray it on me 5) see if an Antarctic ice berg can be towed up near the beach 6) go watch a lot of movies at the theater 7) make ice for drinks 8) see if the city can open up some fire hydrants for people to cool off in 9) become a climate scientist and go on a research mission to Greenland :) Wonder if you can escape any of the heat by going under ground in those places?

Comment on Forced Responses: Jan 2018 by nigelj

Wed, 17 Jan 2018 03:17:47 +0000

Killian @180 Regarding limited reserves of Cobalt. Its really a question of what is an appropriate rate of use of cobalt. Massive population and economic growth would send prices very high and push recycling beyond the limits and cause stress. But there's also no point simply not making batteries and not using cobalt. So we are stuck navigating a middle course somehow. (And just an aside. No doubt America will find a "convenient reason" to interfere in the Congo's politics, and to try to monopolise the cobalt resource)

Comment on Unforced Variations: Jan 2018 by Thomas

Wed, 17 Jan 2018 03:15:09 +0000

PS more properly called a "database" surely an app/algo could be made to automatically scour google scholar, other databases, and websites for the data, to "assemble/collate", but maybe I'm dreamin'

Comment on Unforced Variations: Jan 2018 by Thomas

Wed, 17 Jan 2018 03:07:35 +0000

102 MA Rodger, thx for links etc. i appreciate what noaa bom etc do and the info available via numbers. Though I was more thinking along the lines of more tangible events, observations that are a bit more nuanced, real life scenarios, where the avg person is more likely to be able to gauge / understand the degree of impacts upon everyday people, or commercial activity -- vs hard core numbers. I'm thinking of a giant basic spreadsheet, and the original idea of a web of interconnected pages .... with exceptional events shifts new records etc. eg massive beach mangroves die off in gulf carpentaria qld. aust. 2016 suspected or confirmed agw/cc related cause - lack of water (precip/temps whatever) the mangrove trees died suddenly from spring 8/2015 to summer 12/2015 extent - 150,000 hectares, 600 miles of coastline refs - news reports, wiki, uni, etc and everything is cross referencing .. on key words eg "mangroves" "qld" "2016" "die off" etc etc eg 2010 - Qld Cane toads population of at least ~1,000 established in Melbourne Vic Australia for first time eg 2017 - Sydney NSW Heat wave above 40C maximum for 8 days - new Summer December Record eg 2018 - Irunkandji Jellyfish originally from Far North Qld only 1880 until 1997 (@ Gladstone Qld Australia) new infestation in waters of Harvey Bay Qld Australia for the first time - summer Dec-Jan cause - warmer SSTs of xC in SE Qld (?) floods, below normal rainfall for x mths, bush fires, fish die offs, disease in tasmanian oysters, blue algae events, coral bleaching events, river flows, collapse of fish stocks (?), etc ... anything from every where. eg +100 killed in 3 months of massive Portugal bushfires in 2017 Contributors could simply enter the info into a pro-forma Form .. via an App or webpage? Volunteer reviewers could cross check and add in verifiable references and more "data/dates" into the Event details and publish? so someone could come along and do a "search" with parameters like country australia biosphere all kinds events any kind date/s 2010 to 2017 OR country global all biosphere mangroves events die off dates 1990 - 2010 Just a thought .... way above my pay grade.

Comment on Forced Responses: Jan 2018 by nigelj

Wed, 17 Jan 2018 02:57:13 +0000

wili @175 "Nigel, do you really think there is nothing at all wrong with neo-classical economic theory?" (sometimes called neoliberalism) I think neo classical theory is flawed in several respects. It takes ideas of deregulation, privatisation, flat taxes, and pushes them much too far. However I support private ownership in a general way, free trade and reasonably open immigration. So its hard to generalise. Its also politicians that tend to push certain things too far, to further self interest agendas, more so than economists. Thanks for the reference to Herman Daly. He appears to promote steady state economies. I have had a quick read and am sympathetic to his views. Its fair to say economics generally assumes economic growth is a good thing, but then so do most people. I don't think the economics profession has got to grips with the growth and resource scarcity issues very well, and politicians certainly haven't.

Comment on Forced Responses: Jan 2018 by Killian

Wed, 17 Jan 2018 02:38:59 +0000

#174 nigelj said Killian @136 “Yes, we know some things are recyclable. Endlessly? Not so much.” Just posting a simple denial doesn’t do much. You post no sources. Do you need an explanation of why the sun seems to rise and set, too? As I have said: You do not belong in the conversation. And, I am not the only person to have made this point on these pages, so why do you only attack my comment with your ignorance? To make sure you understand my point above, let me say if you do not understand why there are losses in production, you're ignorant to a degree that makes your commenting here an absurdity.

Comment on Unforced Variations: Jan 2018 by Thomas

Wed, 17 Jan 2018 02:17:03 +0000

PS re: "These results highlight the issue of increased water scarcity in the Mediterranean region under climate change." Hadn't the even the IPCC summaries noted this for the mediteranean years ago? (my memory, sorry dont have a link atm) I do understand the issue is "increased scarcity" but no where can one see how much any "possible/maybe" increase is vs modelling in quantitative terms ... in the above links. I'm wondering what 'value' there is in this Letter for working climate scientists.

Comment on Unforced Variations: Jan 2018 by Thomas

Wed, 17 Jan 2018 02:08:10 +0000

(while not reading...due to cost)

Comment on Forced Responses: Jan 2018 by Mr. Know It All

Wed, 17 Jan 2018 02:05:15 +0000

166 - nigelj "Did you feel better after that bitter and twisted political rant?"...and "Perhaps because most humans are damaging the planet. Perhaps you didn’t do science at school, but students probably know more about CO2 than some of the commentators on this website (A McDonald for example)" My comment was a reply to 119, point by point. School children don't need to be indoctrinated about global warming, a phenomenon that less than 1% of adults understand, and which no children understand. I try to avoid insulting other commenters unlike your comment about A McDonald, so tell me who made the more bitter comment - you or me? [edit - there is nothing as tedious as people whining when tedious comments get deleted. Get over yourself]

Comment on Unforced Variations: Jan 2018 by Thomas

Wed, 17 Jan 2018 01:46:38 +0000

This: Comes from This: Which originally comes from This: Nature Climate Change 7, 813–816 (2017) doi:10.1038/nclimate3416 Is that "Letter" worthwhile, and really useful, or is it perhaps merely a sales/income generator for Nature that becomes redundant (or totally lost in the noise) of genuine research into impacts of AGW/CC? While reading the whole thing in full, due to "cost", I was already aware that historically for thousands of years southern europe had a lower precip water flow than nth europe anyway. So how does a paper like this really matter, or present material that has the appearance that this differential is caused by climate change, versus the status quo natural way it has always been? Does someone (time &) have sufficient knowledge and access to the paper to be able to say it is useful and important for climate science know-how in general ...