Global Warming is over.

[gwb72tii]

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/nasa-study-mass-gains-of-antarctic-ice-sheet-greater-than-losses

[smooth]

Do you post these articles because of the headlines or do you actually read them?

Even within that article the researcher pointed out that his findings were "bad news" since the fact that the Antarctic was basically moving ice from one region to the other (based on the past few decades' climate and we've yet to see the impacts of the past decade, which he also pointed out, for reasons I hope you can figure out provided you don't erroneously believe glaciers shrink and reconstruct in a year or so) means documented sea level rises must be attributed to melting ice/snowpack elsewhere on the globe.

This goes back to the bizarre argument people tend to make about this issue: sure, maybe the globe's climate is changing but the planet will survive. Well no shit! The issue isn't and has never been about whether the planet was going to not make it through, the problem is that humans won't make it through.


Regardless this is ignoring the issues raised previously be researchers (including NASA themselves) of the fact that glaciers aren't as deep as they used to be and the ice sheet is being hollowed out underneath by warmer currents than previously experienced. I presume they don't raise that here because it's considered settled science and isn't "news" anymore. This article comes out at the same time where scientists are declaring a third year running of the hottest on record.

Pretty much all of the projections have not come to pass, no statistical warming since 1997, etc.

Not only was this the third consecutive year to rank hotter than all previous years, it also means 16 of the 17 hottest years on record have occurred since 2000, according to NOAA. To put this in perspective, the last time we had a record cold year was 1911.

Temperatures over the Earth's continents and oceans in 2016 were 1.1 degree Celsius (1.98 degrees Fahrenheit) above the pre-industrial average, according to the WMO. That means we are already a majority of the way to the 1.5-degree warming goal set at the Paris Climate Agreement in 2015."
[...]
To come up with its figures the WMO combined different global temperature datasets from various sources, including NOAA, NASA, the UK Met Office and the European weather and climate center, ECMWF.

Despite using different methods to compile and analyze the temperatures, all those agencies reached the same conclusion -- that 2016 "continued the long-term trend of warming we have seen since the 1970s ... and have not paused in any way," said Gavin Schmidt, director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/18/world/2016-hottest-year/

That's what the director of the Institute who did the research you are hinging your opinion upon has to say about the issue. It would seem like a good opportunity to bring up his Institute's research from a little over a year ago if it was actually saying what you interpreted it to mean

[BraveUlysses]

Do you post these articles because of the headlines or do you actually read them?

lol

[LBJefferies]

that is exactly the point Lee
we are burning co2 from the past, its not like we're adding co2 that hasn't been here before

Lol I am a bit of a skeptic myself (not of warming but of how we should react to it) but your arguments aren't even good ones. That co2 has been trapped deep underground since the Carboniferous Period which ended 300 million years ago. Can you not see how releasing trillions of tons of carbon into the atmosphere, and thus changing its chemical composition entirely, could alter the system? Are you really that dense? These types of changes in the past have brought about mass extinction events and ushered in completely new geologic epochs.

[z31maniac]

These types of changes in the past have brought about mass extinction events and ushered in completely new geologic epochs.

Given the current inhabitants of this planet, us, I don't really see this as a problem.

[LBJefferies]

Given the current inhabitants of this planet, us, I don't really see this as a problem.

Haha ok so because humans might be able to survive a mass extinction event, it's NBD?

[marshallnoise]

Haha ok so because humans might be able to survive a mass extinction event, it's NBD?

The. Sky. Is. Falling.

[mrsleeve]

I think you took that one the wrong way l there holmes

[ForcedFirebird]

I was on the understanding methane was the bigger scare than co2?

Again, no one talks much of methane.

[BraveUlysses]

It's talked about plenty, here's some reading about it if you're curious:

https://www.skepticalscience.com/methane-and-global-warming.htm

[marshallnoise]

It's talked about plenty, here's some reading about it if you're curious:

https://www.skepticalscience.com/met...al-warming.htm

No more beef, dairy or farting.

[Wschnitz]

Beef is already on its way to having a viable synthetic substitute, Dairy is incredibly over-consumed and marketed in america, the famous Got-Milk? Commercials made sure of that, but dairy cows are much less of the problem compared to the millions of Beef cattle.

The bigger problem is Methane and other gasses releasing from arctic tundra because of our current CO2 Emissions increasing the global average temperature. Which is dangerous, since those new gasses being introduced will cause the same effect. Creating a pretty obvious cycle.

[ForcedFirebird]

It's talked about plenty, here's some reading about it if you're curious:

https://www.skepticalscience.com/met...al-warming.htm

I meant in here. Read plenty about it ;)

There's lots of controversy about how harmful it is compared to co2, but as a greenhouse gas, it's proven far more volatile in the atmo right? Everyone in this thread keeps bringing up the co2, but as population increases, naturally consumption will too.

Beef is already on its way to having a viable synthetic substitute, Dairy is incredibly over-consumed and marketed in america, the famous Got-Milk?

Interesting you bring that up. 20+yr ago one of my room mates did a college paper on dairy products and humans. I forget the title exactly, but it was something along the lines of "Finding proof dairy is good for humans, that is NOT supplied by the USDA". He ended up with a long paper with interesting facts about human bodies reacting to animal proteins - ended the paper with a line of the sorts: "Humans are one of the only mammals who continue to drink milk after weening".

This was when the internet was a baby, I was amazed how much is written about it in modern times - it was just generally accepted that "milk does a body good".

[Wschnitz]

Yeah when its really just a luxury drink we overuse. It was marketed extremely heavy to be beneficial to our bones, teeth, etc, when the reality seems to be it just help us get fatter.

[nando]

I don't drink milk anymore. Yuck. :p

I do eat cheese and dairy products though..

I don't think you'll find much to dispute that methane is worse than C02. I think the biggest risk to the climate is possibly methane thawing in the arctic/antarctica.