What can I do for global warming?

@handyandy said
Can you back that up with any scientific studies?

Yes. I posted several on the sea level rise thread on this forum. Humy is lying. He is ego bruised because I proved him wrong so many times.

@humy said
Been here many times before. He can't. The science and study after study suggests most if not all the most recent warming (last few decades) is due to man made causes and partly because no known natural causes can explain most of that warming and partly because even basic physics tells us more CO2 should cause warming and it would be a huge scientific mystery if it didn't!

You are a liar.
I have posted peer reviewed articles that proved you wrong. You failed to prove your case using sea level rise.

Drive less. Walk, bike, carpool or take mass transit more often.

@metal-brain said
You are a liar.
I have posted peer reviewed articles that proved you wrong. You failed to prove your case using sea level rise.

As usual, you lie. You proved nothing other than your stupidity. What do you think sea level rise 'proves' other than the oceans are warming?

@humy said
As usual, you lie. You proved nothing other than your stupidity. What do you think sea level rise 'proves' other than the oceans are warming?

You are the liar. I proved the warming was mostly from natural causes, not man made as you keep lying about. I posted a peer reviewed article from a respected science journal and you posted nothing to counter it. You are a liar.

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2006GL028492

@metal-brain said
You are the liar. I proved the warming was mostly from natural causes, not man made as you keep lying about. I posted a peer reviewed article from a respected science journal and you posted nothing to counter it. You are a liar.

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2006GL028492

Here we go yet again;

For starters, your above link is for ONLY SEA LEVEL RISE and thus doesn't measure temperature including sea temperatures.

+ It also says;

"...All the stations in this study show a significant increase in sea level over the period 1904–2003 with an average increase of 174 mm during that time (Figure 4).
...
The mean rate of rise was greater in the first half of this period than the latter half, though the difference in rates was not found to be significant.
..."

So, it does NOT deny the sea level is rising and doesn't prove the climate isn't warming and, the above words "though the difference in rates was not found to be significant" means it also does NOT prove we are not responsible for most of this warming, which it wouldn't do even if the difference was 'significant' because this is sea level rise, not temperature rise (and even that reasoning is moronically ignoring the fact natural fluxuations in temperature are superimposed on man made warming).

In short, it does nothing to prove me and the scientists wrong about anything because all the data there is consistent with what the science says.

In fact, if you look at the TEMPERATURE data, not to be confused with sea level rise, you will see that the rate of increase in warming of the oceans has itself been increasing in the last half of that same time period. Just look at the actual TEMPERATURE data here;

https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-global-temperature

So, even according to your same moronic 'logic' that moronically just completely ignores natural fluxuations in temperature superimposed on man made warming, that should 'prove' to you that most of the recent warming was caused by man.

Try again.

@humy said
Here we go yet again;

For starters, your above link is for ONLY SEA LEVEL RISE and thus doesn't measure temperature including sea temperatures.

+ It also says;

"...All the stations in this study show a significant increase in sea level over the period 1904–2003 with an average increase of 174 mm during that time (Figure 4).
...
The mean rate of rise was greater in th ...[text shortened]... warming, that should 'prove' to you that most of the recent warming was caused by man.

Try again.

Sea level rise is a very good indicator of temperature. Sea temperatures are a factor in seas level rise because of the thermal expansion of ocean water. Melting glaciers are the other factor in seal lever rise which is also a very good indicator of temps. When glaciers melt where does it go? Into the ocean.

You are trying to obfuscate by digressing into temp data which is often cherry picked by alarmists like you to mislead people. Take your "heat island effect data" and shove it up your ass. This is about sea level rise and it is the best indication of temperatures we have today.

You have failed again. I provided you with a peer reviewed article from a respected science journal and you changed the subject to data that is commonly manipulated with cherry picked data.

The whole point of my sea level rise thread was to prevent cherry picked temp data from being used to lie. Apparently you like being able to lie about it.

Global warming is real, but it is from mostly natural causes. There is nothing unusual about sea level rise. I challenged you to present a peer reviewed article to make your case and you have failed again.

Prove it using sea level rise or stop your blatant lying!

@metal-brain said
Sea level rise is a very good indicator of temperature.

A much better indicator of temperature is the direct temperature readings ( OBVIOUSLY! ), which, because they show the exact opposite of your claim by showing the rate of temperature increase in the second half of that period INcreased i.e. did NOT decrease as you claimed, proves to us all here you are wrong and deliberately obtuse. You convince nobody here.

Try again.

@metal-brain said
Sea level rise is a very good indicator of temperature. Sea temperatures are a factor in seas level rise because of the thermal expansion of ocean water. Melting glaciers are the other factor in seal lever rise which is also a very good indicator of temps. When glaciers melt where does it go? Into the ocean.

You are trying to obfuscate by digressing into temp data whic ...[text shortened]... ke your case and you have failed again.

Prove it using sea level rise or stop your blatant lying!

Hmmm I wonder if there might be another good indicator of temperature. Maybe one where you don't have the confounding factors of thermal expansion and space filled by melting glaciers? Is there a way to directly measure temperature with sensors that are calibrated and configured? I'm sure you could work this out with a small device (no larger than a peanut) that allowed you convert the changes in temperature to a digital readout? We could call it a thermometer.

@metal-brain said
Yes. I posted several on the sea level rise thread on this forum. Humy is lying. He is ego bruised because I proved him wrong so many times.

Do you know of any reliable climate change studies focusing on factors other than sea level rise?

@handyandy said
Do you know of any reliable climate change studies focusing on factors other than sea level rise?

Yes, the ice core samples show methane and CO2 lagged behind temps so before the industrial revolution temps can be estimated by methane and CO2 levels. After the industrial revolution the best measure is sea level rise.

Alarmists prefer temp data so they can select the "heat island effect" to mislead people. Sea level data cannot be misrepresented in that way so alarmists hate it. It is the best measure of temperatures today.

Sea level rise results from higher temps. Contrary to the stupid claim of humy, there is no better measure of temperatures. You cannot get a heat island effect with sea level rise. Humy even pointed out the first half of the long term sea level rise graph rose less than the second half. What he omits is that the second half of sea level rise is less than 50% more than the first half.

That is proof man is NOT the main cause of GW. That is why alarmist hate being confined to sea level rise. They hate being denied the heat island effect as their preferred option to mislead and lie.

There is no better measure of temps than sea level rise. Who can name a factor of sea level rise that does not result from temperature rise? Humy is a deceitful SOB and he knows it.

@metal-brain said
Yes, the ice core samples show methane and CO2 lagged behind temps so before the industrial revolution temps can be estimated by methane and CO2 levels. After the industrial revolution the best measure is sea level rise.

Alarmists prefer temp data so they can select the "heat island effect" to mislead people. Sea level data cannot be misrepresented in that way so alarm ...[text shortened]... sea level rise that does not result from temperature rise? Humy is a deceitful SOB and he knows it.

I don't think anyone is claiming that man is the only contributor to climate change. Do you have links to any of these studies?

@handyandy said
I don't think anyone is claiming that man is the only contributor to climate change. Do you have links to any of these studies?

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2006GL028492

@metal-brain said
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2006GL028492

This links to a study on the AGU100 website. On another page, the organization publishes its position statement on climate change, which opens as follows:

Humanity is the major influence on the global climate change observed over the past 50 years. Rapid societal responses can significantly lessen negative outcomes.

Human activities are changing Earth’s climate. At the global level, atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping greenhouse gases have increased sharply since the Industrial Revolution. Fossil fuel burning dominates this increase. Human-caused increases in greenhouse gases are responsible for most of the observed global average surface warming of roughly 0.8°C (1.5°F) over the past 140 years. Because natural processes cannot quickly remove some of these gases (notably carbon dioxide) from the atmosphere, our past, present, and future emissions will influence the climate system for millennia.

Extensive, independent observations confirm the reality of global warming. These observations show large-scale increases in air and sea temperatures, sea level, and atmospheric water vapor; they document decreases in the extent of mountain glaciers, snow cover, permafrost, and Arctic sea ice. These changes are broadly consistent with long-understood physics and predictions of how the climate system is expected to respond to human-caused increases in greenhouse gases. The changes are inconsistent with explanations of climate change that rely on known natural influences.

@handyandy said
This links to a study on the AGU100 website. On another page, the organization publishes its position statement on climate change, which opens as follows:

Humanity is the major influence on the global climate change observed over the past 50 years. Rapid societal responses can significantly lessen negative outcomes.

Human activities are changing Earth’s climate. At th ...[text shortened]... nges are inconsistent with explanations of climate change that rely on known natural influences.[/b]

What organization? What does it have to do with the study?