Climate Change acronym memory aid challenge - how to sum up risks to people and planet?

[dlamberth]

How about the One that I dance with?

Well, quite honestly, the way things are made up, I wonder sometimes.

 

[AV1611VET]

If God's believers said that the ingredients had actual real history when that's not the case, in my opinion that would make God's Creation a lie. But God can't lie. So your "IF" example is bogus and not based on anything.

You can't even understand the question, can you?

 

[AV1611VET]

Well, quite honestly, the way things are made up, I wonder sometimes.

Just out of curiosity, how much Christian doctrine do you feel you know enough to debate one?

You're answers are so evasive, it's like trying to read a newspaper through a translucent window.

 

[eclipsenow]

None of that justifies the charge I have against you.

The "Charge you have against me?" Ha ha ha. That's a bit melodramatic? You've never met me.

Anyway, when things get off track like this I can get over-invested.
I'm not a moderator - but sometimes have to remind myself that in this forum:

Do not flame other views. Christianity cannot be called a myth, and science cannot be called a religion or made up. Threads started, or responses made, to simply disparage science will be considered off topic to the forum.​

​

Creation and Evolution discussions are off topic to this main forum, and should be started in the sub-forum, Creation & Evolution.​

​

Statement of Purpose - Physical & Life Sciences Statement of Purpose

Physical & Life Sciences Statement of Purpose The Physical & Life Sciences forum is a discussion and debate area on physics, biology, chemistry and other physical sciences. Other physical sciences may include but is not limited to astronomy, earth science, archeology, climate change...

www.christianforums.com

so God Himself confirms that the vast majority of professing "christians" are going to be cast into the lake of fire. He said in another passage, that "the road that leads to hell is broad and many travel on it, but the road that leads to heaven is narrow and few find it.

So in your mind - TE's are going to hell? They're not saved by grace alone, Christ alone, faith alone and scripture alone (for guidance to all good works?) Many Christians much smarter than yourself are TE's. Read my signature. He's a TE. He's also done more to debate New Atheists like Richard Dawkins than any YEC banging their drum.

The climate is not a static thing, it's always changing on a daily basis and it also changes over the run. Everyday goes from cool to warm to rainy to dry etc. That's what the climate does because God created it to do that.

I love it when armchair deniers point out “The climate’s changed before!” Um, ya think?

What do you think climatologists study to understand the Climate Sensitivity?

They gather ‘Proxies’ - the marks various temperatures and gas mixes leave on the earth, and study them to get a snapshot of the temperature of the deep past. This helps fine tune their understanding of Climate Sensitivity - how much CO2 (and other greenhouse gases) will cause how much warming.

The average climate denier snorts “It’s changed before!” as if they’ve suddenly found the Achilles heel of the whole argument. But just like the old saying, when you point at someone there are 3 fingers pointing back at yourself. It reveals how ignorant the denier is of the very nature of climate science!

AS IF the professional climatologists have NOT extensively studied how and why the climate has changed in deep history!? The very idea of them just blindly ignoring that is preposterous!

Now here is the real question. Does the denier know what they found? Why the climate changes? What are the mechanisms? Why does the world go into and out of 'ice ages' (AKA glacial periods)?

Climate scepticism is an insidious anti-science meme sponsored by Big Oil and Coal and have funded various church groups, retirement villages, and online echo-chambers. Here are the top 10 myths promoted by such people - so they can sing from the same denier hymn book. And they do so without once discussing it with an actual climatologist.

None of the climate alarmist dare debate the experts, they would be humiliated very quickly, so they avoid the real scientists ;like the plague

That's just FUNNY!

 

[eclipsenow]

Just out of curiosity, how much Christian doctrine do you feel you know enough to debate one?

Dude - what kind of forum are you in again?
Theology or science?
Check the heading.... read the words.... put the letters together in your head.... there you go! Thataboy! Got it now? Well done!

 

[AV1611VET]

Now here is the real question. Does the denier know what they found? Why the climate changes? What are the mechanisms? Why does the world go into and out of 'ice ages' (AKA glacial periods)?

Would you address this please:

Furthermore, since the theory of global warming assumes maximum warming at the poles, why have average temperatures in the Arctic dropped by 0.88°C over the past 50 years?

SOURCE

 

[AV1611VET]

Dude - what kind of forum are you in again?
Theology or science?
Check the heading.... read the words.... put the letters together in your head.... there you go! Thataboy! Got it now? Well done!

Fair enough.

I apologize.

 

[Ophiolite]

Are your children and grandchildren aware that these harms are being placed in check by the Creator of the earth Himself?

Genesis 8:22 While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease.

Or will they be left to themselves to fear needlessly; and grow up with a disdain for non-alarmists like grandpa?

For the record, did your parents put the fear of nature in you?

Or did you learn to fear this on your own through academia?

View attachment 345411

Your are using empty, irrelevant rhetoric to ignore thoroughly validated facts and thereby acting on behalf of ignorance and evil. Shame on you,

 

[eclipsenow]

Would you address this please:

Furthermore, since the theory of global warming assumes maximum warming at the poles, why have average temperatures in the Arctic dropped by 0.88°C over the past 50 years?

SOURCE

Hang on - Gregory Gardener is a GP? Really? And this article is from 1998? Seriously - would you get brain surgery from your mechanic, or legal advice from your dentist? Also - what on earth is he talking about? Everyone knows the poles are crazy warm, permafrost across Siberia is melting (which it kind of shouldn't - given the name PERMA-Frost), the Greenland ice sheet is melting, the glaciers are retreating, the seasons are arriving earlier (and sometimes later) because the JET STREAM IS 'DRUNK' on climate change. Why? Because the Poles have warmed so much the temperature differential between the equator and poles isn't as defined - and the jet stream is not as locked in place by the 2 temperature zones. This means it can wander about all over the place - dumping Arctic blizzards unseasonably LATE in the year.

In other words - a warmer planet and warmer poles = weirdly COLD local weather.
Which makes sense if you study the GLOBAL system.

But if you just stick your head out your window and think "Gee it's colder today than normal - so much for this global warming theory!" then you're missing the bigger picture and intentionally remaining in your ignorance.

Dude - EVERYONE knows the poles ARE warmer. Dangerously so! I'm surprised you would quote this paper by a GP from over a quarter century ago!

Seriously - stop sprouting your 'opinions' on these forums for 5 minutes and read some headlines once in a while!

Antarctic areas reach 40C above normal at same time as north pole regions hit 30C above usual levels​

​

The danger is twofold: heatwaves at the poles are a strong signal of the damage humanity is wreaking on the climate; and the melting could also trigger further cascading changes that will accelerate climate breakdown.​

​

As polar sea ice melts, particularly in the Arctic, it reveals dark sea that absorbs more heat than reflective ice, warming the planet further. Much of the Antarctic ice covers land, and its melting raises sea levels.​

​

Scientists warned that the events unfolding were “historic”, “unprecedented” and “dramatic”.​

​

Michael Mann, director of the Earth System Science Centre at Pennsylvania State University, said the extreme weather being recorded was exceeding predictions to a worrying extent.​

​

“The warming of the Arctic and Antarctic is cause for concern, and the increase in extreme weather events – of which these are an example – is a cause for concern as well,” he said. “The models have done a good job projecting the overall warming, but we’ve argued that extreme events are exceeding model projections. These events drive home the urgency of action.”​

​

The latest unprecedented weather patterns follow a series of alarming heatwaves in 2021, most notably in the US Pacific north-west, where previous records were shattered by several degrees as temperatures climbed close to 50C.​

​

Mark Maslin, professor of earth system science at University College London, said: “I and colleagues were shocked by the number and severity of the extreme weather events in 2021 – which were unexpected at a warming of 1.2C. Now we have record temperatures in the Arctic which, for me, show we have entered a new extreme phase of climate change much earlier than we had expected.”​

​

The Associated Press reported that one weather station in Antarctica beat its all-time record by 15C, while another coastal station used to deep freezes at this time of year was 7C above freezing. In the Arctic, meanwhile, some parts were 30C warmer than average.​

​

Heatwaves at both of Earth’s poles alarm climate scientists

Antarctic areas reach 40C above normal at same time as north pole regions hit 30C above usual levels

www.theguardian.com

 

[Dan1988]

That perspective makes God's creation a lie. That doesn't work for me.

There are billions of private opinions out there, then we have Gods Word. He created all thigs so I think i will believe Him and dismiss your opinion as baseless nonsense.

 

[Dan1988]

I like the "whilst" instead of "while" in the first sentence. Too few people use whilst today; it carries a sense of elegance and seems more nuanced.

Unfortunately the rest of the post is full of misinformation, a false dichotomy, and empty assertions. Your last statement is palpably false, as attested to by almost all experts in the field. There are some things one can legitimately argue about climate change - its reality is not one of them.

I don't know what qualifications you have. to make any valid points on the climate debate. The experts don't agree with each other, so it's pointless and futile for butchers and pastry chefs to weigh in on the debate as they have nothing to offer apart from speculation.

The debate has been raging for around 40 years now and we are no closer to reaching a conclusion than we were in the beginning. We have one group of scientists who have been paid to study the climate and fabricate a particular result, so they don't get paid if they don't produce the required outcome.

We have another group of independent scientists showing entirely different results with their studies. So the casual observer can see one group producing false results in order to be paid and the the findings of the independent group, exposes their scam.

The man on the street is clueless, so most do as sheep do and follow the crowd. I don't follow crowds, I'm a free thinking individual who doesn't drink kool aid just because the crowd does.

 

[eclipsenow]

There are billions of private opinions out there, then we have Gods Word. He created all thigs so I think i will believe Him and dismiss your opinion as baseless nonsense.

As I said to AV above -

What kind of forum are you in again?
Theology or science?
Please sound out the letters. S C I E N C E.
Now say the word.
There you go.

Now - I'm not a moderator - but I'm just trying to understand how this next rule applies in here. It seems to me it might be best not to carry on in a certain way - don't you agree?

Disparage: regard or represent as being of little worth. "he never missed an opportunity to disparage his competitors"

Do not flame other views. Christianity cannot be called a myth, and science cannot be called a religion or made up. Threads started, or responses made, to simply disparage science will be considered off topic to the forum.​

Creation and Evolution discussions are off topic to this main forum, and should be started in the sub-forum, Creation & Evolution.​

Statement of Purpose - Physical & Life Sciences Statement of Purpose​

 

[eclipsenow]

I don't know what qualifications you have. to make any valid points on the climate debate. The experts don't agree with each other...

I'm pretty sure I've addressed this nonsense before - and given you the NASA statement below before.
Let's try again shall we? See how your comprehension is going.

Yes, the vast majority of actively publishing climate scientists – 97 percent – agree that humans are causing global warming and climate change. Most of the leading science organizations around the world have issued public statements expressing this, including international and U.S. science academies, the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and a whole host of reputable scientific bodies around the world. A list of these organizations is provided here. NASA​

Academies of science (general science)​

Since 2001, 34 national science academies, three regional academies, and both the international InterAcademy Council and International Council of Academies of Engineering and Technological Sciences have made formal declarations confirming human induced global warming and urging nations to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases. The 34 national science academy statements include 33 who have signed joint science academy statements and one individual declaration by the Polish Academy of Sciences in 2007.​

List of statements by major scientific organizations about climate change - Wikipedia​

The only major Scientific organisation that disagreed years ago? Guess who? "American Association of Petroleum Geologists". Gee - I wonder why? But the good news is:

Since 2007, when the American Association of Petroleum Geologists released a revised statement, no longer does any national or international scientific body reject the findings of human-induced effects on climate change.​

List of statements by major scientific organizations about climate change - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[sjastro]

The anti AGW nonsense in this thread is so pronounced it makes one think if Poe's law is in effect.

 

[AV1611VET]

The anti AGW nonsense in this thread is so pronounced it makes one think if Poe's law is in effect.

I remember a comic strip that showed a man and woman looking out their window at an approaching tornado.

Man: Quick! Into the basement.
Wife: Can't! Radon gas!

Man: Quick! Into the bathroom.
Wife: Can't! Asbestos pipes!

Man: Quick! Into the utility room.
Wife: Can't! Carbon monoxide.

So they just sit down on the couch and await the inevitable.

Maybe we're too busy trying to save the whales, plant trees, install pollution detectors and solar panels, building underground shelters, wind turbines, praying asteroids and comets will miss us, getting water filters, recycling our trash, and getting all the asbestos out of our houses right now to worry about AGW?

 

[eclipsenow]

Maybe we're too busy trying to save the whales, plant trees, install pollution detectors and solar panels, building underground shelters, wind turbines, praying asteroids and comets will miss us, getting water filters, recycling our trash, and getting all the asbestos out of our houses right now to worry about AGW?

When you look at the nightly news what issues concern you as a Christian? Is there anything that grieves you or concerns you - or is everything Pollyanna sweet in your world?

 

[eclipsenow]

Would you address this please:

Furthermore, since the theory of global warming assumes maximum warming at the poles, why have average temperatures in the Arctic dropped by 0.88°C over the past 50 years?

SOURCE

I addressed it.
Your reply? Do you concede you basically quoted a carpenter about your legal fees - sorry - that's plumber about your brain surgery - sorry - that's a GP ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE?

Oh - and that EVERYTHING shows this GP's 26 year old idea to be wrong?

 

[eclipsenow]

QV please:

Synopsis:

Alarmists do four things:

1. Hide the data.
2. Repeat a mantra.
3. Act arrogantly.
4. Enlist all kinds of constituents that disagree with non-alarmists, because they [constituents] want to make money.

So you did a quick google and found something that suited your fancy? How wonderful for you.
Unfortunately for you - I'm not going to watch Denial rubbish put on youtube. It's usually too shallow and annoying.
If you want me to reply the most you'll get away with (from me at least) is about 3 paragraphs of writing. Then I can at least see what I'm dealing with - and reply paragraph by paragraph. But I'm just over youtuber Deniers use sneering sarcasm and mood music and all kinds of manipulative rubbish.

On the other hand - and I acknowledge quite hypocritically - I WILL sometimes post Climate videos. Why do I allow myself this indulgence?
First - I tend to post either news reports or actual climatologists with degrees in the science - not random individuals sprouting gibberish.
Second - climate science is hard to understand sometimes - like REAL hard - and I find that the graphics in the videos can actually help.
Sorry - but that's the way it is. However, I looked up the name you quoted and you've done it again! You're quoting a carpenter about your brain surgery!

Irrelevant.

1. I am not an alarmist.
2. The data can be found in the documents published openly by the IPCC.
3. Mantras seem one of the few things that attract the attention of people with their heads in the sand, fingers in their ears, incessantly mouthing la-la-la-la. . . .
4. You are mistaking disgust, fear and bewilderment for arrogance. Arrogance is ignoring the vast body of evidence for AGW.
5. Conspiracy theories are one of the last refuges of the incompetent.

Jay Lehr can take a hike along with your dangerous denials that contribute to the harm of my children and grandchildren. Enough already!

Exactly!​

The fact that this guy once had the audacity to repeat these rubbish assertions must be some form of projection - because it's everything HE did from the sounds of it!

Just 5 seconds on Desmog blog shows he's not a climatologist - but OF COURSE is part of the Heartland institute. OF COURSE AV quotes someone like that! Ha ha.

​

Background​

Jay H. Lehr was a senior fellow3 and former “Science Director”4 of the Heartland Institute. He was editor of “Rational Readings of Environmental Concerns,” which labeled environmentalists as “extremists” and “alarmists.” He testified before Congress numerous times on environmental issues. Lehr passed away on January 10, 2023.5

Dr. Lehr’s experience is in groundwater hydrology. He received the nation’s first Ph.D. in Groundwater Hydrology from the University of Arizona and later became the executive director of the National Association of Groundwater Scientists and Engineers.6

Jay Lehr, who has called the EPA “Fraudulent” in its estimates of how pollution poses hazards to human health, was himself convicted and sentenced to six months in prison for defrauding the EPA, reports Connor Gibson of Polluterwatch.7

Jay H. Lehr

Jay H. Lehr (Deceased) Credentials Profile image screenshot from YouTube, Jay Lehr speaking at the Heartland Institute’s 12th International Conference on Climate Change (ICCC12). Background Jay H. Lehr was a senior fellow and former “Science Director”2“Policy Experts & Staff,” The Heartland...

www.desmog.com

According to archived tobacco industry documents, Jay Lehr was among “TASSC member scientists” who helped The Advancement of Sound Science Coalition (TASSC) draft its “Five Guiding Scientific Principles” document.8 TASSC began as an astroturf group for Philip Morris Tobacco, working as a “national coalition intended to educate the media, public officials and the public about the dangers of ‘junk science’” and to “link the tobacco issue with other more ‘politically correct’ products”; and to associate scientific studies that cast smoking in a bad light with “broader questions about government research and regulations” – such as “global warming”, “nuclear waste disposal” and “biotechnology, according to memos from the PR firm APCO to Philip Morris in 1993.9

 

[AV1611VET]

When you look at the nightly news what issues concern you as a Christian?

Abortion, crime, alternate lifestyles, democrats, shacking up, etc.

 

[AV1611VET]

I addressed it.
Your reply? Do you concede you basically quoted a carpenter about your legal fees - sorry - that's plumber about your brain surgery - sorry - that's a GP ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE?

Oh - and that EVERYTHING shows this GP's 26 year old idea to be wrong?

What does GP stand for?

And yes, it looks like I fell victim to ever-changing science.

I don't keep up with the latest science fads like others do.