Experts admit global warming predictions wrong

[Irvinecommuter]

Too lazy to start another thread:

Darla Shine, a former TV producer and podcaster, falsely claimed Wednesday that sizable measles outbreaks in Washington state and New York are fake.

?Bring back our #ChildhoodDiseases they keep you healthy & fight cancer,? she tweeted, falsely claiming that a 2014 Mayo Clinic study proved the measles cures cancer.

In fact, the study outlined the use of a genetically modified version of the virus to treat one woman?s blood cancer. There?s no evidence that the standard measles virus cures cancer.

Darla Shine retweeted several people who peddled conspiracy theories that the government intends to hurt people using vaccines and that the injections cause autism. The CDC reports no link between vaccines and autism.

https://www.yahoo.com/huffpost/top-trump-official-wife-calls-172151943.html

 

[Liar Loan]

There have been several "scientific" predictions that soon California will have no skiing/snowboarding season at all.

Mammoth Mountain Breaks 30-Year-Old February Snowfall Record

With over 22 feet of snow at the top, Mammoth broke their record for most snowfall in February. The record was set in February of 1987.

To put the heavy snowfall in perspective, they broke the record in just 16 days.

Mammoth Mountain boasts the most snow in the country. With all that snow, the resort has announced they will stay open until July 4th of this year.

So far in February, the mountain has received over 22 feet of snow and has received 446 inches of snow on their summit so far this season. This is the highest number of any resort in North America.

https://activenorcal.com/mammoth-mountain-breaks-30-year-old-february-snowfall-record/

 

[morekaos]

Whaaa? I thought this was the "New Normal"?  I guess a change in leadership can change the weather,  or maybe its Global cooling this week.

Is Drought the ?New Normal? for California?

Some have already jumped to this conclusion.

?This is the new normal,? Gov. Jerry Brown declared during an April 1 press conference at which he announced mandatory urban water restrictions statewide, the first in state history. The news media amplified the pithy quote and several other elected officials have repeated the claim as their own.

Brown made the announcement at a snowless Sierra snow survey site. The water content of the mountain snowpack, so crucial to California?s water supply, was only 5 percent of the April 1 average, by far the lowest reading on record for that date.

https://www.newsdeeply.com/water/articles/2015/07/20/is-drought-the-new-normal-for-california

 

[zubs]

2018 winter very wet very cold, snowing in Vegas.

I heard on the radio that this winter will be the last one where we have this much snow.  It will be dry like 2016 and 2017 for the foreseeable future.
I'll check back on this thread every year to see if the predictions are true.


time capsule post.

 

[Liar Loan]

Twin Cities / Minneapolis set February snowfall record ? and it?s not over yet

St. Paul and Minneapolis declared snow emergencies Wednesday as a winter storm dropped up to 10 inches on the metro area, making this the snowiest February on record in the Twin Cities by a wide margin.

The snowfall, which began early Wednesday morning and began to taper off only late in the afternoon, is just the first round expected this week. The second is forecast to arrive on Friday and continue through the weekend.

The snowfall was especially intense in the morning. By noon, the airport ? which records the metro area?s official precipitation totals ? had already received 7.8 inches, bringing the February tally for the Twin Cities to 30.4 inches. By 6 p.m., 8.9 inches of snow had fallen at the airport, bringing the monthly total to 31.5 inches.

Not only does that eclipse the metro area?s previous February record of 25.6 inches set in 1962, it also makes this among the top 10 snowiest months in Twin Cities history. The top month was November 1991, when 46.9 inches fell, much of it as a result of the infamous Halloween Blizzard.

https://www.twincities.com/2019/02/20/st-paul-minneapolis-minnesota-february-snow-record/

 

[fortune11]

If I can sum this up and other currently ?hot topics? among the MAGA crowd ?

If it's cold anywhere, climate change is a hoax.

If a single hate crime is faked, racism doesn't exist.

If a single rape accusation is falsified, sexual assault isn't an issue.

Right wing thought in 2019 is just a glorified series of get-out-of-thinking free cards

 

[morekaos]

Again, accusing the other side of always thinking in absolutes, just not the case.

 

[Irvinecommuter]

Again, accusing the other side of always thinking in absolutes, just not the case.

Then maybe the other side should stop using anecdotal examples as sort of definitive evidence while ignoring context and other facts.

 

[Liar Loan]

Again, accusing the other side of always thinking in absolutes, just not the case.

Then maybe the other side should stop using anecdotal examples as sort of definitive evidence while ignoring context and other facts.

There is nobody that uses more anecdotes about climate change than those trying to create a panic.  Fact.

 

[Irvinecommuter]

Again, accusing the other side of always thinking in absolutes, just not the case.

Then maybe the other side should stop using anecdotal examples as sort of definitive evidence while ignoring context and other facts.

There is nobody that uses more anecdotes about climate change than those trying to create a panic.  Fact.

From the side that confuses weather with climate.

 

[Liar Loan]

Again, accusing the other side of always thinking in absolutes, just not the case.

Then maybe the other side should stop using anecdotal examples as sort of definitive evidence while ignoring context and other facts.

There is nobody that uses more anecdotes about climate change than those trying to create a panic.  Fact.

From the side that confuses weather with climate.

This is such a telling comment.  It shows that you don't know what you're really talking about.

Can you go ahead and define climate for me?  I'm going to drive up to downtown LA and play in the snow for a bit while you figure it out.

 

[Irvinecommuter]

Again, accusing the other side of always thinking in absolutes, just not the case.

Then maybe the other side should stop using anecdotal examples as sort of definitive evidence while ignoring context and other facts.

There is nobody that uses more anecdotes about climate change than those trying to create a panic.  Fact.

From the side that confuses weather with climate.

This is such a telling comment.  It shows that you don't know what you're really talking about.

Can you go ahead and define climate for me?  I'm going to drive up to downtown LA and play in the snow for a bit while you figure it out.

I will let the Encyclopedia Britannica do it:

Adding confusion to the politics of climate change and global warming in the press is the assumption that the terms weather and climate are at some level interchangeable. The two terms are confused with one another, presumably because the same elements (solar radiation, temperature, humidity, wind speed and direction, precipitation, etc.) make them what they are, but there is more to the story. The main difference between weather and climate is duration. Weather and climate relate to one another in much the same way that an inning in a baseball game compares with the whole game.

The weather is the set of conditions in the atmosphere in one location for a limited period of time?such as throughout the day, at night, or at any particular point during the day. When your local meteorologist says that today will be partly sunny and 80 ?F with 10-mile-per-hour southwesterly winds and high humidity, he or she is talking about the weather conditions for some portion of a given day. Climate, however, describes the average condition of the atmosphere over a long period of time, such as across spans of 30 years or more, for a given location. Moreover, weather conditions change from hour to hour and even moment to moment for a single point, neighborhood, town, or city on Earth?s surface. Climate conditions, on the other hand, are far less volatile, and they are often used to describe larger areas?such as parts of countries, whole countries, or even groups of countries.

Climate conditions also differ between one part of the planet and another. We know that Africa?s Sahara has a much hotter and drier climate than South America?s Amazon River basin and Alaska?s rocky coast. The forces that shape the atmospheric conditions in each of these parts of the world are vastly different. In the Sahara, high pressure combined with its tropical location allows for more solar radiation to reach the ground and heat it throughout the year. In contrast, the conditions of Alaska?s Pacific coast are governed by the region?s proximity to the ocean, its subarctic location, vast differences in the number of daylight hours between summer and winter, and warm ocean currents that circulate nearby.

It?s easy to see why people who equate weather with climate might not see the problem of climate change as a big deal, since the weather is always changing. When climates change even slightly, however, the consequences can be much more severe than an afternoon of inclement weather. In the wild, specialized plants and animals that have evolved to adapt to one set of climate conditions face the challenge of being thrust suddenly into conditions that do not suit them. In the human sphere, once-predictable climate conditions become more volatile, and crop yields decline because of increased risks from unexpected flooding, drought, or the effects of unseasonable cold snaps.

https://www.britannica.com/story/whats-the-difference-between-weather-and-climate

 

[inv0ke-epipen]

Here's the thing... If you believe global warming is a crisis that needs to be averted, then why aren't you doing everything in your power to change how you live... RIGHT NOW!  Why does it take heavy handed government action to force you to sell your over-sized Irvine box, sell your multiple vehicles, stop flying on planes, stop commuting to an office, and start riding your bike everywhere?  The global warming alarmists want to increase government control of our lives, but they don't even want to make small changes in their own lives. 

It doesn't take radical heavy-handed government policy to make social changes.  You can lead the charge by setting the example yourself (cut your own carbon usage before lecturing others), being nice to the opposition (something Irvinecommuter flatly rejects), and making a convincing case for what needs to change and why.  This is the libertarian approach and it will be much more successful than trying to ram legislation through that harms people's livelihoods , threatens their families, and leads to suffering.

Thanks Yoda! 

I guess we should have done the same in the Civil Rights movement...just wait until people come to their sense.  Clearly, if we wanted to go to the moon, each person should have just started building rockets in their backyard and boom...we are walking on the moon.  I guess the smog in LA cleared up because people decided to pollute less. 

Weird that conservatives are all for the concept of collective power when in comes to private corporations but not government. 

Oh..California has been setting examples for 30+ years on the environmental front...so the rest of the country should follow too right?

Again...just say that you are selfish and don't want to do anything different.

See you don't really believe in climate change either.  You're not willing to make even one small change to your own comfortable lifestyle.

This is why you will continue to lose on this issue.  Everybody sees the hypocrisy.  C'est la vie.

Oh someone didn?t conserve, better tell the climate scientists throw out all the data and start over, global warming is clearly fake! Irvinecommuter doesn?t believe!

Conservation is bs anyway. The measure of a civilization is the amount of energy it wields for its own ends. Maybe a good idea to get that energy from nuclear and renewables instead of terraforming our atmosphere though. Nah let?s just do an experiment to see the effect of massive CO2 increases, yolo!

 

[morekaos]

The morons are in charge of the loony bin.  Nice virtue signalling that results in nothing, and don't tell me "the kids love it", thats a flat out lie.  He could have at least made if Fridays so as to help out with Lent.

New York public schools to have 'Meatless Mondays' starting this fall

That's because all public schools in New York will have "Meatless Mondays" in the 2019-2020 school year. New York Mayor Bill de Blasio introduced the new meal program Monday. Meatless Mondays, which will provide students with all-vegetarian breakfast and lunch offerings, is being expanded citywide from a pilot program that was tried out last spring in 15 schools.
"Cutting back on meat a little will improve New Yorkers' health and reduce greenhouse gas emissions," de Blasio said at a news conference. "We're expanding Meatless Mondays to all public schools to keep our lunch and planet green for generations to come."

https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/12/us/new-york-meatless-mondays-trnd/index.html

 

[Kings]

The morons are in charge of the loony bin.  Nice virtue signalling that results in nothing, and don't tell me "the kids love it", thats a flat out lie.  He could have at least made if Fridays so as to help out with Lent.

New York public schools to have 'Meatless Mondays' starting this fall

That's because all public schools in New York will have "Meatless Mondays" in the 2019-2020 school year. New York Mayor Bill de Blasio introduced the new meal program Monday. Meatless Mondays, which will provide students with all-vegetarian breakfast and lunch offerings, is being expanded citywide from a pilot program that was tried out last spring in 15 schools.
"Cutting back on meat a little will improve New Yorkers' health and reduce greenhouse gas emissions," de Blasio said at a news conference. "We're expanding Meatless Mondays to all public schools to keep our lunch and planet green for generations to come."

https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/12/us/new-york-meatless-mondays-trnd/index.html

i will eat extra meat on mondays to make up for this travesty

 

[inv0ke-epipen]

No meat? Excuse me WTF?

 

[Kings]

wait, this can't be right!  "natural cyclical cooling"....sounds like a conspiracy theory to me! the world is going to end in 12 years so i don't buy it!

Big U-turn: Key melting Greenland glacier is growing again

A major Greenland glacier that was one of the fastest shrinking ice and snow masses on Earth is growing again, a new NASA study finds.

The Jakobshavn (YA-cob-shawv-en) glacier around 2012 was retreating about 1.8 miles (3 kilometers) and thinning nearly 130 feet (almost 40 meters) annually. But it started growing again at about the same rate in the past two years, according to a study in Monday?s Nature Geoscience . Study authors and outside scientists think this is temporary.

?That was kind of a surprise. We kind of got used to a runaway system,? said Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland ice and climate scientist Jason Box. ?The good news is that it?s a reminder that it?s not necessarily going that fast. But it is going.?

Box, who wasn?t part of the study, said Jakobshavn is ?arguably the most important Greenland glacier because it discharges the most ice in the northern hemisphere. For all of Greenland, it is king.?

A natural cyclical cooling of North Atlantic waters likely caused the glacier to reverse course, said study lead author Ala Khazendar, a NASA glaciologist on the Oceans Melting Greenland (OMG) project. Khazendar and colleagues say this coincides with a flip of the North Atlantic Oscillation ? a natural and temporary cooling and warming of parts of the ocean that is like a distant cousin to El Nino in the Pacific.

The water in Disko Bay, where Jakobshavn hits the ocean, is about 3.6 degrees cooler (2 degrees Celsius) than a few years ago, study authors said.

https://www.apnews.com/b19abfb0a0534b51925aa121806255a8

 

[Liar Loan]

Can you go ahead and define climate for me?  I'm going to drive up to downtown LA and play in the snow for a bit while you figure it out.

I will let the Encyclopedia Britannica do it:

Adding confusion to the politics of climate change and global warming in the press is the assumption that the terms weather and climate are at some level interchangeable. The two terms are confused with one another, presumably because the same elements (solar radiation, temperature, humidity, wind speed and direction, precipitation, etc.) make them what they are, but there is more to the story. The main difference between weather and climate is duration. Weather and climate relate to one another in much the same way that an inning in a baseball game compares with the whole game.

The weather is the set of conditions in the atmosphere in one location for a limited period of time?such as throughout the day, at night, or at any particular point during the day. When your local meteorologist says that today will be partly sunny and 80 ?F with 10-mile-per-hour southwesterly winds and high humidity, he or she is talking about the weather conditions for some portion of a given day. Climate, however, describes the average condition of the atmosphere over a long period of time, such as across spans of 30 years or more, for a given location. Moreover, weather conditions change from hour to hour and even moment to moment for a single point, neighborhood, town, or city on Earth?s surface. Climate conditions, on the other hand, are far less volatile, and they are often used to describe larger areas?such as parts of countries, whole countries, or even groups of countries.

Climate conditions also differ between one part of the planet and another. We know that Africa?s Sahara has a much hotter and drier climate than South America?s Amazon River basin and Alaska?s rocky coast. The forces that shape the atmospheric conditions in each of these parts of the world are vastly different. In the Sahara, high pressure combined with its tropical location allows for more solar radiation to reach the ground and heat it throughout the year. In contrast, the conditions of Alaska?s Pacific coast are governed by the region?s proximity to the ocean, its subarctic location, vast differences in the number of daylight hours between summer and winter, and warm ocean currents that circulate nearby.

It?s easy to see why people who equate weather with climate might not see the problem of climate change as a big deal, since the weather is always changing. When climates change even slightly, however, the consequences can be much more severe than an afternoon of inclement weather. In the wild, specialized plants and animals that have evolved to adapt to one set of climate conditions face the challenge of being thrust suddenly into conditions that do not suit them. In the human sphere, once-predictable climate conditions become more volatile, and crop yields decline because of increased risks from unexpected flooding, drought, or the effects of unseasonable cold snaps.

https://www.britannica.com/story/whats-the-difference-between-weather-and-climate

This shows what I'm dealing with here... Somebody that has to google the definition of climate change from encyclopedia britannica.

 

[morekaos]

Why would they plunk down $15 million on 26 acres of water front property that they KNOW will be under water in just 12 years?  They should just keep renting it then buy the lot inland and move there when the tide comes in...they need better advisers.

A look inside the Martha?s Vineyard mansion the Obamas are reportedly buying

ormer president Barack Obama and his wife, Michelle, are reportedly in escrow for a $14.85 million mansion on Martha?s Vineyard.

And not just any mansion ? the one belonging to Celtics co-owner Wyc Grousbeck, which the Obamas rented out for their island vacation this August.

Grousbeck has been looking to unload his home for quite a while: It?s been on the market for four years.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/lifestyle/names/2019/08/22/photos-look-inside-martha-vineyard-mansion-obamas-are-reportedly-buying/WzMbNOGcP9HsCSMx3dkT0N/story.html

 

[Kings]

it's never been about the climate and what effect we may or may not be contributing.  it's about creating a narrative and painting a "bad guy" as someone who, "doesn't want to save the only planet we have."  how could those on the right be so evil as to poison our air and our water and increase the temperature to make life uninhabitable in antarctica?

case in point, your daily does of fake news and fake outrage

Fake Amazon rainforest fire photos are misinforming on social media

BRAZIL ? Social media helped increase coverage of the wildfires, but it?s also contributing to misinformation.

Yes, there is are real fires happening in the Amazon rainforest, and humans are likely the cause of the blazes. But yes, there are also a lot of the photos being shared are either old photos of past Amazon fires or photos of different fires faked to look like its in the Amazon.

In Brazil alone, there are 80% more fires in 2019 than there were last year, according to the country?s space research center. More than half of the fires in Brazil are in its Amazon region.

Satellite images are helping show just how many fires there are, and how much of their smoke has spread across the country.

But photos on social media are conflating the current crisis with previous fires.

One such photo ? one of the most-shared photos on social media ? shows a lush forest with a massive wall of smoke billowing from a fire.

Musical artist and actor Jaden Smith shared the image on his Instagram, where it garnered over a million likes. YouTube celebrity Logan Paul shared the image on Twitter, too.

Yes, the image shows the Amazon rainforest in Brazil. But it?s not of the current fires. It?s more than 20 years old: the Guardian, which republished the photo in 2007, says it was taken in June 1989.

Entertainment sites like 9gag and UNILAD both are running the photo on their websites. Their social media posts prominently featuring the photo have tens of thousands of shares.

Another photo making the rounds on social media claims to also show the Amazon rainforest on fire.

Leonardo DiCaprio shared it on his Instagram and it has over 3 million likes.

Even the Rainforest Trust, which is asking people to donate to help stop deforestation, shared it on its Twitter account.

But it?s definitely not showing the current fires in the Amazon. CNN found it on a website published in 2018.

Actor David Licauco shared four photos ? all of which are not of the current wildfires in the Amazon. Two aren?t even of an Amazon wildfire. The top image is from a 2018 wildfire in Sweden; the bottom is of a wildfire in Montana on August 6, 2000.

The most heartbreaking photos being shared are the charred remains of animals, or animals attempting to escape wildfires. Blogger Nathalie Mu?oz posted a series of photos about the Amazon rainforest fires.

The photo of the monkey crying, holding a smaller monkey, isn?t in the Amazon. It was taken in Jabalpur, India, by Avinash Lodhi sometime in April 2016. And the photo of the burned rabbit is from the 2018 wildfire in Malibu, California.

https://fox4kc.com/2019/08/22/fake-amazon-rainforest-fire-photos-are-misinforming-on-social-media/