Contact   Imprint   Advertising   Guidelines

climate change / unpredictable weather/wind

Forum for snow- and landkiters
User avatar
SimonP
Frequent Poster
Posts: 471
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 4:49 am
Local Beach: Rotorua Lakes, Maketu, NZ
Favorite Beaches: Aotea, Maroochydore, Faro, Aitutaki
Style: Foiling, free-style, waves
Gear: J-shapes foil, Switch kites, Underground twintips, misc surfboards.
Brand Affiliation: None
Location: Bay of Plenty, New Zealand
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 20 times

Re: climate change / unpredictable weather/wind

Postby SimonP » Fri Oct 02, 2020 11:56 pm

Show me just one peer-reviewed paper in a reputable scientific journal that backs your claims.
Here are fifty or so papers that confirm what I have just told you:
https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads ... _FINAL.pdf

Matteo V
Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 2075
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2017 3:42 pm
Local Beach: US, Iowa/Nebraska/Kansas/Utah/Oregon Coast
Favorite Beaches: Ft. Stevens, North coast of Oregon
Style: Just like school in summertime
Gear: Delta Kites and LF Kitefish QuadMod
Snowboard (Cambered and Rockered)
Foil kites on the snow
Brand Affiliation: NONE F--- the corporate world
Has thanked: 142 times
Been thanked: 167 times

Re: climate change / unpredictable weather/wind

Postby Matteo V » Sat Oct 03, 2020 5:13 am

SimonP wrote:
Fri Oct 02, 2020 11:56 pm
Show me just one peer-reviewed paper in a reputable scientific journal that backs your claims.
Here are fifty or so papers that confirm what I have just told you:
https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads ... _FINAL.pdf
Did the medieval warming period exist?

Did the little iceage exist?

What inconsistencies do we observe in Milankovich cycles vs the climate record?

How do we account for CO2 lagging warming, instead of preeceeding it?

How can you rely on temperature data stations where urban areas have engulfed them, when stations just outside those growing areas show no warming or even cooling?

How can warming be seen (sold) as bad when it actually allows for more species and more humans with less of an enviormental impact due to humans?

How can we belive that climate stability is a possibility?

How many religious books could I reference, which all claim to contain the truth, and anyone questioning that truth is evil and should loose their job to punish them for their blasphemy?

And with the above questions being just the tip of the iceberg of uncertainty, how can anyone claim to be sure of the effects of what we are doing to a system which we do not even understand?




No references needed, just a short answer will work.

palmbeacher
Frequent Poster
Posts: 269
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 6:53 pm
Kiting since: 2011
Gear: Lift foils + Cabrinha kites
Has thanked: 39 times
Been thanked: 25 times

Re: climate change / unpredictable weather/wind

Postby palmbeacher » Sat Oct 03, 2020 7:45 am

Matteo V wrote:
Sat Oct 03, 2020 5:13 am
SimonP wrote:
Fri Oct 02, 2020 11:56 pm
Show me just one peer-reviewed paper in a reputable scientific journal that backs your claims.
Here are fifty or so papers that confirm what I have just told you:
https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads ... _FINAL.pdf
Did the medieval warming period exist?

Did the little iceage exist?

What inconsistencies do we observe in Milankovich cycles vs the climate record?

How do we account for CO2 lagging warming, instead of preeceeding it?

How can you rely on temperature data stations where urban areas have engulfed them, when stations just outside those growing areas show no warming or even cooling?

How can warming be seen (sold) as bad when it actually allows for more species and more humans with less of an enviormental impact due to humans?

How can we belive that climate stability is a possibility?

How many religious books could I reference, which all claim to contain the truth, and anyone questioning that truth is evil and should loose their job to punish them for their blasphemy?

And with the above questions being just the tip of the iceberg of uncertainty, how can anyone claim to be sure of the effects of what we are doing to a system which we do not even understand?




No references needed, just a short answer will work.
Oh my, we have a QAnon in our midst. They didn’t tell you that kitesufing is a conspiracy in support of liberals? That’s why they banned it in Saudi.

Matteo V
Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 2075
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2017 3:42 pm
Local Beach: US, Iowa/Nebraska/Kansas/Utah/Oregon Coast
Favorite Beaches: Ft. Stevens, North coast of Oregon
Style: Just like school in summertime
Gear: Delta Kites and LF Kitefish QuadMod
Snowboard (Cambered and Rockered)
Foil kites on the snow
Brand Affiliation: NONE F--- the corporate world
Has thanked: 142 times
Been thanked: 167 times

Re: climate change / unpredictable weather/wind

Postby Matteo V » Sat Oct 03, 2020 2:10 pm

palmbeacher wrote:
Sat Oct 03, 2020 7:45 am
Oh my, we have a QAnon in our midst. They didn’t tell you that kitesufing is a conspiracy in support of liberals? That’s why they banned it in Saudi.
Typically, religions do not like competing for followers with new religions as religious leaders can run into some problems explaining the differences and inconsistencies of logic between opposing viewpoints. Thus it is easier to just ban other views on order to maintain control and power. This is exactly like the "cancel culture" that is a part of the church of AGW. Skepticism leads to unfaithful followers and diversity of thought, so it is stamped out by any means available.

Thus one can easily identify totalitarianism creeping into an ideology as leaders call for more sanctions against skeptics and nonbelievers.

User avatar
SimonP
Frequent Poster
Posts: 471
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 4:49 am
Local Beach: Rotorua Lakes, Maketu, NZ
Favorite Beaches: Aotea, Maroochydore, Faro, Aitutaki
Style: Foiling, free-style, waves
Gear: J-shapes foil, Switch kites, Underground twintips, misc surfboards.
Brand Affiliation: None
Location: Bay of Plenty, New Zealand
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 20 times

Re: climate change / unpredictable weather/wind

Postby SimonP » Sat Oct 03, 2020 8:17 pm

Matteo V wrote:
Sat Oct 03, 2020 5:13 am
Did the medieval warming period exist?
Did the little iceage exist?
What inconsistencies do we observe in Milankovich cycles vs the climate record?
How do we account for CO2 lagging warming, instead of preeceeding it?
How can you rely on temperature data stations where urban areas have engulfed them, when stations just outside those growing areas show no warming or even cooling?
How can warming be seen (sold) as bad when it actually allows for more species and more humans with less of an enviormental impact due to humans?
How can we belive that climate stability is a possibility?
How many religious books could I reference, which all claim to contain the truth, and anyone questioning that truth is evil and should loose their job to punish them for their blasphemy?
And with the above questions being just the tip of the iceberg of uncertainty, how can anyone claim to be sure of the effects of what we are doing to a system which we do not even understand?
No references needed, just a short answer will work.
1. Yes, Northern Europe only.
2. Yes, see Milankovich cycles.
3. Random variation.
4. Because warming causes outgassing of CO2 from the ocean which leads to additional warming, i.e. a feedback loop.
5. Homogenisation of temperature records.
6. No proof of this statement.
7. A dynamic system will tend towards equilibrium if there are no external forcing.
8. Science is not a religion.
9. The mathematical basis of weather and climate has been understood since the late 1890's. It is a non-linear system with multiple feedback loops so the precautionary principle applies.

All you are doing here is displaying your ignorance of basic climate science which makes your constant need to express your opinion very odd.
Once again, show me a single peer-reviewed paper that attributes the observed warming to some other cause than increased greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.
These users thanked the author SimonP for the post (total 2):
turfAndsurf (Sat Oct 03, 2020 9:42 pm) • jumptheshark (Sun Oct 04, 2020 12:10 am)
Rating: 13.33%

turfAndsurf
Medium Poster
Posts: 121
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2008 2:46 am
Local Beach: San Diego
Brand Affiliation: None
Location: San Diego
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: climate change / unpredictable weather/wind

Postby turfAndsurf » Sat Oct 03, 2020 9:46 pm

Thanks SimonP, my sentiment exactly.

Matteo V
Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 2075
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2017 3:42 pm
Local Beach: US, Iowa/Nebraska/Kansas/Utah/Oregon Coast
Favorite Beaches: Ft. Stevens, North coast of Oregon
Style: Just like school in summertime
Gear: Delta Kites and LF Kitefish QuadMod
Snowboard (Cambered and Rockered)
Foil kites on the snow
Brand Affiliation: NONE F--- the corporate world
Has thanked: 142 times
Been thanked: 167 times

Re: climate change / unpredictable weather/wind

Postby Matteo V » Sun Oct 04, 2020 9:31 am

SimonP wrote:
Sat Oct 03, 2020 8:17 pm
Matteo V wrote:
Sat Oct 03, 2020 5:13 am
Did the medieval warming period exist?
Did the little iceage exist?
What inconsistencies do we observe in Milankovich cycles vs the climate record?
How do we account for CO2 lagging warming, instead of preeceeding it?
How can you rely on temperature data stations where urban areas have engulfed them, when stations just outside those growing areas show no warming or even cooling?
How can warming be seen (sold) as bad when it actually allows for more species and more humans with less of an enviormental impact due to humans?
How can we belive that climate stability is a possibility?
How many religious books could I reference, which all claim to contain the truth, and anyone questioning that truth is evil and should loose their job to punish them for their blasphemy?
And with the above questions being just the tip of the iceberg of uncertainty, how can anyone claim to be sure of the effects of what we are doing to a system which we do not even understand?
No references needed, just a short answer will work.
1. Yes, Northern Europe only.
2. Yes, see Milankovich cycles.
3. Random variation.
4. Because warming causes outgassing of CO2 from the ocean which leads to additional warming, i.e. a feedback loop.
5. Homogenisation of temperature records.
6. No proof of this statement.
7. A dynamic system will tend towards equilibrium if there are no external forcing.
8. Science is not a religion.
9. The mathematical basis of weather and climate has been understood since the late 1890's. It is a non-linear system with multiple feedback loops so the precautionary principle applies.

All you are doing here is displaying your ignorance of basic climate science which makes your constant need to express your opinion very odd.
Once again, show me a single peer-reviewed paper that attributes the observed warming to some other cause than increased greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.
Nice! There is so much here that I am just going to focus on two things in this post so that I don't lose too many people with short attention spans. But I do feel like a kid in a candy store with your relatively complete response. So let's get started.....

On your list you give the explanation of "homogenization" as response #5. But what is homogenization, and why is it one of the many unscientific methods criticized by skeptics? Well, as I stated, it is the arbitrary increasing of the temperature data to intentionally show warming when the data actually shows no change, or even cooling.

The biggest scandal was with the Brazil data where one sensor that was once in an undeveloped area, had the area developed around it. This meant lots of concrete or bare dirt to heat up and hold heat, along with no more shade. This sensor showed predictable urban higher temps. But multiple other sensors that were close by and had not seen any development, showed no change.

So what is a group of "climate scientists" to do when the data does not fit into their narrative? You change the data to show warming where there is none, and give your data falsification a clean and "scientific" name - HOMOGENIZATION! What was done was a simple adjustment of other sensors data to match the sensor which showed increasing temps.

On a side note, I think it is brilliant, though an older trick with its roots in religion. The word "sanctions" is a wonderful sterilization of what is basically "starvation of a people to overthrow leaders of another country that you dont like". All the while keeping the people of that targeted country forever pissed off at the people off at your country, so that the leaders of the sanction imposing country have a constant enemy who will always seem worse than themselves. Sanctions, and homogenization.........great words!

But I digress......

As a response to #8, you have emphatically stated that "science is not a religion". However, religion is well known for "selectively" choosing bits of reality, while at the same time "selectively" ignoring other bits of reality, in order to support its own narrative. Think about how well the word "homogenization" fits here. One can see where this leads to the creation of "dogma" which is not allowed to be questioned, even though the slightest scrutiny of it brings up many, MANY questions.

So just in case I lost you, the falsification or simply ignoring of data to confirm a particular narrative is.....I think it is fair to say, RELIGION!

More to come.....

Matteo V
Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 2075
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2017 3:42 pm
Local Beach: US, Iowa/Nebraska/Kansas/Utah/Oregon Coast
Favorite Beaches: Ft. Stevens, North coast of Oregon
Style: Just like school in summertime
Gear: Delta Kites and LF Kitefish QuadMod
Snowboard (Cambered and Rockered)
Foil kites on the snow
Brand Affiliation: NONE F--- the corporate world
Has thanked: 142 times
Been thanked: 167 times

Re: climate change / unpredictable weather/wind

Postby Matteo V » Sun Oct 04, 2020 10:25 am

SimonP wrote:
Sat Oct 03, 2020 8:17 pm
1. Yes, Northern Europe only.
2. Yes, see Milankovich cycles.
3. Random variation.
Thanks for this! This goes to show once again, the selection of certain things in the past as "natural", while other similar occurrences are only because of "evil human CO2"!

Because if we have a warming climate in Greenland hundreds of years ago that could actually support agriculture, or boreal forests just 400,000 years ago, that is ok. But today, any change that we either falsely or correctly attribute to man, is again "evil" and must be punished and stopped.

Every hurricane, typhoon, hot day in summer, cold day in winter is all due to global warming caused solely by human activity. And every mild day in summer or winter that we experience is "the way it should be" or because we have reduced our global CO2 emissions by 2%. This is cherry picking to support a religious narrative.



Matteo V wrote:
Sat Oct 03, 2020 5:13 am
How can warming be seen (sold) as bad when it actually allows for more species and more humans with less of an enviormental impact due to humans?
SimonP wrote:
Sat Oct 03, 2020 8:17 pm
6. No proof of this statement.
Ok, let's try an example from the beautiful and green island of Greenland.

Just 450,000 years ago, greenland was warm and green enough to have forests. How many people could subsistence agriculture support on that island in those "good times"? Quite a few, right? And their impact would have been taking down maybe a tenth of that forest for agricultural production. Would this irreparably damage the ecosystem of the forests of Greenland? How many species would be lost that are only found on that island, to human settelment?

I think there is no question that you would see some environmental impact and quite possibly a few species lost. But if mans population was kept in check, and the environment stayed warm, the impact would be minimal.

But what could you reasonably expect if the climate cooled?

First, in a cooling enviorment, rainfall could be expected to be reduced. This would shift food sources from agricultural to more hunting and fishing to support the population. But even if rainfall was sufficient, a shorter growing season would have the same effect.

But as the temps really cool, resourses begin to get really scarce. This forces the population to begin to cut down more forests, and exploit new food sources. Maybe moving from land based hunting to whaling and hunting seals could support the population as the ice sheets start to form.

All of this theoretical human impact on Greenland a half a million years ago, is actually insignificant compared to the complete collapse of the boreal forest ecosystem caused by the ice sheets forming caused by cooling. Likely thousands of unique species once lived there. How many live there now?

So cooling is certainly the most destructive event.

But what if we took Greenland 500,000 years ago and slowly, over the course of a hundred years or so, moved it south? Well, I think it is safe to say many of those species would have many descendants still thriving on that warmer island.

So warming seems to support ecosystems, and cooling destroys them. And this is fact, not disputed in any non religious circles.

User avatar
tegirinenashi
Very Frequent Poster
Posts: 735
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2014 3:29 am
Local Beach: 3rd Ave
Gear: Bates 4000, Dominator MX-10
Brand Affiliation: None
Has thanked: 18 times
Been thanked: 15 times

Re: climate change / unpredictable weather/wind

Postby tegirinenashi » Sun Oct 04, 2020 5:16 pm

Homogenization pundits are often asked "Wouldn't it be more reliable to just throw away unreliable stations (and data), instead of adjusting them?" There is never a satisfactory answer to that question. But those pesky critics are not professional climate scientists, so how would they know?

User avatar
SimonP
Frequent Poster
Posts: 471
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 4:49 am
Local Beach: Rotorua Lakes, Maketu, NZ
Favorite Beaches: Aotea, Maroochydore, Faro, Aitutaki
Style: Foiling, free-style, waves
Gear: J-shapes foil, Switch kites, Underground twintips, misc surfboards.
Brand Affiliation: None
Location: Bay of Plenty, New Zealand
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 20 times

Re: climate change / unpredictable weather/wind

Postby SimonP » Sun Oct 04, 2020 8:43 pm

Oh please, I'm not going to play whack-a-mole on an endlessly repeating list of climate science denier myths. They are all easily refutable and debunked here: https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php
Since you've obviously got some time on your hands, I would encourage you to start reading the peer-reviewed scientific literature rather than hang out in the wackier parts of the internet.
The IPCC documentation is a good place to start, which exists primarily as a summary of the research for policy-makers. https://www.ipcc.ch/
These users thanked the author SimonP for the post:
turfAndsurf (Mon Oct 05, 2020 6:49 pm)
Rating: 6.67%


Return to “Snow / Land”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 2 guests