Global Warming | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

Global Warming

KnightersRevenge

Baby Knighters is 7!! WTF??
Aug 21, 2007
6,782
1,222
Ireland
Here is a great analysis of how climate change deniers online "massage" data to create their junk:

https://tamino.wordpress.com/2019/02/24/arctic-sea-ice-the-denier-viewpoint/
 

KnightersRevenge

Baby Knighters is 7!! WTF??
Aug 21, 2007
6,782
1,222
Ireland
TL;DR

ice.jpg


Arctic Sea Ice Data

ice_ann.jpg


Same data presented differently

figure.png


Same data presented to look like sea ice is growing by online climate stooges

fig1.jpg


Original data manipulated to appear like the dodgey stuff

fig2.jpg


And again with contextual data included

fig4.jpg


And with the full data set.
 

LeeToRainesToRoach

Tiger Legend
Jun 4, 2006
33,186
11,546
Melbourne
So quoting from blogs is OK now, or does it depends on your opinion?

I think this chart is pretty clear in what it is displaying - a high February ice extent in comparison to recent years.

figure.png


This one on the other hand uses an abbreviated scale, which in general is a no-no.

ice_ann.jpg


Temperatures in the Arctic, generally, have risen more than anywhere else on earth. A decline in Arctic sea ice is a logical consequence of that.
 

YinnarTiger

Tiger Legend
May 2, 2007
7,521
727
75
Gippsland
LeeToRainesToRoach said:
So quoting from blogs is OK now, or does it depends on your opinion?

I think this chart is pretty clear in what it is displaying - a high February ice extent in comparison to recent years.

figure.png


This one on the other hand uses an abbreviated scale, which in general is a no-no.

ice_ann.jpg


Temperatures in the Arctic, generally, have risen more than anywhere else on earth. A decline in Arctic sea ice is a logical consequence of that.
With the term "abbreviated scale" are you referring to "million km^2" in chart 2 as opposed to "millions of square kilometres" in chart 1? That in general is pedantry at its worst.
 

AngryAnt

Tiger Legend
Nov 25, 2004
27,017
14,794
bullus_hit said:
Definitely a massive worry, I read a report a few years back that indicated some benefits for insects, unfortunately that's a falsehood.

Warmer climates may benefit some insects, but pesticides and other unknown anthropogenic effects seem to be obliterating those benefits.

There's always been a strong movement of action and anxiety about what we are doing to the planet since the 1960s... but it shows that disorganised people power and disparate action always tends to lose out to systematic industrialisation/deforestation/pollution since the economic imperative always drives humans at the local level to seek economic benefit and push off environmental/climate costs as "externalities". The costs are borne by others at some future date.

Can't see a way out unless the economy shifts to a far more service/information orientated model where we don't need big cars/holidays/tvs/houses and our global population stabilises and then declines significantly.
 

LeeToRainesToRoach

Tiger Legend
Jun 4, 2006
33,186
11,546
Melbourne
YinnarTiger said:
With the term "abbreviated scale" are you referring to "million km^2" in chart 2 as opposed to "millions of square kilometres" in chart 1? That in general is pedantry at its worst.

No, I'm referring to the scale that begins at 10.5M rather than zero, to exacerbate a trend.
 

YinnarTiger

Tiger Legend
May 2, 2007
7,521
727
75
Gippsland
LeeToRainesToRoach said:
No, I'm referring to the scale that begins at 10.5M rather than zero, to exacerbate a trend.
The chart you are comparing it with starts at 13.2M exacerbating the February 2019 comparison.
 

LeeToRainesToRoach

Tiger Legend
Jun 4, 2006
33,186
11,546
Melbourne
YinnarTiger said:
The chart you are comparing it with starts at 13.2M exacerbating the February 2019 comparison.

Acknowledged, the print is small and I didn't notice. It's not legitimate practice unless used for emphasis, accompanied by other charts for context. And where used, there should be a 'lightning' bend incorporated into the axis to indicate truncation.

But these are blogs we're dealing with, not science publications.
 

LeeToRainesToRoach

Tiger Legend
Jun 4, 2006
33,186
11,546
Melbourne
Tigers of Old said:
Frightening.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/may/06/human-society-under-urgent-threat-loss-earth-natural-life-un-report

Of the billions of species on earth, how many were declared extinct last year? Look beyond the posturing.
 

tigersnake

Tear 'em apart
Sep 10, 2003
23,486
11,638
LeeToRainesToRoach said:
Of the billions of species on earth, how many were declared extinct last year? Look beyond the posturing.

there you go oldie. Nothing to worry about.
 

LeeToRainesToRoach

Tiger Legend
Jun 4, 2006
33,186
11,546
Melbourne
tigersnake said:
there you go oldie. Nothing to worry about.

I didn't say "nothing to worry about". Obviously we're encroaching on natural habitats and making it harder for animals to survive. Who's going to stand up against over-population?

"You, Muslim! Use a condom!"
 
E

easy_tiger

Guest
LeeToRainesToRoach said:
I didn't say "nothing to worry about". Obviously we're encroaching on natural habitats and making it harder for animals to survive. Who's going to stand up against over-population?

"You, Muslim! Use a condom!"

You would be perfect for the AFL CEO job L2
 

lukeanddad

Tiger Champion
Nov 17, 2008
2,971
211
tigersnake said:
there you go oldie. Nothing to worry about.

L2 can stand up for himself, but it is frustrating to see people conflating two distinct actions that are causing environmental problems. Of the 1m species that are threatened, how many are due to us/humans encroaching on habitats Vs climate change?

I agree that overpopulation is the greater risk, I just wish there is a solution that doesn’t see us with an average global population age of 60 by 2050!
 

Coburgtiger

Tiger Champion
May 7, 2012
4,955
6,939
It is pretty hilarious that all the conservatives and deniers have suddenly jumped on the over population train.

For so long they've been telling us that climate change isn't an issue. Recently, in the face of overwhelming evidence, they've been saying that it is an issue but it's not human driven. Now they've jumped sideways to the idea that climate change isn't the issue, it's humans themselves that are the issue.

It's an interesting 180 from humans aren't causing the problem, to humans are the only problem.

Four issues with this new misdirect.
1. No duh. Humans are bad for the other animals. We know this. In this context, the 'over' part of over population is redundant. Human populations have been out competing other species for resources for hundreds of thousands of years, since we were a population measured in the thousands. Any population is over population as far as the wiping out of natural habitats is concerned. Encroaching on natural habitats is what we do. Here's the thing. A lot of people asking for action on climate change don't actually care about the trees or the frogs or the bees. They care about the people. Climate change is going to affect us way more than the environment. The environment has been around for four and a half billion years and will continue to so for the next few billion. What we want is to maintain one that is good for humans.
2. We already have action on our increasing population. Our growth is not exponential. The rate of growth has been declining for the last 50 years. Meanwhile the rate of increase in CO2 in the atmosphere has been increasing for the last 50 years.
3. Increasing population is a non issue if your impact decreases. Impact on the environment is the thing we want to address. Obviously, one way is to eradicate people, but we like people
4. What are these people actually suggesting? I've still never heard any ideas. Immigration? Unless they're coming in from outer space, what? Distribution of prophylactics and sex Ed? Definitely! We're already doing that, let's keep it up. All that's left is castration and culling. Clearly that causes the problem we're trying to solve. Human suffering.

It's basically whataboutism. Let's ignore climate change because humans cause environmental issues just by existing. Uhhhhhhhhhhhh
 
E

easy_tiger

Guest
Coburgtiger said:
It is pretty hilarious that all the conservatives and deniers have suddenly jumped on the over population train.

For so long they've been telling us that climate change isn't an issue. Recently, in the face of overwhelming evidence, they've been saying that it is an issue but it's not human driven. Now they've jumped sideways to the idea that climate change isn't the issue, it's humans themselves that are the issue.

It's an interesting 180 from humans aren't causing the problem, to humans are the only problem.

Four issues with this new misdirect.
1. No duh. Humans are bad for the other animals. We know this. In this context, the 'over' part of over population is redundant. Human populations have been out competing other species for resources for hundreds of thousands of years, since we were a population measured in the thousands. Any population is over population as far as the wiping out of natural habitats is concerned. Encroaching on natural habitats is what we do. Here's the thing. A lot of people asking for action on climate change don't actually care about the trees or the frogs or the bees. They care about the people. Climate change is going to affect us way more than the environment. The environment has been around for four and a half billion years and will continue to so for the next few billion. What we want is to maintain one that is good for humans.
2. We already have action on our increasing population. Our growth is not exponential. The rate of growth has been declining for the last 50 years. Meanwhile the rate of increase in CO2 in the atmosphere has been increasing for the last 50 years.
3. Increasing population is a non issue if your impact decreases. Impact on the environment is the thing we want to address. Obviously, one way is to eradicate people, but we like people
4. What are these people actually suggesting? I've still never heard any ideas. Immigration? Unless they're coming in from outer space, what? Distribution of prophylactics and sex Ed? Definitely! We're already doing that, let's keep it up. All that's left is castration and culling. Clearly that causes the problem we're trying to solve. Human suffering.

It's basically whataboutism. Let's ignore climate change because humans cause environmental issues just by existing. Uhhhhhhhhhhhh

good post Burger.

there's a definite shift on here amongst the deniers.

Still, its more sophisticated than single use plastic bags being the focus of saving the reef :headscratch