Scientific Consensus?

[Gomer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harold7

If you wish I'll put the proposition directly to you: do you believe there is an "Imminent Climate Catastrophe", if the claim is true why will it happen, when will it happen and in what form will the catastrophe appear... do we have days, weeks, months?

This is a fairly straight forward question, either the claim is true or it isn't, is there any scientific evidence to prove the claim... it seems to me that to use the term "imminent" implies knowledge of a time frame for the event... if the claim isn't true, why are they making it?

Again... I've told you repeatedly very clearly what it is I accept to be representative of the situation. You ask first if I believe something and then want me to define the terms of what it is I believe. I have already told you what it is I accept. Read the scientific statements 1-32 that I referenced. That is representative of what I accept the situation to be. It is up to you to determine if that is what meets your criteria for an "imminent climate catastrophe".

As I outlined in post #17, I have to choose my words very carefully with you. You have no qualms with rearranging and outright fabricating what I said into something else. I'm not going to get into that sort of battle with you.

Quote:

BTW I don't question the whole field of Climate Science, the Global Warming/Climate Change theory will stand or fall on it's own merits, time and research will always provide the answers... what I do question is the political and social engineering the activists are engaged in using the cover of science to alter the world to their own ends, so it does make a difference if they are lying about what the science means.

[Beemer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harold7

A question on the "imminent climate catastrophe" Gore keeps talking about...

Can you show me one time Gore says “imminent climate catastrophe”? Video, transcript, etc. Give me a valid source for Gore saying those words.

Looking over the transcript of AIT, Gore didn’t use the word imminent, but did use the word “catastrophes” within the Effects of Global Warming segment,

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gore

Europe has just had a year very similar to the one we've had where they say nature has just been crazy crazy, all kinds of unusual catastrophes like a major hike through the book of Revelations.

Flooding in Asia, Mumbai, India this past July (2005): 37 inches of rain in 24 hours, by far the largest downpour that any city in India has ever received. A lot of flooding in China also.

[Harold7]

Boy with your skill at tap dancing around an issue Gomer, you should be on American Idol... why is it so hard for you to answer the simple question I asked, maybe you should read it again, there is nothing in the question that questions anything about the science, just the validity of the claim :

"If you wish I'll put the proposition directly to you: do you believe there is an "Imminent Climate Catastrophe", if the claim is true why will it happen, when will it happen and in what form will the catastrophe appear... do we have days, weeks, months?

This is a fairly straight forward question, either the claim is true or it isn't, is there any scientific evidence to prove the claim... it seems to me that to use the term "imminent" implies knowledge of a time frame for the event... if the claim isn't true, why are they making it?"

... the intent of the question is clearly to find out if there is a scientific basis for the claim...if there is none then there is most likely a political reason... nothing cited in #17 addresses the question at all... BTW here's my understanding of "imminent" : "do we have days, weeks, months?" if you go into the years, decades, centuries definition then maybe the activists should consult a dictionary to find a word that is more accurate in describing their time frame.

If there is scientific proof for "imminent Climate Change" anywhere in what you posted in #17, please point out the specific link because I couldn't find it.

Please point out to me specific instances of what you think I'm guilty of doing to you: "As I outlined in post #17, I have to choose my words very carefully with you. You have no qualms with rearranging and outright fabricating what I said into something else." what rearranging and outright fabrication (lying?)... if you think that happened it certainly was not intentional, please point out to me where you think it happened so I won't do it again


.

[Pexster]

Your question is not "straightforward" in any scientific sense. It is a loaded question, subject to various interpretations according to one's agenda.

[Harold7]

Thanks Beemer, for pointing out my error about ever accusing Gore of making that specific statement., however, in his own words he believes that the climate crisis is "real, rising, imminent, and universal" so I guess you can see the inevitable connection to the term "imminent" whenever he talks about the climate..

I came across this: BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Chaotic world of climate truth that answers and explains a lot of my concerns... the politicization of science by activists distorts the the public perception of Climate Theory... is it useful to scare people to death to achieve some political or social end... especially if the public finds out the situation really isn't as dire as it is presented?

I've spent enough time at RealClimate browsing through some of the discussions to see that there is active disagreement about whether the oceans are warming or cooling, whether activists are using the upper range of IPCC temperature predictions for their projections rather than the lower end... interesting discussions, but the scientists can get snippy at times at anyone who challenges them.

I'm curious Beemer, it we've already passed the tipping point ,does that mean we're already doomed and there is nothing that can be done about it, the IPCC data says that CO2 will continue to be added to the atmosphere for centuries, so even if we haven't reached a tipping point yet, isn't it inevitable that it will happen... I don't see how even the most restrictive climate treaty can stop our doom if we're as close to a tipping point as the activists think.

[Beemer]

You missed this part in my post.

"It’s the threat that is imminent. Not the climate crisis."

Do you have your mind around that part? We can continue if you do.

[Gomer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Harold7

Boy with your skill at tap dancing around an issue Gomer, you should be on American Idol... why is it so hard for you to answer the simple question I asked, maybe you should read it again, there is nothing in the question that questions anything about the science, just the validity of the claim :

"If you wish I'll put the proposition directly to you: do you believe there is an "Imminent Climate Catastrophe", if the claim is true why will it happen, when will it happen and in what form will the catastrophe appear... do we have days, weeks, months?

I think part of your problem is illustrated in your first statement. American Idol is a singing competition, not dancing. And you told me in another post that it was I who needed to brush up on my analogies. HA!

Quote:

This is a fairly straight forward question, either the claim is true or it isn't, is there any scientific evidence to prove the claim... it seems to me that to use the term "imminent" implies knowledge of a time frame for the event... if the claim isn't true, why are they making it?"

... the intent of the question is clearly to find out if there is a scientific basis for the claim...if there is none then there is most likely a political reason... nothing cited in #17 addresses the question at all... BTW here's my understanding of "imminent" : "do we have days, weeks, months?" if you go into the years, decades, centuries definition then maybe the activists should consult a dictionary to find a word that is more accurate in describing their time frame.

[Chuckiechan]

Quote:

Perhaps so Sarah, but there's never been such a strain on the earths resources in history like there is today, why doesn't that figure into anything?

Yes there was. It was during Jimmy Carter's administration.

His gift to environmentalism: the 2.5 gallon per flush toilet.
His gift to the USA - he got thrown out after one term.

[Harold7]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beemer

You missed this part in my post.

"It’s the threat that is imminent. Not the climate crisis."

Do you have your mind around that part? We can continue if you do.

So what is the threat that is imminent and what time frame is meant by imminent? What is the nature of the climate crisis,... extreme warming or extreme cooling... will it be a gradual process over decades or in the next year or two (my concept of what imminent means) if you're going to say a threat is imminent without attaching a subject to the word it really becomes meaningless ie., imminent (insert subject here).

If there is some vague in- determinant threat that is imminent, doesn't that mean "the more urgent the threat, the more drastic and coercive the solution" for government... is the only way to save ourselves from ourselves the creation of a social dictatorship... you can see where I'm going with this line of inquiry.

What I can't get my mind around is the logical inconsistency of the IPCC saying that CO2 will continue to be added to the atmosphere irreversibly for centuries and how creation of a climate treaty will do anything except slow down the rate that CO2 is added to the atmosphere, so unless there is some secret meaning to the word irreversible that I'm not aware of, how is it that we can do anything to stop climate change... if rising atmospheric CO2 levels means rising global temperatures how is it possible to do anything at all for hundreds of years?

Gone on holiday til after Memorial Day ( the dreaded family reunion and cookout) so everyone buckle up and drive safe if you're traveling and can afford the gas ... see ya later friends

[Beemer]

I was wrong in creating the impression of an all inclusive tipping point in an earlier post because it gave the impression of an apocalyptic event. That I will attribute to a meteor event that is similar to what did in the dinosaurs.

My idea of a tipping point is more along the lines of what I said next. "The catastrophes will always be regional events." (It was an early morning post with half a brain engaged.)

Here is a good article on how I view the term.
Tipping Points

Quote:

For components of the Earth system that are at least sub-continental in scale (~1000km), they are a tipping element if: The parameters controlling the system can be transparently combined into a single control, and there exists a critical value of this control from which a small perturbation leads to a qualitative change in a crucial feature of the system, after some observation time (a full formalisation of this is given in Lenton et al., submitted). This definition is deliberately broad and inclusive. It includes ‘abrupt climate change’ defined as occurring when the climate system is forced to cross some threshold, triggering a transition to a new state at a rate determined by the climate system itself and faster than the cause. However, it goes beyond this because we wish to include: (i) non-climatic variables, (ii) cases where the transition is slower than the forcing causing it, (iii) cases where there is no abruptness, but a slight change in control still makes a qualitative impact in the future (which can be thought of as analogous to passing the points on a railway track). The definition encompasses equilibrium properties with threshold behaviour, including all orders of phase transition and the most common bifurcations found in nature (saddle-node and Hopf bifurcations). Qualitative change may occur immediately after the cause or much later, and the transition may be reversible or irreversible. Thus far there is nothing specific to human activities in the definition. Critical conditions may be reached without human interference and a qualitative change may be triggered by natural variability. Thus in its general form the definition may be applied to any time in Earth history (or future).

That was an excerpt from a good article that really breaks down the term and all the implications.