Comments by "Old Scientist" (@OldScientist) on "CBS 8 San Diego" channel.

Why declare a climate emergency when there isn't one? So the weather's bad sometimes. The Earth was warmer in the recent and distant past. It also warmed faster in the past.
7
As regards the melting of Arctic Ice, the records nearly always seem to start in 1979. Strange that, considering it was a year of record extent for Arctic Ice. Even so, data from NOAA (2022) show winter (March) ice coverage has hardly changed since '79, and that the summer (September) coverage trend had stopped declining since 2007. How inconvenient! Didn't someone predict in 2007 Arctic ice free by 2010, or 2015, or 2013, or in 5 years? Or was it in 2008 the Arctic ice sheet would melt away. Also predicted in 2008 North Pole ice free in ... 2008 ... or in 10 years. 2009 prediction: Arctic ice free in 2014. 2012 prediction: snow will be gone by 2020. And 2013 star prediction: Methane catastrophe in 2 years because of ice free Arctic. 2018 prediction: zero chance of permanent ice in Arctic by 2022. It's still there, and it's stopped shrinking. If you consider global sea ice cover, it was basically flat from 1981 to 2008, rose until 2010, stayed level until 2015, dropped until 2018, and then rebounded almost all the way back to the 1990-2000 average. Nobody predicted theses changes, nor can they explain them. The changes have no relationship to the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere. The climate crisis/emergency/apocalypse is make-believe. Multiyear ice is an unproductive habitat as far as marine organisms are concerned: first year (seasonal) ice over continental shelves is the most productive and this is where the vast majority of polar bears, seals, fish, whales, and sea birds are found. Therefore the decline of extremely thick multiyear ice (>4 years old) could be seen as an unconcerning development with regards to the wildlife in the region, especially since 2-3 year old ice that can be used as a resting/hunting platform for seals and polar bears hasn't declined in summer since 2007. In fact, biologically, the Arctic is in good shape with all its regions showing a positive trend in primary productivity over an extended period (2003-2022). This has resulted in more food for seals, walruses, bowhead whales and polar bears, which are hence maintaining or expanding their populations. There's no "death spiral" in the region as some people reported. In fact, there is, as I say, no evidence of any crisis/emergency. That is silly nonsense designed to scare people.
4
@G I hope you're being hyperbolic when you say "every scientist" and I'm sure you understand that science does not move forward by consensus - that's politics. But just in case...It was warmer during the Medieval (Elbert, 2013, 2.9°C above present), Roman (Margaritelli, 2020, 2°C above present), and Minoan Warm Periods (Lécuyer, 2018, 4°C above present). It was certainly warmer during the Holocene Climatic Optimum, so during our current interglacial. If you want a citation, try Quaternary Research Volume 53, Issue 3, May 2000, Pages 302-311. This makes the point that it was upto 7°C warmer on the shores of the Arctic during that time, with trees growing on the shores of the ocean (which would have been ice free in the summer), far to the north of the current treeline. The northern coast of Greenland was, during parts of the Pleistocene, warmer by double figures than today. The summer and winter average minimum temperatures of 10 degrees Celsius and 17 degrees C, respectively, were more than 10 degrees C warmer than present day. I think it was a maximum of 19 °C warmer than today. Remarkable. Maybe it was those pesky Neanderthals driving around in their SUVs. That one's been all over the news but if you want a citation I think it was in the 7th December 2022 issue of Nature. The original research was done by some Danish chappy. If you want some really rapid warming look at the CET (Central England Temperature) Record between 1690 and 1730. That won't be reliable enough for you though. Why not try the Dansgaard–Oeschger events? Some researchers believe the Medieval Warm Period was one of these, but I'm not convinced.
2
There were 84 documented eastern north Pacific TCs (tropical cyclones) that had an effect on the SW United States from 1900-1984 (NOAA).
2
I'm afraid the Doomsday glacier has lost its doom. “No numerical modeling work has shown that Thwaites Glacier is currently undergoing an irreversible retreat.” – Gudmundsson et al., 2023. "Removing TWIS [Thwaite's Ice Shelf] causes a modification in modelled SLR [Sea Level Rise] of 1-2mm SLR equivalent over the first 50 years." That's risibly tiny and described as "negligibly small" by the authors. The removal of the ice shelf "will have almost no discernable effect on the future mass loss of the glacier." Oh dear. There's nothing to see here. You'd better move on to the next scare story. The problem is there is no objective observational evidence that we are living in a global climate crisis.
1
@crapisnice You've got nothing.
1
@crapisnice Thanks.
1
@crapisnice I'm afraid the Doomsday glacier has lost its doom. “No numerical modeling work has shown that Thwaites Glacier is currently undergoing an irreversible retreat.” – Gudmundsson et al., 2023. "Removing TWIS [Thwaite's Ice Shelf] causes a modification in modelled SLR [Sea Level Rise] of 1-2mm SLR equivalent over the first 50 years." That's risibly tiny and described as "negligibly small" by the authors. The removal of the ice shelf "will have almost no discernable effect on the future mass loss of the glacier." Oh dear. There's nothing to see here. You'd better move on to the next scare story. The problem is there is no objective observational evidence that we are living in a global climate crisis.
1
I'm afraid the Doomsday glacier has lost its doom. “No numerical modeling work has shown that Thwaites Glacier is currently undergoing an irreversible retreat.” – Gudmundsson et al., 2023. "Removing TWIS [Thwaite's Ice Shelf] causes a modification in modelled SLR [Sea Level Rise] of 1-2mm SLR equivalent over the first 50 years." That's risibly tiny and described as "negligibly small" by the authors. The removal of the ice shelf "will have almost no discernable effect on the future mass loss of the glacier." Oh dear. There's nothing to see here. You'd better move on to the next scare story. The problem is there is no objective observational evidence that we are living in a global climate crisis.
1
I'm afraid the Doomsday glacier has lost its doom. “No numerical modeling work has shown that Thwaites Glacier is currently undergoing an irreversible retreat.” – Gudmundsson et al., 2023. "Removing TWIS [Thwaite's Ice Shelf] causes a modification in modelled SLR [Sea Level Rise] of 1-2mm SLR equivalent over the first 50 years." That's risibly tiny and described as "negligibly small" by the authors. The removal of the ice shelf "will have almost no discernable effect on the future mass loss of the glacier." Oh dear. There's nothing to see here. You'd better move on to the next scare story. The problem is there is no objective observational evidence that we are living in a global climate crisis.
1
@brockreynolds870 That research is from 2016 (Albert et al 2016 Environ. Res. Lett.), and it has been superceded. Atolls in the Pacific nations of the Marshall Islands and Kiribati, as well as the Maldives archipelago in the Indian Ocean, have risen up to 8 percent in size (Ford and Kench, 2020). 89% of the globe’s islands and 100% of large islands have stable or growing coasts (Duvat, 2019). No island larger than 10ha decreased in size.
1
When's the baby due, luv?
1
There is no objective evidence that a climate crisis is occurring.
1
I'm afraid the Doomsday glacier has lost its doom. “No numerical modeling work has shown that Thwaites Glacier is currently undergoing an irreversible retreat.” – Gudmundsson et al., 2023. "Removing TWIS [Thwaite's Ice Shelf] causes a modification in modelled SLR [Sea Level Rise] of 1-2mm SLR equivalent over the first 50 years." That's risibly tiny and described as "negligibly small" by the authors. The removal of the ice shelf "will have almost no discernable effect on the future mass loss of the glacier." Oh dear. There's nothing to see here. You'd better move on to the next scare story. The problem is there is no objective observational evidence that we are living in a global climate crisis.
1
There is no objective observational evidence that we are living in a global climate crisis. The UN's IPCC AR6, chapter 12 "Climate Change Information for Regional Impact and for Risk Assessment", section 12.5.2, table 12.12 confirms there is a lack of evidence or no signal that the following have changed: Air Pollution Weather (temperature inversions), Aridity, Avalanche (snow), Average precipitation, Average Wind Speed, Coastal Flood, Agricultural drought, Hydrological drought, Erosion of Coastlines, Fire Weather (hot and windy), Flooding From Heavy Rain (pluvial floods), Frost, Hail, Heavy Rain, Heavy Snowfall and Ice Storms, Landslides, Marine Heatwaves, Ocean Acidity, Radiation at the Earth’s Surface, River/Lake Floods, Sand and Dust Storms, Sea Level, Severe Wind Storms, Snow, Glacier, and Ice Sheets, Tropical Cyclones. There is no objective observational evidence that we are living through a global climate crisis. None.
1
@G This is not "cherry picking " but examples of eminent scientific research. None of which you have attempted to dismantle. Most of the examples noted were global or at least hemispheric. When the Earth's climate does warm, this warming does not occur evenly. There will be very little change at the tropics. The temperature changes that occur are extra-tropical i.e. towards the poles. This temperature differential is magnified during ice ages (about 40°), is less now (about 20°) and was even less during the Eocene (about 5°). There is plenty of evidence from around the world that large and rapid temperature changes have occurred in the recent past especially the Medieval Warm Period which required no extra radiative forcing from human activity. Please understand the climate system here on Earth is more complicated than we yet know and that CO2 is not THE control knob.
1
@G Unfortunately, NASA (2010) would disagree with the entirety of Science. They believe that two-thirds of man-made warming is due to CO2. The problem with this, the IPCC and others (like your good self) is they rely on models rather than observations to show warming is entirely man-made. When you "look under the hood" (IPCC 2013, p882) you see the result is a compound of 15 models with wildly different outcomes that have to be "scaled" to fit the believed level of warming - that's fudging it so it fits. Most models show very excessive warming, but some show cooling! This gives an exceptionally large variation in the computed man-made warming. Much larger than the believed level of warming (0.66°C 1951-2010), because of that one should not have confidence in the overall values provided. It's bad science.
1
@Brian When it comes to the extent of the previous warming events you mentioned these events were not local in nature. The Minoan Warm Period was identified in the Greenland Ice record as pointed out in the paper I cited, if you'd bothered to read it, so it was at least hemispheric. The Roman Warm Period was not just in Rome (see Wang et, 2012, published in Quaternary International) but has also been identified on the other side of the world. When it comes to the Medieval Warm Period, I can quote you upwards of 100 recent peer reviewed published scientific papers that cover all the Earth's continents and show both qualitatively and quantitatively that the Medieval Warm Period was hotter than the Current Warm Period.
1
I'm afraid the Doomsday glacier has lost its doom. “No numerical modeling work has shown that Thwaites Glacier is currently undergoing an irreversible retreat.” – Gudmundsson et al., 2023. "Removing TWIS [Thwaite's Ice Shelf] causes a modification in modelled SLR [Sea Level Rise] of 1-2mm SLR equivalent over the first 50 years." That's risibly tiny and described as "negligibly small" by the authors. The removal of the ice shelf "will have almost no discernable effect on the future mass loss of the glacier." Oh dear. There's nothing to see here. You'd better move on to the next scare story. The problem is there is no objective observational evidence that we are living in a global climate crisis.
1
I'm afraid the Doomsday glacier has lost its doom. “No numerical modeling work has shown that Thwaites Glacier is currently undergoing an irreversible retreat.” – Gudmundsson et al., 2023. "Removing TWIS [Thwaite's Ice Shelf] causes a modification in modelled SLR [Sea Level Rise] of 1-2mm SLR equivalent over the first 50 years." That's risibly tiny and described as "negligibly small" by the authors. The removal of the ice shelf "will have almost no discernable effect on the future mass loss of the glacier." Oh dear. There's nothing to see here. You'd better move on to the next scare story. The problem is there is no objective observational evidence that we are living in a global climate crisis.
1