We want graphs? How about atmospheric co2 yearly trends as measured at the peak of Mauna Loa, exposed to cross-pacific high altitude winds. https://gml.noaa.gov/ccgg/trends/
Flowers aren’t good enough for you?
Japan's cherry blossom: as indisputable as climate change evidence gets
41–50 of 132 posts
Re: Japan's cherry blossom: as indisputable as climate change evidence gets
#42We want graphs? How about atmospheric co2 yearly trends as measured at the peak of Mauna Loa, exposed to cross-pacific high altitude winds. https://gml.noaa.gov/ccgg/trends/
Meh. The denier response is “yeah CO2 is increasing, but the evidence that it’s leading to other stuff is suspect”.
Re: Japan's cherry blossom: as indisputable as climate change evidence gets
#43We want graphs? How about atmospheric co2 yearly trends as measured at the peak of Mauna Loa, exposed to cross-pacific high altitude winds. https://gml.noaa.gov/ccgg/trends/
Sea level rise doesn't look that concerning:
https://www.e-education.psu.edu/earth107/node/1506
Re: Japan's cherry blossom: as indisputable as climate change evidence gets
#44"It's not projected data, it's actual data. It's not measured, it's observed." It's certainly elegant proof. If those climate change deniers could read they would be very upset.
I’m a climate change denier. A lot of us keep our opinions to ourselves, mostly because we know we don’t know enough about it. Articles like these help change my mind. Well, partly. The question I keep coming to is “how do you know any of this matters, for a definition of ‘matter’ that includes widespread upheaval of human societies?” But at this point I go meh, not worth the risk. Point is, condescending remarks onl…
> Point is, condescending remarks only push people away from your cause.
Thanks for the honesty. Here's some more.
Some of us don't care about your feelings at this point. It is past time for talking. There are always people with perverse incentives, or deeply held beliefs or grudges, who are unreachable. Screw 'em, it is time for action. If they want to argue, they can argue with each other.
Re: Japan's cherry blossom: as indisputable as climate change evidence gets
#45It's nice data, but I think the article is overselling it. It's an indisputable evidence of climate change at Japan. However, we do know from historical records that a regional climate can change in its own way. (E.g., the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age of Europe.)
The good(??) news, of course, is that we have global coverage of the current climate, plus thousands of regional records going back to prehistory - taken together, they are truly indisputable.
Basically, no serious researcher in 2021 is trying to "prove" (or disprove) AGW, any more than trying to prove the theory of germs. It's proven. What's left is details.
Re: Japan's cherry blossom: as indisputable as climate change evidence gets
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure I understand. Why deny something that you claim not to know enough about?
Isn't that the default stance in philosophy? Assume something is false until evidence proven true. You cannot begin with the assumption that something is true, otherwise we're back to the mystical dark ages of magic monsters and alchemy
> Assume something is false until evidence proven true.
This cuts both ways, depending how your phrase the assumption.
Which of these statements should we assume false, until proven true:
"Doubling the concentration of atmospheric CO2 will not cause meaningful negative impacts on human civilization."
"Doubling the concentration of atmospheric CO2 will cause meaningful negative impacts on human civilization."
Philosophy isn't going to rescue us from this. Climate science will.
Re: Japan's cherry blossom: as indisputable as climate change evidence gets
#47I "believe" in climate change, but this article does a pretty poor job of examining even the most basic of questions a skeptic would ask. Such as, what determines when the blossoms are peak bloom?
How accurate were the ancient Japanese at recording days? I mean, just looking at the graph you can see it narrows near modern times which suggests we simply got better at recording accurate data.
Re: Japan's cherry blossom: as indisputable as climate change evidence gets
#48I hate to do this but... cherry trees only live about 15-40 years. They're cultivated and bred for their blossoms, among other things. How can we be sure that we haven't selected trees for earlier blooms?
How can we be sure we have not selected them for later blooms and things are even worse than we thought?
: )
Re: Japan's cherry blossom: as indisputable as climate change evidence gets
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
Heh. Well, since you asked... There's a distressing pattern: the idea that "man made climate change exists, therefore disaster." The "disaster" part is the part I've never truly been able to convince myself of. I don't deny it -- you're right, it's more along the lines of agnosticism. But I think it's really easy to convince yourself of doom. However, striving to be something resembling a scientist, I recognize that…
> I’m a climate change denier > I don't deny it So, you're not a climate change denier
To be fair, everyone gets put in the denier bucket if they question any part of the narrative. (Disclaimer: I’m not a denier)
Re: Japan's cherry blossom: as indisputable as climate change evidence gets
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m a climate change denier. A lot of us keep our opinions to ourselves, mostly because we know we don’t know enough about it. Articles like these help change my mind. Well, partly. The question I keep coming to is “how do you know any of this matters, for a definition of ‘matter’ that includes widespread upheaval of human societies?” But at this point I go meh, not worth the risk. Point is, condescending remarks onl…
The question of the impact of climate change on humans seems to me a separate one from the observable reality of climate change and CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere, which is a more tangible data question. It seems odd to describe yourself as a "denier" unless you mean you reject the actual science itself. And if you do, the question of whether it "matters" seems not at all important given that you reject it is h…
For me, I'm sure the climate is changing, partly because of human activity. Where I differ is that I think the impacts of the changing climate will be so small and gradual and so easy to adapt to that it doesn't warrant the massive upheaval to economies that are being prescribed.