The effects of Climate Change

How does science work? And what's all this about quantum mechanics?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 5297
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: The affects of Climate Change

Post by Sculptor »

attofishpi wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 11:35 pm
Sculptor wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 11:13 pm
attofishpi wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 8:37 pm

What? The science of common sense. Seems apparent I'm not the only person contemplating this.

Bill McGuire (volcanologist) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_McGu ... anologist)
McGuire is regarded as a UK expert on geological disasters including supervolcanoes, impact events, tsunamis and earthquakes.
In his latest book, Waking the Giant,[8] he argues temperature change brought about by global warming could release pressure from melting ice caps (through post-glacial rebound) and trigger earthquakes and volcanic eruptions, as well as increased landslides resulting from heavier rainfall.[9] See Physical impacts of climate change
A theory with no basis.
Really!??

Sculptor wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 11:13 pmplease acknowledge the word "COULD".
Ya, it's a plausible theory.

Sculptor wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 11:13 pm It's just a wild specualtion.
Wild?? ..as in irrational?
Yes.
it's ridiculous, comapring the mega forces of volcanos with a little weight of ice which only rests on a tiny bit of land in antartica, espacialy when most loss of icebrugs happens over the sea and not land.
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 6112
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: The affects of Climate Change

Post by attofishpi »

Sculptor wrote: Wed Jan 19, 2022 12:09 am
attofishpi wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 11:35 pm
Sculptor wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 11:13 pm

A theory with no basis.
Really!??

Sculptor wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 11:13 pmplease acknowledge the word "COULD".
Ya, it's a plausible theory.

Sculptor wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 11:13 pm It's just a wild specualtion.
Wild?? ..as in irrational?
Yes.
it's ridiculous, comapring the mega forces of volcanos with a little weight of ice which only rests on a tiny bit of land in antartica, espacialy when most loss of icebrugs happens over the sea and not land.
The weight of ice in Antarctica is not little - over 2 miles thick. Sure the volcano has mega forces - but these are contained by rock AND the sheer weight of the ice - disturb the ice, the result would be a volcano kicking off a lot sooner and more frequently that would have been the case.
User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 11157
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: The affects of Climate Change

Post by vegetariantaxidermy »

attofishpi wrote: Thu Jan 20, 2022 5:28 am
Sculptor wrote: Wed Jan 19, 2022 12:09 am
attofishpi wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 11:35 pm

Really!??




Ya, it's a plausible theory.




Wild?? ..as in irrational?
Yes.
it's ridiculous, comapring the mega forces of volcanos with a little weight of ice which only rests on a tiny bit of land in antartica, espacialy when most loss of icebrugs happens over the sea and not land.
The weight of ice in Antarctica is not little - over 2 miles thick. Sure the volcano has mega forces - but these are contained by rock AND the sheer weight of the ice - disturb the ice, the result would be a volcano kicking off a lot sooner and more frequently that would have been the case.
He's just another know-it-all. I've encountered a few of those.
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 6112
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: The affects of Climate Change

Post by attofishpi »

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: Thu Jan 20, 2022 5:35 am He's just another know-it-all. I've encountered a few of those.
I'm trying not to poke the ol' bugger, he's gotten worse in his old age. :D
User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 11157
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: The affects of Climate Change

Post by vegetariantaxidermy »

attofishpi wrote: Thu Jan 20, 2022 6:34 am
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: Thu Jan 20, 2022 5:35 am He's just another know-it-all. I've encountered a few of those.
I'm trying not to poke the ol' bugger, he's gotten worse in his old age. :D
I think he has me on his ignore list so it doesn't matter what I write and he probably didn't see the link to SCIENTIFIC American. :wink:
User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 5297
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: The affects of Climate Change

Post by Sculptor »

attofishpi wrote: Thu Jan 20, 2022 5:28 am
Sculptor wrote: Wed Jan 19, 2022 12:09 am
attofishpi wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 11:35 pm

Really!??




Ya, it's a plausible theory.




Wild?? ..as in irrational?
Yes.
it's ridiculous, comapring the mega forces of volcanos with a little weight of ice which only rests on a tiny bit of land in antartica, espacialy when most loss of icebrugs happens over the sea and not land.
The weight of ice in Antarctica is not little - over 2 miles thick. Sure the volcano has mega forces - but these are contained by rock AND the sheer weight of the ice - disturb the ice, the result would be a volcano kicking off a lot sooner and more frequently that would have been the case.
Not even got your facts right. It is maximum 2 km thick. which precisely 0.031% the radius of the earth, and with a significantly lower density of rock supporting it. It's like putting a foot deep chopping board on a boiling pan and expecting an icecube on the board to stop it boiling over.
The theory that you have gotten third hand from the Interweeb, is based on the assumption that there are more volcanic eruptions now than in the past. and that there were less in the early holocene.
THere is a massive problem with this due to partial evidence.
THis is typical "hockey stick thinking", in that modern evidence is always tending to give bgger results than could be possibly available to the fossil record.
Let me give you a more simple example. IN the 1950 the estimate of the Roman population was small, extrapolated from the available evidence which posited x number of villas in the periphery of the known ROman towns across Britian.
Can you think why after the 1960s, the estimate for the Roman population rocketed?
It is because we started to build motorways the length and bredth of the country. This coupled with a legal obligation to notify about any evidence of archeology meant that the apparent Roman population tripled.

With volcanoes we are talking about significant time persiod in which evidence al ALL minor quakes can be thourouhly wiped out and sequences of volcanoes over thousands of year can appear in the fossil record as single events.
THe difference today is the for the first time in history every single seismic event is meticulously recorded, whereas in the past much if this went unnoticed ar at least unreported.

Here's another way of looking at it.
The number of reported instances of volcanic activity in the last thousand years almost exacly matches the growth in earth's population.
Do not run away with the idea that people cause earthquales - I know you love to jump to conclusions.
No, it means that the REPORTING of volcanoes and earthquakes is increased because there are more people involved. It does NOT mean there was more volcanic activity. IN any event APPARENT volcanic activity has been on the increase long before GW was a thing.


There is real hard cash out there in the world of science to add the phrase "with reference to Global Warming" to research proposals and without it you do not get access to funding streams, this has caused a slew of dubious speculations concerning GW.
User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 11157
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: The effects of Climate Change

Post by vegetariantaxidermy »

The 'know-it-all':
One who expends a huge amount of energy trying to convince everyone around them that they know everything about everything (which naturally includes things they know next to nothing about). It tends to be almost exclusively males who have this affliction (although there are exceptions). The know-it-all can be very convincing to the unwary. It is terribly important to them to always be 'right', even when proven wrong. They will never give in and will usually end up boring their 'opponent' into giving up, or conveniently 'forget' that the argument ever happened, when, weeks later, they are proven wrong without any doubt whatsoever.
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 6112
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: The effects of Climate Change

Post by attofishpi »

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: Thu Jan 20, 2022 8:14 pm The 'know-it-all':
One who expends a huge amount of energy trying to convince everyone around them that they know everything about everything (which naturally includes things they know next to nothing about). It tends to be almost exclusively males who have this affliction (although there are exceptions). The know-it-all can be very convincing to the unwary. It is terribly important to them to always be 'right', even when proven wrong. They will never give in and will usually end up boring their 'opponent' into giving up, or conveniently 'forget' that the argument ever happened, when, weeks later, they are proven wrong without any doubt whatsoever.
I don't use this emoti very oftern, but this deserves one:- :lol: ya LMFAO!
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 6112
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: The effects of Climate Change

Post by attofishpi »

Sculptor wrote: Thu Jan 20, 2022 11:50 am
attofishpi wrote: Thu Jan 20, 2022 5:28 am
Sculptor wrote: Wed Jan 19, 2022 12:09 am
Yes.
it's ridiculous, comapring the mega forces of volcanos with a little weight of ice which only rests on a tiny bit of land in antartica, espacialy when most loss of icebrugs happens over the sea and not land.
The weight of ice in Antarctica is not little - over 2 miles thick. Sure the volcano has mega forces - but these are contained by rock AND the sheer weight of the ice - disturb the ice, the result would be a volcano kicking off a lot sooner and more frequently that would have been the case.
Not even got your facts right. It is maximum 2 km thick.
Get YOUR facts right - the average thickness is 2.14 KM thick. There are locations where is is over 3 KM thick (2 miles).

Sculptor wrote: Thu Jan 20, 2022 11:50 amwhich precisely 0.031% the radius of the earth, and with a significantly lower density of rock supporting it.

Irrelevant, and your analogy was ridiculous, so I removed it.

Sculptor wrote: Thu Jan 20, 2022 11:50 amThe theory that you have gotten third hand from the Interweeb, is based on the assumption that there are more volcanic eruptions now than in the past. and that there were less in the early holocene.
Wrong. I thought the idea myself, and since you asked for evidence I investigated internet sources. NONE of which was forumulated from actual statistical evidence - since as I suggested earlier in the thread, we simply DONT have such stats to make any accurate conclusions.

Sculptor wrote: Thu Jan 20, 2022 11:50 amTHere is a massive problem with this due to partial evidence.
THis is typical "hockey stick thinking", in that modern evidence is always tending to give bgger results than could be possibly available to the fossil record.
Let me give you a more simple example. IN the 1950 the estimate of the Roman population was small, extrapolated from the available evidence which posited x number of villas in the periphery of the known ROman towns across Britian.
Can you think why after the 1960s, the estimate for the Roman population rocketed?
It is because we started to build motorways the length and bredth of the country. This coupled with a legal obligation to notify about any evidence of archeology meant that the apparent Roman population tripled.
More irrelevance.
bla bla bla...let Sculptor profess himself, he sleeps better at night when he thinks people know he is well educated. (just don't test his intelligence, he gets angry)

Sculptor wrote: Thu Jan 20, 2022 11:50 amWith volcanoes we are talking about significant time persiod in which evidence al ALL minor quakes can be thourouhly wiped out and sequences of volcanoes over thousands of year can appear in the fossil record as single events.
THe difference today is the for the first time in history every single seismic event is meticulously recorded, whereas in the past much if this went unnoticed ar at least unreported.

Here's another way of looking at it.
The number of reported instances of volcanic activity in the last thousand years almost exacly matches the growth in earth's population.
Do not run away with the idea that people cause earthquales - I know you love to jump to conclusions.
Really? I am not jumping to any conclusions based on STATS. As I have already pointed out in this thread, we simply don't have the means, but you insist on strawnan tactics.

Sculptor wrote: Thu Jan 20, 2022 11:50 amThere is real hard cash out there in the world of science to add the phrase "with reference to Global Warming" to research proposals and without it you do not get access to funding streams, this has caused a slew of dubious speculations concerning GW.
Interesting point.
popeye1945
Posts: 417
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2021 2:12 am

Re: The effects of Climate Change

Post by popeye1945 »

The accelerated change of a condition spells the possiable death of all organisms, for the evolutionary change of all life forms are geared to a much slower speed of change, which means for life no possiablity of adaption, thus the death of all species. At least it will be peaceful--lol!! Perhaps seeing as humanity seems not to have that quality called self-control, nature might step in with enough force to thin our populations out and save herself. More pandemics are on the way, pretty sure, she is going to turn the forces of nature against us, and a thinking person can't think that's all bad. Maybe the magic man in the sky will instruct us to build a few arks, the least he could do for fucking things up so badly. One thing humanity cannot afford at the moment and that is negativity, negativity spells failure, death, and absurdity----keep your eyes on the prize hold on, HOLD ON!
User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 4724
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: The effects of Climate Change

Post by RCSaunders »

popeye1945 wrote: Thu Mar 10, 2022 6:12 am The accelerated change of a condition spells the possiable death of all organisms, ...
It's the end of everything! Been hearing that for over 80 years.

I've never been able to see why anyone would care if there really were a, "death of all organisms." They wouldn't be around to care, nor would anything else.

Perhaps the world will be lucky, and just the Chicken Littles that believe this doomsday nonsense will become extinct.
socrat44
Posts: 188
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2019 4:20 pm

Re: The effects of Climate Change

Post by socrat44 »

The effects of Climate Change
Attachments
Global warming = a joke.jpg
Global warming = a joke.jpg (11.91 KiB) Viewed 28 times
Post Reply