5 ms·

Everyone who said during the 1970s that we should be afraid of global cooling are the same people who now demand that we believe them on global warming. Oceani

Everyone who said during the 1970s that we should be afraid of global cooling are the same people who now demand that we believe them on global warming. Oceanic thermocline: explain the data we have and the mathematical model we have to cover this phenomenon. You can't, because you don't actually know. You just blindly believe it, don't you?

fallingfrog 8y ago
There is a gigantic mountain of evidence in favor of climate change, and you're listening to industry propaganda produced by the very people who have a clear monetary interest in doing nothing! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling#/media/File:PeerReviewedPapersComparingGlobalWarmingAndCoolingIn1970s.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling#/media/File:Pee... https://www.skepticalscience.com/ice-age-predictions-in-1970s.htm https://www.skepticalscience.com/ice-age-predictions-in-1970...
- patrickg_zill 8y ago
  "Oceanic thermocline" never fails to trigger people. As soon as they actually do in fact research it, they realize that: a) we don't have the data b) we don't have an accurate/sane mathematical model for it. We can't use satellites to measure anything other than surface temperature of the ocean; it would require an actual, physically located sensor network spread throughout the oceans of the world to get this information. Which we don't have now and never had in the past...
  - fallingfrog 8y ago
    http://www.argo.ucsd.edu/FAQ.html http://www.argo.ucsd.edu/FAQ.html We have a whole fleet of submersible thermometers that dive down to 2000 meters. And it's not that hard to tie a thermometer to a lead sinker and take a deep ocean temperature.
    - patrickg_zill 8y ago
      We don't even have 20 years' worth of data. As far as historical data, nothing at all. "In 1999, to combat this lack of data, an innovative step was taken by scientists to greatly improve the collection of observations inside the ocean through increased sampling of old and new quantities and increased coverage in terms of time and area. That step was Argo. "
  - tzs 8y ago
    > We can't use satellites to measure anything other than surface temperature of the ocean ...and atmospheric temperature, and surface temperature of the land, and the solar energy arriving on Earth, and the energy being radiated away from Earth. There are plenty of things we can measure to show that there is warming beside just deep ocean temperature. We probably need deep ocean temperature measurements to predict accurately how the warming effects will be distributed, but we don't need it to show the warming is happening. I don't know what you are going on with about the oceanic thermocline because all you've said is that there is some problem with some data related to some phenomenon involving it and that we don't have enough data to understand the oceanic thermocline. You seem to think this thermocline problem is inconsistent with global warming. Let's say you are right. So what? You noted that we don't have good data or models for the thermocline. We do have good data and models on dozens of things that do indicate warming. Generally in science when you have a lot of things that have good data and good models and support a theory, and some thing without good data or a good model that doesn't fit the theory, you wait until you get good data on the later before considering throwing out the theory.
    - patrickg_zill 8y ago
      The Pacific Ocean, alone, has a greater surface area than all the land masses of Earth, combined. Water, especially a large deep mass of water like the Pacific, can hold a lot of heat energy. And we don't know what is happening with the heat transfer and storage cycle; we don't even understand the full operation of heat exchange between ocean and the rest of the planet. Thermocline is "about" 800 meters of water depth (that's a HUGE heat sink): https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/thermocline.html https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/thermocline.html
roywiggins 8y ago
> are the same people Which people, specifically?
- fallingfrog 8y ago
  The Institute of Public Affairs is funded by: ExxonMobil,[34] Telstra, WMC Resources, BHP Billiton, Philip Morris,[35] Murray Irrigation Limited,[36] Visy Industries, Clough Engineering, Caltex, Shell, Esso[3] and British American Tobacco (BAT) give me some other example of anti-climate change propaganda and I will again show you the money trail.
fallingfrog 8y ago
When Philip Morris told everyone that cigarettes don't cause cancer, did you believe that too? Tell me the truth now.
fallingfrog 8y ago
Let me try another tack: I want you to examine your own beliefs. Let me guess, and tell me if I'm wrong. Doubtless I'm not 100% right about all this stuff, but think about these points honestly. This is based on my conversations with other climate change deniers. -You believe that climate change is part of some global conspiracy to create a world government, or redistribute resources to countries where brown skinned people live. -You believe that God promised Noah that He would never again flood the Earth, so rising seas can't happen. -You believe that people who protest against industry actions are just rabble rousers who are trying to take power for themselves. -You believe that the real motivation for talking about climate change is to destroy our traditional way of life. Am I close?

fallingfrog 8y ago

There is a gigantic mountain of evidence in favor of climate change, and you're listening to industry propaganda produced by the very people who have a clear monetary interest in doing nothing! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling#/media/File:PeerReviewedPapersComparingGlobalWarmingAndCoolingIn1970s.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling#/media/File:Pee... https://www.skepticalscience.com/ice-age-predictions-in-1970s.htm https://www.skepticalscience.com/ice-age-predictions-in-1970...

patrickg_zill 8y ago
"Oceanic thermocline" never fails to trigger people. As soon as they actually do in fact research it, they realize that: a) we don't have the data b) we don't have an accurate/sane mathematical model for it. We can't use satellites to measure anything other than surface temperature of the ocean; it would require an actual, physically located sensor network spread throughout the oceans of the world to get this information. Which we don't have now and never had in the past...
- fallingfrog 8y ago
  http://www.argo.ucsd.edu/FAQ.html http://www.argo.ucsd.edu/FAQ.html We have a whole fleet of submersible thermometers that dive down to 2000 meters. And it's not that hard to tie a thermometer to a lead sinker and take a deep ocean temperature.
  - patrickg_zill 8y ago
    We don't even have 20 years' worth of data. As far as historical data, nothing at all. "In 1999, to combat this lack of data, an innovative step was taken by scientists to greatly improve the collection of observations inside the ocean through increased sampling of old and new quantities and increased coverage in terms of time and area. That step was Argo. "
- tzs 8y ago
  > We can't use satellites to measure anything other than surface temperature of the ocean ...and atmospheric temperature, and surface temperature of the land, and the solar energy arriving on Earth, and the energy being radiated away from Earth. There are plenty of things we can measure to show that there is warming beside just deep ocean temperature. We probably need deep ocean temperature measurements to predict accurately how the warming effects will be distributed, but we don't need it to show the warming is happening. I don't know what you are going on with about the oceanic thermocline because all you've said is that there is some problem with some data related to some phenomenon involving it and that we don't have enough data to understand the oceanic thermocline. You seem to think this thermocline problem is inconsistent with global warming. Let's say you are right. So what? You noted that we don't have good data or models for the thermocline. We do have good data and models on dozens of things that do indicate warming. Generally in science when you have a lot of things that have good data and good models and support a theory, and some thing without good data or a good model that doesn't fit the theory, you wait until you get good data on the later before considering throwing out the theory.
  - patrickg_zill 8y ago
    The Pacific Ocean, alone, has a greater surface area than all the land masses of Earth, combined. Water, especially a large deep mass of water like the Pacific, can hold a lot of heat energy. And we don't know what is happening with the heat transfer and storage cycle; we don't even understand the full operation of heat exchange between ocean and the rest of the planet. Thermocline is "about" 800 meters of water depth (that's a HUGE heat sink): https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/thermocline.html https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/thermocline.html

roywiggins 8y ago

> are the same people Which people, specifically?

fallingfrog 8y ago
The Institute of Public Affairs is funded by: ExxonMobil,[34] Telstra, WMC Resources, BHP Billiton, Philip Morris,[35] Murray Irrigation Limited,[36] Visy Industries, Clough Engineering, Caltex, Shell, Esso[3] and British American Tobacco (BAT) give me some other example of anti-climate change propaganda and I will again show you the money trail.

fallingfrog 8y ago

When Philip Morris told everyone that cigarettes don't cause cancer, did you believe that too? Tell me the truth now.

fallingfrog 8y ago

Let me try another tack: I want you to examine your own beliefs. Let me guess, and tell me if I'm wrong. Doubtless I'm not 100% right about all this stuff, but think about these points honestly. This is based on my conversations with other climate change deniers. -You believe that climate change is part of some global conspiracy to create a world government, or redistribute resources to countries where brown skinned people live. -You believe that God promised Noah that He would never again flood the Earth, so rising seas can't happen. -You believe that people who protest against industry actions are just rabble rousers who are trying to take power for themselves. -You believe that the real motivation for talking about climate change is to destroy our traditional way of life. Am I close?