4 ms·

==I find it far easier to believe that the consistent global drop in insect populations has far more to do with deforestation and chemical disbursement rather t

==I find it far easier to believe that the consistent global drop in insect populations has far more to do with deforestation and chemical disbursement rather than fractions of degrees of warming that we've seen so far.== They did add "large-scale biodiversity losses" as part of the climate change threat. Either way, what are your personal qualifications on the subject? It shouldn't be about what's "easiest to believe", but what the data shows us. Here's some data that just came out [1]: 2019 was the second-hottest year on record, continuing a global warming trend, researchers say. "Six of the warmest years on record occurred during the past decade" [1] https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/15/2019-was-the-second-hottest-year-on-record.html https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/15/2019-was-the-second-hottest-...

IanDrake 7y ago
What are your personal qualifications on the subject?
- IanDrake 7y ago
  I parrot the parent post's question and nobody likes it. If you think GW is a man made disaster, then you need no qualifications. If you don't, there aren't enough qualifications on earth for your opinion to matter.
  - take_a_breath 7y ago
    The people quoted in the article are named and have their titles presented. We are able to research their history and expertise if we desire. An anonymous poster on the internet has neither name or qualifications. When the anonymous poster posts "they find it far easier to believe" a theory counter to an article, knowing their qualifications helps level the playing field. If you had to choose between investing advice from a named financial expert or from me, an anonymous internet poster, you would be wise to either go with the named expert (who you could research their qualifications) or ask me for information on my expertise.
    - IanDrake 7y ago
      We must have read different articles. This article has no climate scientist mentioned. These are business people who are talking more about legislative risk and consumer trends than loss from GW related events.
at-fates-hands 7y ago
> "Six of the warmest years on record occurred during the past decade" This data is completely relative. In the midwest, the last several years have been some of the coldest on record. So while the West Coast had some of the driest and warmest weather, the midwest has seen some of the coldest: The climate statistics are in from the National Weather Service and winter 2013-2014 will go down as one of the coldest on record in both Missouri and Illinois. State wide temperature data showed Missouri finished the December 2013 to February 2014 period 4.6°F below normal, which is the tenth coldest on record, and coldest since 1979. Illinois saw its 9th coldest winter on record, also the coldest since 1979, with an average winter temperature 6.3° below normal. Climate records date back to 1895. https://www.ksdk.com/article/weather/2013-14-winter-ranks-in-top-10-coldest-ever-in-mo-ill/63-282201993 https://www.ksdk.com/article/weather/2013-14-winter-ranks-in...
- chimprich 7y ago
  > This data is completely relative. No, it's not. These are global temperatures. 2019 was the second-hottest year on record, looked at globally.
  - ska 7y ago
    Furthermore, locally larger weather shifts (and even unseasonably cold areas) are completely consistent with, in fact expected, for increased global temperatures. That energy has to go somewhere.
  - jdnenej 7y ago
    Australia had the hottest year on record in 2019 as well as breaking the hottest day on record multiple times in the same week
  - andygates 7y ago
    And it was only not the hottest because of a neutral ENSO. ENSO (the El Nino - La Nina cycle) puts a wobble on the trend. A strong El Nino year will bust the current 2016 record. The UK Met easily predicted this year's temps to be second-highest.
- 7y ago
bjornsing 7y ago
Sure 2019 was hot. But isn’t the parent questioning whether this causes a loss in biodiversity?

IanDrake 7y ago

What are your personal qualifications on the subject?

IanDrake 7y ago
I parrot the parent post's question and nobody likes it. If you think GW is a man made disaster, then you need no qualifications. If you don't, there aren't enough qualifications on earth for your opinion to matter.
- take_a_breath 7y ago
  The people quoted in the article are named and have their titles presented. We are able to research their history and expertise if we desire. An anonymous poster on the internet has neither name or qualifications. When the anonymous poster posts "they find it far easier to believe" a theory counter to an article, knowing their qualifications helps level the playing field. If you had to choose between investing advice from a named financial expert or from me, an anonymous internet poster, you would be wise to either go with the named expert (who you could research their qualifications) or ask me for information on my expertise.
  - IanDrake 7y ago
    We must have read different articles. This article has no climate scientist mentioned. These are business people who are talking more about legislative risk and consumer trends than loss from GW related events.

at-fates-hands 7y ago

> "Six of the warmest years on record occurred during the past decade" This data is completely relative. In the midwest, the last several years have been some of the coldest on record. So while the West Coast had some of the driest and warmest weather, the midwest has seen some of the coldest: The climate statistics are in from the National Weather Service and winter 2013-2014 will go down as one of the coldest on record in both Missouri and Illinois. State wide temperature data showed Missouri finished the December 2013 to February 2014 period 4.6°F below normal, which is the tenth coldest on record, and coldest since 1979. Illinois saw its 9th coldest winter on record, also the coldest since 1979, with an average winter temperature 6.3° below normal. Climate records date back to 1895. https://www.ksdk.com/article/weather/2013-14-winter-ranks-in-top-10-coldest-ever-in-mo-ill/63-282201993 https://www.ksdk.com/article/weather/2013-14-winter-ranks-in...

chimprich 7y ago
> This data is completely relative. No, it's not. These are global temperatures. 2019 was the second-hottest year on record, looked at globally.
- ska 7y ago
  Furthermore, locally larger weather shifts (and even unseasonably cold areas) are completely consistent with, in fact expected, for increased global temperatures. That energy has to go somewhere.
- jdnenej 7y ago
  Australia had the hottest year on record in 2019 as well as breaking the hottest day on record multiple times in the same week
- andygates 7y ago
  And it was only not the hottest because of a neutral ENSO. ENSO (the El Nino - La Nina cycle) puts a wobble on the trend. A strong El Nino year will bust the current 2016 record. The UK Met easily predicted this year's temps to be second-highest.
7y ago

bjornsing 7y ago

Sure 2019 was hot. But isn’t the parent questioning whether this causes a loss in biodiversity?