[DrCaleb]

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Mmm, no. We have 1 degree of warming, with a 43% increase in CO2. In the real world, there are always feedbacks. They don't disappear because you plug your ears and go "LALALALALA".

But who is doing that, with the plugged ears?

I would tell you there are feedbacks. It's a basic, known fact. In the real world most feedbacks are known to be negative. You suggest a little warming burst of positive feedback. I see that. It happened towards the end of the 20th century.

I suggested nothing of the sort. I stated facts. Before the Industrial revolution, the CO2 concentration of the atmosphere was no more than 280ppm. Right now, it is 403ppm. 43% increase. In that time, Global temperatures have averaged 1 degree higher. Therefore the temperature rose 1 degree for every 43% increase in CO2. By your estimate of 560ppm (doubling of CO2) we should see at least 2 degrees of warming. So your own feelings are trumped by actual measurements.

And your suggestion that most feedbacks in the real world are negative is false.

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

Now show me how you know the only possible conclusion as to where it came from was Manbearpig? Do it without a computer model. Show us the real word evidence that CO2 is magically increasing to say even 3 degrees of warming per doubling and only that can explain the 1980s to 90s warming increase.

You want me to prove your random goofy picture using a computer model? What are you trying to say here? Get someone else to help you with the words if they are too big.

[N_Fiddledog]

Ok, there's too much misinformation here to do this in 1 post. I'm going to have to do it in pieces. Let's start with this snarky bit of nonsense.

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

Now show me how you know the only possible conclusion as to where it came from was Manbearpig? Do it without a computer model. Show us the real word evidence that CO2 is magically increasing to say even 3 degrees of warming per doubling and only that can explain the 1980s to 90s warming increase.

You want me to prove your random goofy picture using a computer model? What are you trying to say here? Get someone else to help you with the words if they are too big.

You don't understand metaphor. Got it. But what part of "Do it without a computer model." translates in your now proven to be limited understanding into "using a computer model"?

[BartSimpson]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

And your suggestion that most feedbacks in the real world are negative is false.

A lifetime of experience has amply demonstrated to me that most feedbacks in the real world are indeed negative, asshole.




[/jk]

[N_Fiddledog]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

And your suggestion that most feedbacks in the real world are negative is false.

No it's not. I'll show you again with the same metaphor I've shown you before. As I understand it you have a problem with metaphors so as you say, get somebody to help you.

OK, here goes...

Are you familiar with the cartoon trope where, let's say a little mouse comes running out of a house and scurries up a snowy hill? As he mounts the peak we wonder. What could be chasing him. A cartoon cat bumbles clumsily but quickly out the door of the house and approaches the hill.

The quick thinking mouse rolls himself a little snowball and pushes it down the hill. It gathers momentum in its descent and as it does it gathers more and more snow getting larger and larger. It picks up the cat on the way down the hill and continues as a giant ball of snow finally crashing into the house.

Ok now let's re-enter the real world. Forget about the cartoon cat and mouse now. A ball of snow will not behave like what was seen in the cartoon. Why not?

Because negative feedbacks dominate the real world.

[N_Fiddledog]

Now let's deal with your little coup de gras of chosen ignorance.

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

I suggested nothing of the sort. I stated facts. Before the Industrial revolution, the CO2 concentration of the atmosphere was no more than 280ppm. Right now, it is 403ppm. 43% increase. In that time, Global temperatures have averaged 1 degree higher. Therefore the temperature rose 1 degree for every 43% increase in CO2. By your estimate of 560ppm (doubling of CO2) we should see at least 2 degrees of warming. So your own feelings are trumped by actual measurements.

We might disagree on the details but the basic idea of "there was some warming" is agreed.

We disagree that you know where it came from and have evidence it could only come from that.

Let's try another metaphor. You might like this one. In this one you're a scientist drifting through space on a dead planet in a research pod. The heating has gone out in one room. You put on your government approved Acme spacesuit and go to investigate.

You enter the room. It's minus 500 degrees. There is no light. No problem. You pull out your government approved, CO2 powered, Acme cigarette light and spark it up. Nothing much happens.

But wait all of a sudden it starts to warm. You quickly reach down with your other space gloved hand for your government approved, Acme, pocket computer. The dutiful little search engine zooms past the porn and finds the government approved model that might explain what's happening. This warming could only be caused by more heat from the lighter it says. The lighter must be firing like a blow torch now.

Just because...

And because the power of your belief is so strong, you ignore the fact that the space station is geo-thermal heated and the furnace just clicked on. Also this is the room where the water is stored first. The heating is bubbling up beneath the ice. Heat that was circulating the water system from without the room re-enters the system within.

And oh wait...

Here's another thing we forgot. The room is beginning to light up. What could possibly be causing this phenomena? It must be CO2.

Or maybe...

[DrCaleb]

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

And your suggestion that most feedbacks in the real world are negative is false.

No it's not. I'll show you again with the same metaphor I've shown you before. As I understand it you have a problem with metaphors so as you say, get somebody to help you.

OK, here goes...

Are you familiar with the cartoon trope where, let's say a little mouse comes running out of a house and scurries up a snowy hill? As he mounts the peak we wonder. What could be chasing him. A cartoon cat bumbles clumsily but quickly out the door of the house and approaches the hill.

The quick thinking mouse rolls himself a little snowball and pushes it down the hill. It gathers momentum in its descent and as it does it gathers more and more snow getting larger and larger. It picks up the cat on the way down the hill and continues as a giant ball of snow finally crashing into the house.

Ok now let's re-enter the real world. Forget about the cartoon cat and mouse now. A ball of snow will not behave like what was seen in the cartoon. Why not?

Because negative feedbacks dominate the real world.

Are you seriously using a cartoon as an example of real world consequences?

[DrCaleb]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

And your suggestion that most feedbacks in the real world are negative is false.

A lifetime of experience has amply demonstrated to me that most feedbacks in the real world are indeed negative, asshole.




[/jk]

Two hydrogens walk into a bar. One says "I've lost my electron!" The other asks, "Are you positive?"

[DrCaleb]

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

Now let's deal with your little coup de gras of chosen ignorance.

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

I suggested nothing of the sort. I stated facts. Before the Industrial revolution, the CO2 concentration of the atmosphere was no more than 280ppm. Right now, it is 403ppm. 43% increase. In that time, Global temperatures have averaged 1 degree higher. Therefore the temperature rose 1 degree for every 43% increase in CO2. By your estimate of 560ppm (doubling of CO2) we should see at least 2 degrees of warming. So your own feelings are trumped by actual measurements.

We might disagree on the details but the basic idea of "there was some warming" is agreed.

We disagree that you know where it came from and have evidence it could only come from that.

Let's try another metaphor. You might like this one. In this one you're a scientist drifting through space on a dead planet in a research pod. The heating has gone out in one room. You put on your government approved Acme spacesuit and go to investigate.

. . .

A space station is a closed environment. The Earth is not.

[N_Fiddledog]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Are you seriously using a cartoon as an example of real world consequences?

I was trying to make it easy to understand for you, but that doesn't appear possible. Very well...let's reduce it to a simple question.

Why is it when you push a snowball down a hill it doesn't just keep rolling?

It doesn't happen. To the frustration of little kids everywhere there's snow and hills, I might add.

[DrCaleb]

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

Ok, there's too much misinformation here to do this in 1 post. I'm going to have to do it in pieces. Let's start with this snarky bit of nonsense.

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

Now show me how you know the only possible conclusion as to where it came from was Manbearpig? Do it without a computer model. Show us the real word evidence that CO2 is magically increasing to say even 3 degrees of warming per doubling and only that can explain the 1980s to 90s warming increase.

You want me to prove your random goofy picture using a computer model? What are you trying to say here? Get someone else to help you with the words if they are too big.

You don't understand metaphor. Got it. But what part of "Do it without a computer model." translates in your now proven to be limited understanding into "using a computer model"?

I recognize those words, but I've told you before I won't defend an argument I haven't made.

280ppm -> 403ppm = 1C. That is all.

And I have no idea what you mean by ' 3 degrees warming' or 'explain 80s and 90s increase'. No one mentioned 3 degrees, or the 80s and 90s.

[N_Fiddledog]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

A space station is a closed environment. The Earth is not.

Oh so you mean there might be feedbacks other than just CO2.

Keep going with that. Your approaching the obvious conclusion. Don't be scared. The climate gestapo aren't going to kick your door down.

Yet...

[DrCaleb]

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Are you seriously using a cartoon as an example of real world consequences?

I was trying to make it easy to understand for you, but that doesn't appear possible. Very well...let's reduce it to a simple question.

Why is it when you push a snowball down a hill it doesn't just keep rolling?

It doesn't happen. To the frustration of little kids everywhere there's snow and hills, I might add.

Friction.

And what happens when you put money in a bank account with a positive interest rate, compounded? Positive feedback. What happens when you talk into an amplified microphone too loudly? Positive feedback. What happens when ice, that was reflecting heat back into space melts, leaving darker surfaces to heat the air more? Positive feedback. What happens when that warmer air reduced the point at which water precipitates, causing vegetation to die and warming the air further? Positive feedback.

And your suggestion that most feedbacks in the real world are negative is false.

[N_Fiddledog]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

I recognize those words, but I've told you before I won't defend an argument I haven't made.

280ppm -> 403ppm = 1C. That is all.

Really that's the argument you're making. Cool. Nothing too horrible is happening then. Yeah I know, "a piece of the sky just fell on your head." Run and tell the king.

Sorry, metaphor.

But we always come back to this. If all you're complaining about is a little nice weather enjoy your 1 degree of warming per doubling.

To melt the Antarctic and Greenland you have to start talking at least 3 degrees of warming per doubling with a probability of more.

If you're just talking about 1 degree per doubling buy yourself some sun screen and possibly enjoy a couple extra days of rays.

Depending on where you live...

[N_Fiddledog]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Are you seriously using a cartoon as an example of real world consequences?

I was trying to make it easy to understand for you, but that doesn't appear possible. Very well...let's reduce it to a simple question.

Why is it when you push a snowball down a hill it doesn't just keep rolling?

It doesn't happen. To the frustration of little kids everywhere there's snow and hills, I might add.

Friction.

So a negative feed back then. Keep looking around the real world you're going to see many more.

Now show me as much influence from positive feedbacks.

[Delwin]

You are going to keep getting negative feedback if you keep shitposting.