/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.11507797]

Do scientists take this into account?

[Anonymous No.11507800]

>>11507797
Yes, the heat islanding effect has been well understood since the 1800s and has been controlled for in scientific research since then.

[Anonymous No.11507805]

>>11507800
How convenient.

[Anonymous No.11507829]

>>11507805
So what is your argument that the Earth isn't warming?

So why are glaciers melting?
Why are animals migrating?
Why are plants migrating?
Why is coral dying?

[Anonymous No.11507834]

>>11507829
I'm not OP and I think it's warming but globalhomoclimatechange is a bit of a cult that's a little too sure of themselves and their overfitted models and doomsday prophecies.

[Anonymous No.11507840]

>>11507829
>So why are glaciers melting?
>Why are animals migrating?
>Why are plants migrating?
>Why is coral dying?
That is natures response to a rapid rise in global melanin concentration

[Anonymous No.11507928]

>>11507797
I think they use Antarctic ice cores now

[Anonymous No.11507962]

>>11507829
Those are all things that just happen. The reason is time passing

[Anonymous No.11507983]

>>11507962
Those things happen on the scale of ten thousand years (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycles)), not 100 years, or decades as we're observing them now.

[Anonymous No.11507991]

>>11507829

>So why are glaciers melting?
Because eventually there's no more room for snow to be condensed on one part of the planet and it "discharges" when it gets to a warm enough part. Like pouring sugar into a bowl. When the bowl fills all the way and you keep pouring more on the pile, it falls out of the bowl. Obviously.
>Why are animals migrating?
They always did. It's called "adaptation". Birds do it every year.
>Why are plants migrating?
Because birds shit a lot when they migrate a lot. It's not like they walk on their roots like legs.
>Why is coral dying?
Coral dies when the water is murky and not clear. Factors not man made could cause this to happen
>>11507800
If only it could be so "well understood" everytime places like Japan gets hot as fuck in the summer instead of just blaming it on "global warming".

[Anonymous No.11507996]

It's all taken into account. Global warming is real.

[Anonymous No.11508154]

>>11507797
kek this guy never fails

[Anonymous No.11508339]

>roads and buildings get hotter than forest
>there are more roads / buildings and less forests
>therefore it isn't getting hotter
Did I miss something here or is that actually the argument being made?

[Anonymous No.11508373]

>>11507797
Yes, the requirements (at least according to my country's federal meteorological department) for an air temperature are quite specific about the distance from roads, buildings, height above ground etc. Though I think they may vary by country.

[Anonymous No.11508381]

>>11507829
God is angry at us. Not even joking.

[Anonymous No.11508382]

>>11507991
Coral bleaching only happens when the water is too hot, not when it's too muddy. So why is coral bleaching and dying?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QltN3FjwTu0

[Anonymous No.11508644]

>>11507991

>Because eventually there's no more room for snow to be condensed on one part of the planet

The melting is caused by 'no more room for snow' in the arctic? lmao, retard

>Why are animals migrating?
Wrong, it's called seasonal migration in case of birds and everyone who is not a complete idiot would recognize that the poster wasn't referring to the birds seasonal migration but species disappearing from their natural habitats and some species emerging in places that were previously uninhabitable for them

>Plants are migrating because birds shit a lot when they migrate a lot

Fucking kill yourself

>Corals are dying because I don't know? For whatever other reason you can come up with

Coral bleaching however and ocean acid levels rising however are directly linked to CO2 absorption by the oceans of which there are thousands and thousands of hours of footage that clearly show that places that were vivid with life for hundreds if not thousands or tens of thousands of years are now barren, bleached dead spots

I'm not on the alarmist side in fact I don't even care but the way you think and the fact that people who think this way makes me want to throw up. How can someone be such a retarded faggot and not keep his ideas to himself? If any effort will ever be made to reduce our carbon footprint I hope it will start with gassing plebs like you

[Anonymous No.11508666]

>>11508154
He's really a sad case. Back in the mid-2000s his blog essays were legitimately interesting and well put-together. The last 5 or 6 years he's become a caricature of the most over-the-top /pol/tard you could possibly imagine, except he's not joking.

I think his wife has poisoned his brain to some extent, her idiocy is even more extreme. She has (or had, I haven't checked in years) an essay on her website trying to argue that relativity is a joowish hoax.

[Anonymous No.11508901]

>>11507805
There is no difference between the rural station record and the current temperature record.

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2012JD018509

[Anonymous No.11509306]

>>11507797
>Do scientists take this into account?
the ramblings of a musician famous for murdering his band mate?
i don't think so
should they?

[Anonymous No.11509347]

>>11507797
>Do scientists take this into account?
yes
https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php
#26

[Anonymous No.11509356]

>>11507991
I mean no disrespect by this, but this is a science forum you really should brush up on your fundamentals before posting

[Anonymous No.11509361]

>>11507991
Holy shit, living embodiment of Dunning-Kruger effect here. You are so confident in your armchair reasoning, and yet you make some of the most retarded claims I've ever read. Hang yourself.

[Anonymous No.11509373]

>>11507834
Go scoop some water out of the ocean and look at it under a microscope, and you'll find a million little pieces of plastic. If we can fill the ocean with plastic in 40-50 years, it's not a cult-level proposition that we could raise environmental temperature by a few degrees since the industrial revolution. Especially when there is a heap of evidence supporting the idea.

[Anonymous No.11509374]

>>11509361
Th earth has been warming consistently for 10 thousand years. But durr human did it

[Anonymous No.11509413]

>>11509374
>consistently
nope

[Anonymous No.11509419]

>>11509374
>Th earth has been warming consistently for 10 thousand years
have you considered not being a dumbass? it's a viable alternative to being a dumbass

[Anonymous No.11509472]

>>11509419
You realize that chart is saying the earth is getting colder.

[Anonymous No.11509507]

>>11509472
It shows that it was getting colder over a 10,000 year period. If you look to the right the area in red shows the modern day or at least up to 1950.
See how rapidly that has risen compared to the preceding Little Ice Age? Consult other sources regarding the temperature since then(like pic attached) and it becomes apparent that the present-day heating is far outside any of the natural cooling/heating cycles observed in the past 10000 years. I won't tell you how or what to think so take from that what you will.

[Anonymous No.11509512]

>>11509507
tbqh famalam on this chart >>11509419 that red section doesn't look particularly steep at all compared to many of those other spikes on that same chart.

Maybe you posted the wrong chart? Is that chart incorrect/deceptive?

[Anonymous No.11509522]

>>11509507
T. American education
When a number is negative the higher it goes it means it's getting colder not hotter.

[Anonymous No.11509553]

>>11509507
This chart shows that between 2015 and 1862 the average global temperature rose by almost 1.7 degrees, that much change in 153 years alone should be cause for concern and it's fine if you doubt the efficacy of the data because skepticism is healthy however even if you collate amateur and independent measurements the same exact trend is shown

[Anonymous No.11509556]

>>11509553
Because it only shows 200 years. If you look at this >>11509419 it's clear the earth has been much hotter in the past

[Anonymous No.11509564]

>>11507805
>> Sarcastically refers to controlling for variables as "convenient"

Lol wtf nigga, it's standard scientific practice.

[Anonymous No.11509570]

>>11507805
Uh, yes?

[Anonymous No.11509609]

>>11509522
>When a number is negative the higher it goes it means it's getting colder not hotter.
I guess you're referring to the chart in >>11509419 ??
If so then what I was saying is still valid. Let me break it down for you. Blue lines show ice core temperatures in Greenland over time. Green line shows a trend. As yourself and >>11509472 said the green line shows a trend to the colder temperatures. However the red line shows a trend towards the smaller negative numbers meaning that the ice cores were getting warmer (less negative); As you said, and anyone familiar with maths for toddlers knows "When a number is negative the higher it goes it means it's getting colder not hotter."
P.S I'm not American nor am I the poster who posted that ice core temperate graph

[Anonymous No.11509627]

>>11509609
There's no red line in the first chart. Your switiching to the second one which shows the last 100 years but the first chart shows the earth has been much hotter in the past

[Anonymous No.11509654]

>>11509472
Yes. It was a reply to a guy saying
>the earth has been warming consistently for 10,000 years
which is obviously nonsense. It fluctuates all over the place, with an extremely vague cooling trend, except for very recently (not shown on that chart, which ends in the 1800s) where there's a giant-ass rapid spike.

[Anonymous No.11509676]

>>11509556
The worrying thing isn't the absolute temperature. The earth's temperature as it currently stands isn't the issue it's how fast it's growing. Between 1976 and 2015, just 39 years, the global average temperature rose almost 1.2 degrees, and if you look at the most recent data points and look at that chart as a whole the trend shows no sign of slowing or stopping, quite the opposite. Now look at the graph in >>11509419. The last significant warming was the medieval warming period which saw a 1.5 degree change in ice core temperature over almost 300 years.

[Anonymous No.11509680]

>>11509627
There is. Look to the far right of >>11509419
towards the present day and you'll see a red line connected to the blue line.

[Anonymous No.11509690]

>>11509676
Small scale fluctuations always happen

[Anonymous No.11509702]

>>11509690
So these small scale fluctuations happen to match the time scale of human fossil fuel consumption, happen to stutter and speed up as greenhouse gas emissions do and match computational models of global warming? What a coincidence

[Anonymous No.11509704]

Muh hockeystick

[Anonymous No.11509713]

>>11509690
Jesus Christ

[Anonymous No.11509722]

>>11509704
Thanks for that contribution Einstein

[Anonymous No.11509723]

Can anybody answer this question please? >>11509512

[how do i get a flag like on po(...) No.11509779]

>>11509512
>>11509723
see https://www.skepticalscience.com/10000-years-warmer.htm

also see >>11509676

[Anonymous No.11509788]

>>11509419
That chart is fake and made by a dishonest hack. It only represents a single site and that Greenland ice core ends at 1850 not the present day. It doesn't even have global warming

[Anonymous No.11509793]

>>11509512
That longer timescale graph is indeed deceptive.

[Anonymous No.11509798]

>>11509779
But the rate of change on that chart isn't faster than it has been in the recent (geologically speaking) past. Is that chart wrong?

[Anonymous No.11509804]

>>11509793
On that chart too, the slope of the spike 19th-21st century spike doesn't look steeper than many of the other spikes in the past 10,000 years. Some of those other spikes thousands of years ago look damn near vertical.

[Anonymous No.11509813]

>>11509798
It just doesn't mean what you think it means and it ends at 1850 to intentionally make cluless readers more confused.

[Anonymous No.11509819]

>>11509813
Do you have a chart that shows the past 10,000 years up to the present day?

[Anonymous No.11509822]

>>11507797
Monthly reminder that if you really care for the environment you will buy stuff made of wood and you'll make it last for 300 years

[Anonymous No.11509824]

>>11509819
see
>>11509793

[Anonymous No.11509826]

>>11509824
see: >>11509804
>On that chart too, the slope of the spike 19th-21st century spike doesn't look steeper than many of the other spikes in the past 10,000 years. Some of those other spikes thousands of years ago look damn near vertical.

[Anonymous No.11509829]

>>11509804
>>11509826
You have to be careful interpreting an ice core data from a single site. Greenland has very variable temperatures and a higher rate of ice accumulation when compared to places like Antatctica. For these reasons we have to look at global temperatures, not from a single place.

[Anonymous No.11509831]

>>11509829
That chart seems to only show the past thousand years, not the past 10,000. Is there a better chart showing global temperatures for the past 10,000 years?

[Anonymous No.11509840]

>>11509826
yes you said that, so what?

[Anonymous No.11509844]

>>11509826
>>11509804
>>11509831
Here is a timeline of CO2 using multiple ice cores. Notice the CO2 excursions after the end of the past two ice ages and how it spikes due to anthropogenic output. 10,000 year graph of temperature incoming.

[Anonymous No.11509846]

>>11509840
My question is:
>Is there a better chart showing global temperatures for the past 10,000 years?

[Anonymous No.11509849]

>>11509846

[Anonymous No.11509851]

>>11509844
I don't doubt that there has been global warming driven by a rise in CO2 due to the industrial revolution. What I'm trying to get my mind around is how the rate of change compares to other global temperature changes over 10,000 years or so.

>>11509849
Why does this chart look so radically different from these others: >>11509793 >>11509419 ?

[Anonymous No.11509857]

>>11509851
It's different because one is comparing a single site and the other is comparing a large collection of temperature proxies from all over the world giving you global averages.

[Anonymous No.11509864]

>>11509857
The y-axis on this one >>11509849 says "temperature anomaly", what does that mean exactly? Does that just mean temperature - [some arbitrary baseline]?

[Anonymous No.11509870]

>>11507805
>convenient
I'm sure it's a bigger pain in the ass, actually.
What a joke of a thread this is
>scientists are dumb, they didn't take this common sense into account
>"yes they did"
>no you're lying!!!

[Anonymous No.11509873]

>>11509373
who are you that is so wise in the ways of science?

[Anonymous No.11509876]

>>11509864
The temperature anomaly is calculated based on the difference in temperature from the record in their respective sites to the mean of a time period. It can be pre industrial, or modern. in the case of the Marcott et al 2013 graph is from 1961 to 1990 temperature mean

[Anonymous No.11509877]

>>11509864
>I don't know what temperature anomaly means meaning I have never read any scientific literature on the topic but I'm pretty sure I know more than those "science dudes" anyways

[Anonymous No.11509879]

>>11509864
The whole world is not the same temp so you need a measure that compares a place to itself and averaging that for a bunch of places gets you a temperature anomaly.

[Anonymous No.11509886]

>>11509877
I never said I know anything anon, let alone more than "science dudes". These are the comments I've made in this thread: >>11509512 >>11509723 >>11509798 >>11509804 >>11509819 >>11509826 >>11509831 >>11509846 >>11509851 >>11509864

[Anonymous No.11509891]

Coral bleaching doesn't occur because of "murky water" it's literally directly contributed to heat

[Anonymous No.11509913]

>>11509891
I thought coral bleaching was related to CO2 levels in the water (on account of CO2 dissolved in water, aka carbonic acid, being acidic), not the temperature of the water per-se.

[Anonymous No.11510107]

>>11509913
It's the temperature. The algal symbionts who provide the food and the color for the coral don't like the temperature and they leave the coral tissue. If they don't return in a couple of weeks the coral dies