Record cold and snow in Brazil

sculptor said:
Before you fly too close to the sun young icarus:
Perhaps
you would be well served by contemplating the myriad other cycles which effect climate?
(more on that later)

and, as/re

If you would specify a particular cycle, you would be more likely to get a more specific answer.
Did you mean the Schwabe, Hale, Gleissberg, or Suess-DeVries cycles, or an as yet unnamed cycle of about 2300 years( or, is that confused with the Hallstatt cycle?),
or other not yet well defined longer term cycles
and then
Is the as yet, unnamed 400-405 kyr cycle strictly an orbital cycle, or is there an unidentified solar component?

----------------------------
it seems that the ill informed usually want simple answers to complex questions
maybe
just maybe
that too is due to global warming?
.......................................................................................................
speaking of which
anyone have a good recipe for fried brains with mushroom sauce?
Click to expand...
Haha, now we get the squirt of squid ink. :D

The cycles that affect the level of solar activity responsible, according to you, for the record snow and ice in Brazil, of course.
 
exchemist said:
Haha, now we get the squirt of squid ink. :D

The cycles that affect the level of solar activity responsible, according to you, for the record snow and ice in Brazil, of course.
Click to expand...
I never claimed that any one thing was "responsible"
what i posted was
"Research shows blocking persistence increases when solar activity is low....."
Now
was blocking "responsible" for the cold snap?
I did notice a disconnected channel of the southern jet stream was present in the lower latitudes
but, this was after the cold snap.
Do you understand the blocking actions?
here, you can see part of the southern jet stream in the tropics over the pacific ocean west of south america
https://earth.nullschool.net/#curre...graphic=-97.04,-67.43,468/loc=-98.604,-19.547

...................
and, you have not answered my above questions
 
sculptor said:
I never claimed that any one thing was "responsible"
what i posted was
"Research shows blocking persistence increases when solar activity is low....."
Now
was blocking "responsible" for the cold snap?
I did notice a disconnected channel of the southern jet stream was present in the lower latitudes
but, this was after the cold snap.
Do you understand the blocking actions?
here, you can see part of the southern jet stream in the tropics over the pacific ocean west of south america
https://earth.nullschool.net/#curre...graphic=-97.04,-67.43,468/loc=-98.604,-19.547

...................
and, you have not answered my above questions
Click to expand...
I'm not answering questions from you until you answer the ones previously outstanding for you to answer.

So, now you say low solar activity may not be responsible for the extreme weather in Brazil. Jolly good. We can ignore post 10 then.

Which leaves posts 9, 14 and 18 for you to answer. You seem to be taking your time over that one, I notice.
 
Man made climate change only works if you concentrate on 150 years of climate records. You can use that to support your climate agenda.

But if you look at the history of the earth's climate spanning many thousand and millions of years, you have to say to these climate alarmists, "What the fuck are you on about"
 
geordief said:
Indeed.
Why don't you back up your "argument"

Applies to sculptor too.He seems to have taken a dive into the rocks.
Click to expand...
Alarmists scream on about areas of the planet now becoming too hot or too cold. The Sahara was a rainforest as well as Antarctica. Climate changes, always will, irrespective of the retards believing man is responsible from 150 years of scribbled down observations.
 
Benson said:
Alarmists scream on about areas of the planet now becoming too hot or too cold. The Sahara was a rainforest as well as Antarctica. Climate changes, always will, irrespective of the retards believing man is responsible from 150 years of scribbled down observations.
Click to expand...
reported
 
geordief said:
reported
Click to expand...
Good grief you poor snowflake.

Why can't you climate alarmists grasp the earth's history on climate as opposed to 150 years.

So for example, this issue you have with co2, could you explain why that in the Ordovician period 450 million years ago when the carbon dioxide level in Earth’s atmosphere was approximately 800% higher than it is today, glaciation occured?

A bit of snow in Brazil? How is that amazing? Over the earth's lifespan, regions have been constantly alternating between, sand, snow, rainforest, underwater, above water etc.. So why the retardness that it's our fault due to 150 years?
 
It's utterly amazing that in 2021 there are still people who think that it's viable to argue that anthropogenic climate change is not a thing.

Face it, guys: you're dinosaurs. It's no use you pretending to discuss climate science until you've done some basic reading on the topic. Get back to me once you've done that, if you like.
 
Benson said:
Alarmists scream on about areas of the planet now becoming too hot or too cold. The Sahara was a rainforest as well as Antarctica. Climate changes, always will, irrespective of the retards believing man is responsible from 150 years of scribbled down observations.
Click to expand...
It's extraordinary to be still reading this sort of thing, after all that has been said and written about anthropogenic climate change. It's like those creationists that determinedly fail to understand the concept of natural selection, in spite of being told about it over and over again.

The point about anthropogenic climate change is not that the change will be beyond anything the planet has ever seen since life began (though it may eventually be). It is that the rate of change is about ten thousand times faster. This gives no time for adaptation, either by nature or by mankind.
 
If the very rapid climate change is man made then we can and should attempt to repair it. There is comfort in the thought that we can fix it.
If it is not the result of human activity it has been nice knowing you.
 
candy said:
If the very rapid climate change is man made then we can and should attempt to repair it. There is comfort in the thought that we can fix it.
If it is not the result of human activity it has been nice knowing you.
Click to expand...

It is nice to retain some optimism but my fear is that we have gone down a road there is no turning back from.

Just today there is this newspaper report that the North Atlantic conveyor belt is becoming unstable

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/08/06/world/climate-gulf-stream-collapse-warning-study-intl/index.html

"A crucial ocean circulation is showing signs of instability. Its shutdown would have serious impacts on our weather."


Also:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-021-01097-4.epdf?sharing_token=qWMQcnRcVRZQmZ_yahYbd9RgN0jAjWel9jnR3ZoTv0ODQw4Na6S4LwvIIwjZ_S3NdBoG6pi8c5NBfIwoUKp1VK_OHHszXMnB3OMoyz8L8emOhG-hoDsJyn1YMubz_IampYbIRg_8P9vjnfIPPzRQwm6m9BfwEGfoLu0JsB4E2trSfyu4r947mOz1oZQlyxQxZLxaMkEINR4Wt7XEIrPrRkahci-lKgCSTZahFzlH7wM=&tracking_referrer=www.washingtonpost.com


If that is the case then my gut feeling is that there may be no turnaround from the consequences.

What also fuels my pessimism is the way that the loss of arctic ice seems to have been accepted as a fait accompli.

Sure it is now ,but it is a good long time since this was on the cards and it did not spur any great effort when that particular writing went on the wall.
 
Last edited:
south-hemisphere-america-cold-weather-winter-outbreak-temperature-anomaly-day-2.png
 
exchemist said:
It's extraordinary to be still reading this sort of thing, after all that has been said and written about anthropogenic climate change. It's like those creationists that determinedly fail to understand the concept of natural selection, in spite of being told about it over and over again.

The point about anthropogenic climate change is not that the change will be beyond anything the planet has ever seen since life began (though it may eventually be). It is that the rate of change is about ten thousand times faster. This gives no time for adaptation, either by nature or by mankind.
Click to expand...
Listen, your mantra was "Global warming"

Then when cold spells were pointed out, it turned into "climate change".

When it was pointed out that climate change has happened since day fucking one, it turned into manmade climate change.

When it was pointed out the same fucking climate changes also happened in the earth's history without man being there, it's now the fucking speed of it.

So what's next on your ever changing climate story?????

So, do we know the speed of co2 throughout the earth's history, as in, how quickly it increased or decreased? Or, is it the third step in the retards agenda?
 
Benson said:
Listen, your mantra was "Global warming"

Then when cold spells were pointed out, it turned into "climate change".

When it was pointed out that climate change has happened since day fucking one, it turned into manmade climate change.

When it was pointed out the same fucking climate changes also happened in the earth's history without man being there, it's now the fucking speed of it.

So what's next on your ever changing climate story?????

So, do we know the speed of co2 throughout the earth's history, as in, how quickly it increased or decreased? Or, is it the third step in the retards agenda?
Click to expand...

as/re speed
Dansgaard–Oeschger events
increased by around 8 °C over 40 years
a 5 °C change over 30–40 years is more common.
...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top