Why I stopped debating Climate Science with Science denialists...

Ooops! I take that back! This is down to Christopher Monckton
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2006/nov/14/science.comment
Monckton!



https://skepticalscience.com/Monckton_Myths.htm

 

Why?
If only say 10% of the temperature measurements in the U.SA are affected by UHI (and that would be a High number) then how much of an effect would that be on total global temperature? How much is it going to change the final figure?

 

Wow! Logic fail 101!


“Temperature measurements in the USA might be wrong therefore temperature measurements throughout the world must be wrong!

 

The focus of the research is to understand the effect, not to measure temperature.

 

First step is to understand the effect, then test for geographic reach.

 

That's been proven science for 150-200 years. You can find details in any high school physics textbook.

But that's why you're a physics denier. You just won't fess up.

 

Ooo...... an article written by a journalist with a degree in zoology. Couldn't actually find anyone actually qualified in physics?

Oh, that's right. You're a physics denier.

 

Met you are the one following a man with a degree in journalism. What you have failed to do is actually prove your point

 

So, degrees are the only thing that matters. Even when those degrees come from faithfully regurgitating the accepted mantras and gospel.

 

The same logic applies across the world. It is a universal problem.

 

I'm not following anyone. I've got my own degree in physics. Not that it matters.

You're still a physics denier.

 

Degrees and properly formatted research papers.

 

Papers that are likely to be declined if they don't follow the approved ideology.

 

??.? My point, which it seems some in the USA have difficulty with is that there actually is a “rest of the world” and that “rest of the world” is collecting data too - independent of anything happening in the USA. Our BOM does not take instruction from any US agency neither does the Japanese BOM or Portugal or Europe or South America or……

 

Yep! Journals, well the reputable ones anyway, have standards but there are enough of the questionable ones that even the most ridiculous paper can get published. A few years ago there was one challenging basic physics of IR radiation and it was published in an obscure journal which did not really cover that field - it was the source of much hilarity among the scientific community. Even now there are articles “published” that do not stand scrutiny. Jack keeps linking to them for us

 

Wow! From where? Because I hate to say it but I have yet to see you post with any degree of academic rigor .

 

IF only. but that isn't the case. Several authors have told of having to alter their conclusions to meet the approved conclusion.

And a single example would prove what?

 

Temperature measurements tend to be at airports surrounded by buildings and concrete. They are not representative of the majority of land surface. They do not measure the temperature for general public or historic purposes. They measure it for aviation purposes and they could care less what the temperature is in the surrounding rural areas. They require the temperature on the runway where the aircraft operates.

They could estimate the temperature of surrounding countryside, but it would take a network of temperature measuring equipment which does not exist.

 

Where would you ever get the idea that your opinion of my education matters?

 

Across the world? No they are NOT an and I will provide the same level of proof for that as you have provided for your claim.

 

Pick any temperature measuring location you want and chances are about nine out ten or greater that they are on an airport or in some urban area. Pick Australia for example.

 

Well I hope you can keep them out of your colonies. They make keeping bees a lot more work.

Yes, governments seem to latch onto the aspects that they believe will maintain or increase their ability to control and profit from the governed. Then the governed get tribal and destroy any possibility of the governed holding government accountable.

Ok I see your point. I would counter with the evidence that blankets and clothes don’t seem to be cutting the mustard if 10-17 times more folks die of too cold than too warm. Either people are not as intelligent as you give them credit for or blankets and clothes aren’t as effective as assumed. Perhaps the intelligence angle plays a part as your study below shows.

Also, humans are very good at mitigating temps above optimal. Even extreme temps. Mud hut architecture being one good example. Clothing styles of the Middle East deserts being another. Humans on average have had to expend more energy and brain power mitigating cold because the planet is too cold for humans. Doesn’t mean heat can’t be mitigated.

Well, we will certainly have to begin focusing more on heat mitigation at some point. But humans are very adaptable when we choose to be.

Europeans will have to reject dying out of spite that the planet is warming. If Europeans don’t just throw up their hands and die and instead adopt the equivalent of blankets and clothes to deal with warming your study shows this.

Similar to studies of agriculture that assume ag producers won’t adapt, these studies on future mortality often assume no adaptation. The UK doesn’t get nearly as hot as it does here in Nebraska. Yet I know a guy that immigrated here from the UK and has so far survived a couple decades. When humans use their intelligence along with physiological traits we can definitely mitigate both cold and heat.

Oh, yes, I agree cultural/racial aspects play a part. First world folks are pretty soft. I can guarantee you my ancestors could pitch hay with a fork all day in 100°F heat, but I wouldn’t last half a day. It would take some time to get used to that.

Good study in that it points out it’s not as simple as theoretical wet bulb temps.

Yes, wet bulb temp is a function of temperature and humidity—relative humidity to be exact. As temperature and/or relative humidity increase, the threshold of 31-35°C wet bulb becomes more likely to occur. Unfortunately, what nearly every article I’ve read on wet bulb temps fails to inform the reader about is the fact terrestrial global relative humidity levels have been falling for 40 years and are at pretty much historic lows. Some articles even conflate absolute humidity and relative humidity to further mislead.

https://climate.copernicus.eu/precipitation-relative-humidity-and-soil-moisture-february-2023#:~:text=Global all land-averaged relative,of February in the record.

Also, it should be noted the wet bulb temps we are discussing here do not account for wind/air movement. So death at 6 hours at 35°C wet bulb temp assumes no wind/breeze as well. This matters because the recorded wet bulb temps occur at relative humidities below 100%. I think your link alludes to air movement but doesn’t elaborate on why it matters.

No. Nobody has. Wet bulb temps approaching unlivable conditions have only occurred in small single recording location areas for a couple hours at a time maximum duration.

One reason these conditions are so short lived is because they generally trigger thunderstorm activity that drastically reduces relative humidity after the rain even if temperatures don’t drop much.

I have spent a lot of time in dangerously hot conditions and have suffered from heat exhaustion a few times now as I’ve aged. It’s no joke. But neither is hypothermia which nearly whacked me once.

Apparently not so easy to mitigate if globally cold kills 10-17 times more than heat. Hundreds of millions get through winter by burning massive amounts of fossil fuel and the world’s forests.

It actually shows less mortality if folks adopt mitigations.

Yeh, the worms require cold temps to express the genes. Humans conserved the genes and over express the gene at normal human body temp. So these worms are built for cold exposure it seems but humans are built to benefit at much warmer temps.

I do agree exposure to cold is healthy for humans. We know it can initiate autophagy and many people are seeing great benefit from cold plunges in water near freezing. But saunas are very advantageous to human health as well. Just like with exercise, if done correctly, pressuring the human body is advantageous.

 

Not really.

 

Pity about what, exactly?

H. Sapiens evolved during an interglacial. When temperatures were hotter than they are today.

 

https://medium.com/@budwilliams/the...=According to the Stefan-Boltzmann,-14% (-16%.

https://cen.acs.org/articles/84/i51/Earths-atmosphere.html

https://www.e-education.psu.edu/earth104/node/1335