Direct measurement of CO2 effect:

Originally posted by Metal Brain
So you can't prove Singer wrong. I thought so. Fail!

I see you resort to being infantile and deliberately obtuse pretending to not understand anything rather than be the man and admit you were wrong.

Originally posted by googlefudge
http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2015/03/climate_change_is_already_affecting_alaska_s_weather.html

[b]Baked Alaska
If the Last Frontier is the canary in the climate coal mine, we’re in trouble.

Earlier this winter, Monica Zappa packed up her crew of Alaskan sled dogs and headed south, in search of snow. “We haven’t ...[text shortened]... rganizers had to truck in snow to the ceremonial Iditarod start line in Anchorage. .....

[/b]

That is not what sonhouse was referring to. He specifically said Alaskans were forced inland because of rising ocean levels.

Originally posted by humy
I see you resort to being infantile and deliberately obtuse pretending to not understand anything rather than be the man and admit you were wrong.

I understand quite well. The fact that you think you proved something is amusing. I am the one who proved you wrong. Climate models are unreliable. I'll post the link again.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/warrenmeyer/2011/06/09/model-behavior-in-climate-science-its-all-about-the-computers/

Meyer's logic is flawless. I know you would rather not accept that, but you obviously have a hard time admitting you are wrong.

Originally posted by Metal Brain
That is not what sonhouse was referring to. He specifically said Alaskans were forced inland because of rising ocean levels.

Yes. And if you actually read the article you would see that that is included in it.

... Those are city problems. Meanwhile, along the state’s west coast, some native coastal villages are facing an existential threat, as sea levels rise in response to the warm water. Earlier this winter, the Washington Post’s climate reporter Chris Mooney visited Kivalina, one of the six villages considering plans to relocate due to climate change. “Here, climate change is less a future threat and more a daily force, felt in drastic changes to weather, loss of traditional means of sustenance like whale hunting, and the literal vanishing of land,” Mooney wrote. Another village, Newtok, is a bit further along in the relocation process, with construction on their new village—Mertarvik—already under way. ....

Originally posted by googlefudge
Yes. And if you actually read the article you would see that that is included in it.

... Those are city problems. Meanwhile, along the state’s west coast, some native coastal villages are facing an existential threat, as sea levels rise in response to the warm water. Earlier this winter, the Washington Post’s climate reporter Chris Mooney visit ...[text shortened]... cation process, with construction on their new village—Mertarvik—already under way. ....

I was waiting for sonhouse to post his link. Sea levels can rise due to ocean circulation change for years. It would not surprise me if something similar in the Pacific happened like what happened in the Atlantic ocean and it is being falsely blamed on climate change. I will not know until he posts the link he keeps crowing about.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/02/150224113711.htm

Much of what is being described in your link can also be caused by weather changes rather than climate change. It may just be temporary. When was the article written?

Originally posted by Metal Brain
Sea levels can rise due to ocean circulation change for years. It would not surprise me if something similar in the Pacific happened like what happened in the Atlantic ocean and it is being falsely blamed on climate change.

1, are you saying that a change in sea level due to ocean circulation change couldn't in turm be caused by climate change?
If so, explain your reasoning....

2, how do you account for the global average sea rise? How can merely a change in ocean circulation change the AVERAGE sea level rise over the WHOLE of the oceans?
Explain your reasoning....

3, do you deny that global warming can cause glaciers to melt?
If so, explain your reasoning....

4, do you deny that the observed melting land glaciers would contribute measurably to sea level rise?
If so, where would you think the water would go from melting land glaciers and, if the oceans, explain your reasoning of why this wouldn't cause the sea level to physical rise....

Originally posted by humy
1, are you saying that a change in sea level due to ocean circulation change couldn't in turm be caused by climate change?
If so, explain your reasoning....

2, how do you account for the global average sea rise? How can merely a change in ocean circulation change the AVERAGE sea level rise over the WHOLE of the oceans?
Explain your reasoning....

3, do y ...[text shortened]... the oceans, explain your reasoning of why this wouldn't cause the sea level to physical rise....

How long have glaciers been melting? Are you claiming this is new?

Are you claiming that the ocean circulation changes that temporarily increases sea levels are caused by MMGW?

Let's get something straight so you don't keep asking me stupid questions. I'm asking you how when you think the recent warming started so I don't have to hear you guys keep asking me if I realize glaciers are melting. It is as if you and sonhouse think glaciers never melted until MMGW.

Also, when do you believe man started to have an effect on climate change? I'm asking this because I want you to know that glaciers melted before that time. I feel like I am talking to idiots when guys like you ask me if I deny glaciers are melting. After you answer my questions I am confident you and sonhouse will NEVER ask stupid questions like that again. It gets old!

Originally posted by Metal Brain
How long have glaciers been melting? Are you claiming this is new?

Are you claiming that the ocean circulation changes that temporarily increases sea levels are caused by MMGW?

Let's get something straight so you don't keep asking me stupid questions. I'm asking you how when you think the recent warming started so I don't have to hear you guys keep ...[text shortened]... ns I am confident you and sonhouse will NEVER ask stupid questions like that again. It gets old!

You think glaciers just come and go on a regular basis? Like on the order of a few hundred years or some such?

Do you deny glaciers are disappearing right now? Are you willing to bet your life on the idea they will just magically come back 100 years from now? Because that is what you are doing, betting the lives of your descendants on the idea this will all just blow over and 'go home everyone, there's nothing here, there's nothing to see folks, it's all over, go home."

Originally posted by Metal Brain
How long have glaciers been melting? Are you claiming this is new?

Are you claiming that the ocean circulation changes that temporarily increases sea levels are caused by MMGW?

Let's get something straight so you don't keep asking me stupid questions. I'm asking you how when you think the recent warming started so I don't have to hear you guys keep ...[text shortened]... ns I am confident you and sonhouse will NEVER ask stupid questions like that again. It gets old!

Are you claiming that the ocean circulation changes that temporarily increases sea levels are caused by MMGW?

No; I didn't say “temporarily” there and you know it -just another vain attempt at straw man.

How long have glaciers been melting? Are you claiming this is new?

exactly what do you mean by “ glaciers been melting”?
Do you mean merely melt water coming off them? If so, you are being obtuse because you know very well that is not what I am talking about.
Do you mean glaciers disappearing as a result of melting? If so, do you think that is an everyday natural occurrence? If no, my point is made. If yes, you are even stupider than I thought.

The rest of your post is nonsense because if this.

Originally posted by sonhouse
You think glaciers just come and go on a regular basis? Like on the order of a few hundred years or some such?

Do you deny glaciers are disappearing right now? Are you willing to bet your life on the idea they will just magically come back 100 years from now? Because that is what you are doing, betting the lives of your descendants on the idea this will ...[text shortened]... 'go home everyone, there's nothing here, there's nothing to see folks, it's all over, go home."

The earth has been warming for hundreds of years so glaciers have been melting for at least that long. Man did not cause the glaciers to start melting. You and humy are both being silly. If this is the best you two can do we I am not impressed.

Originally posted by humy

Are you claiming that the ocean circulation changes that [b]temporarily increases sea levels are caused by MMGW?

No; I didn't say “temporarily” there and you know it -just another vain attempt at straw man.

How long have glaciers been melting? Are you claiming this is new?

exactly what do you mean by “ glac ...[text shortened]... yes, you are even stupider than I thought.

The rest of your post is nonsense because if this.[/b]

"No; I didn't say “temporarily” there and you know it -just another vain attempt at straw man."

All I did was state the fact that sea rises because of change in ocean circulation are "temporary". You don't have to say it is temporary for it to be just that. Your assertion that it is a straw man is false and a clear example of bad judgement on your part.

Lets get this straight before we continue. Do you admit that changes in ocean circulation that cause sea level rise is "temporary"? If not you have a lot of explaining to do.

Originally posted by Metal Brain
The earth has been warming for hundreds of years so glaciers have been melting for at least that long. Man did not cause the glaciers to start melting. You and humy are both being silly. If this is the best you two can do we I am not impressed.

Did you see the CO2 chart of the concentration worked out over the last half million years? Do you deny the validity of that chart?

Originally posted by sonhouse
Did you see the CO2 chart of the concentration worked out over the last half million years? Do you deny the validity of that chart?

I must have missed that. Could you post it again?

Originally posted by Metal Brain
I must have missed that. Could you post it again?

Here is one:

http://www.climatecentral.org/news/the-last-time-co2-was-this-high-humans-didnt-exist-15938

One of the charts shows an increase in CO2 of over 20% just in the last 50 years. less than 320 PPM in 1960 to over 400 in 2010.

I guess that is so insignificant to you as to not worth looking at.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Here is one:

http://www.climatecentral.org/news/the-last-time-co2-was-this-high-humans-didnt-exist-15938

One of the charts shows an increase in CO2 of over 20% just in the last 50 years. less than 320 PPM in 1960 to over 400 in 2010.

I guess that is so insignificant to you as to not worth looking at.

I'm glad there is more CO2 in the atmosphere. Plants will grow better and produce more food per acre. It will also be interesting to see how badly climate models fail predicting the temperature rise.

Keep in mind that much of that CO2 increased as a result of the warming that started to pick up about 200 years ago. How much is the result of man burning fossil fuels is unknown. More time is needed to study climate change. There is no justification to rush to some unknown solution. I say unknown because nobody has proposed a practical solution.