DJL

And how does that support your statement that the models exaggerate the role of CO2?

My text that you're replying to with the above: "You're again quoting one person as saying there's an imminent catastrophe looming as if he means that next week a superflood is going to wipe out your Wilmington vacation house. Does that get us up to speed? Try putting that on the scale of human's time on Earth to make it something we can actually discuss." Do you think that Joelle Gergis is claiming in that sentence that your vacation destination in Wilmington will be washed away within a few weeks or are they both referring to the scale of human existence?

Ok, cite your source please?

Since you're here can you cite a reference for your statement that fewer global temperature readings inherently flaws towards overstating the role of CO2 in AGW?

You're again quoting one person as saying there's an imminent catastrophe looming as if he means that next week a superflood is going to wipe out your Wilmington vacation house. Does that get us up to speed? Try putting that on the scale of human's time on Earth to make it something we can actually discuss. Please cite your sources.

While there are downsides to expanded mining, such as that the industry is still currently powered by fossil fuels, I don't think using shoddy Russian mining practices as a reason to not mine cadmium is a good way of making a point. Edit: And it's also funny that it's an RT article (Owned by the Russian State) so it's essentially like when I pretend I'm really bad at packing so that my girlfriend (a packer) does it for me. "Ve kannot do theese very bad at mining!"

....YTD global land and air temperatures are the highest they've ever been. Global land and sea temperatures are the second/third highest surpassed only by the 2012 El Nino year highs (July NOAA data to be released EDIT Aug 19). This has been proven to you time and time again even as you post links that contradict your own statements. We get it, headlines trigger you. Your text above is equivalent to having blinders on and the only thing you see is what happened this year in the US.

Both sides hit the nail on the head. This was a gotcha (that'll show the libtards) photo op. Also, "the Left" could do with a little more volunteerism. I work in an area that is a similar shithole. I've called the police three times for drug activity and homeless people sleeping in an abandoned car. I take a walk up and down the block each day and pick up plastic litter to put in my office's trash can. There's more trash the next day, the same drug users are creeping around and they haven't towed the abandoned car that hookers are running tricks out of. Presler's effort did nothing.

Just talked to my father, also a Naval Officer and Vietnam Vet. He was confused about my assumption that he's an expert on Trump's Charlottesville comments but wants to verify whether I'm arriving on Friday or Saturday morning so they can make dinner plans.

You already went through this one too but with the 2017 report. IPCC didn't track floods, they said droughts are increasing and hurricanes are likely increasing but they're unable to say if that's a local trend as there's insufficient data before satellite records. All other markers for extreme weather showed increases consistent with the effects of global warming. Go find your "Truth for Breakfast" post that didn't hold up for even the first paragraph.

You've had a little bit of a Troll Slumber since we talked about your sources so I'll have to remind you that you can't cherry pick the fringe and say that's the scientific consensus. Specifically you were talking about Arctic Sea Ice loss for which all recorded data and models show a loss of about 924,000 sq km per decade which puts it at about 50 years from now. There is also a giant asterisk associated with this that events don't happen is such a perfect linear fashion (like an ice cube melting on a counter-top) and this 50 year span is a period in which that no-ice event increases in likelihood. At the 50 year mark both models AND historic trends say that in any given year the continuous ice mass refer to as the Arctic Ice Sheet will be gone and the sea will be mostly open with the exception of scattered ice flows. So, what you just brought up is something I've already shown you to be an entirely false statement in the context of claims by the worldwide scientific community.

Funny you mention THE HOTTEST MONTH IN HISTORY because previously that's what you said needed to happen in order for the predictions of global warming to be accurate. Things that make you go hmmm.

Sure, that too. So, what's the location? A two week look ahead makes your plans pretty safe but anyone who is actually from that area doesn't brag about whether their house will be there before vs after hurricane season. And what's your point anyway, that if a hurricane doesn't hit then global warming doesn't exist? Is that what you're resorting to?

In the meantime, while you're on vacation you can impress everyone with your understanding of sea level rise since 1950, how and why it affects the local area and how the state is spending $2 Billion on mitigation. https://sealevelrise.org/states/north-carolina/ Or hey, look! If you have any issues you can just have them drive your house away! (Gee, wonder why they're doing that?) https://www.nationalgeographic.com/news/special-features/2014/07/140725-outer-banks-north-carolina-sea-level-rise-climate/

Yup. So to continue for our fellow readers, the next "record el nino event" will stand on the shoulders of this new normal.

If he made even a peep about taking action he'd have every major Republican politician jammed into the oval office explaining how they'd lose their most important election tools.

To highlight an element of that article and what John is pointing out is that it took a record El Nino event to create that previous high. While there may be other weather patterns contributing to the issue, this is the new normal.

Today I got a message from my college class reunion association and it struck me to be about the only type of correspondence for which that phrase seems appropriate.

We had thousands of years to adjust to the "change" as a species of scattered hunter gatherers and basic city civilizations who would fade out in regions experiencing harsh climates and thrive where life was easier. We didn't exist on the planet spread out and as densley populated as we are now and as I've already said, those higher summer temperature extremes were limited to the Northern Hemisphere. See this for a scaled representation of the development of our civilization compared to Earth's average temperatures: https://xkcd.com/1732/

And only occurred in the Northern Hemisphere during the Summer months.

Are you comparing our current habitation of the planet with when we were literally in the stone age? And if you're taking exception with the terms "imminent" and "catastrophic" do you know that the tilt in the Earth's Axis required to reach that "suddenly found" period took about 40,000 years?

FIFY We're not going to see them on the move all at once so I said millions.

He's about to bring up the Holocene Climatic Optimum. It's a favorite go to for the wattsup readers who don't know that was a Northern Hemispheric Summertime issue, not something that reached around the globe.

Not something we want on our doorstep, wall or no wall at the Southern Border.

This is another exercise in you picking something as measure of what is and isn't. Sure, "Imminent" and "Catastrophic" are fairly alarming words and seem ridiculous if you're typing from a shady valley in Pennsylvania. That's not so much the case if your house and business are located in low coastal areas or if you live in places like Europe or India where a heat wave can kill anywhere between 30-70,000 people (per previous events). What do you think the densely populated regions like South Asia, Sub-Saharan Africa, and Latin American are going to do when they barely lived through a crop failure because of some short term weather anomaly and the next season is looking like the same. Seeing as we're having year after year of record high temperatures all within the last 20 years and still steadily increasing they may see the writing on the wall that you're missing from your perspective. They're going to die or flee. There have never been so many humans on the planet and the planet has never been in a more precarious position. What do you think millions of people on the move will look like?