Ocean Temperatures

Status
Not open for further replies.

chico bill

Dogs Better than People
May 6, 2016
12,839
6,623
113
Most people who have studied climate science professionally for years would disagree with you.

What I do know is that I can't remember a summer as hot as this before in the DR.
Oh please this is not the hottest. June was hot but until then it was below average and the last week has been warm but not real hot.
People's memories are not a reliable scientific measure.
 
  • Like
Reactions: thompstr

chico bill

Dogs Better than People
May 6, 2016
12,839
6,623
113
Not on this scale. Shirley you can’t be serious
I recall a summer in Chico California in 1971 where it was over 110 for two weeks hitting a high downtown of 119.
It hasn't been that hot sense.
 

El Hijo de Manolo

It's outrageous, egregious, preposterous!
Dec 10, 2021
4,247
2,783
113
Dominican Republic
Record highs...... a dangerous situation

top-map-artboard-600.jpg
I'll drop this here 😂
 

drstock

Silver
Oct 29, 2010
4,577
2,169
113
Cabarete
Oh please this is not the hottest. June was hot but until then it was below average and the last week has been warm but not real hot.
People's memories are not a reliable scientific measure.
Correct. I'm not a climate scientist any more than you are so I can only give my personal impression, but I do listen to what the professionals say.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AlaPlaya

chico bill

Dogs Better than People
May 6, 2016
12,839
6,623
113
Correct. I'm not a climate scientist any more than you are so I can only give my personal impression, but I do listen to what the professionals say.
I'm am not a meteorologist but I am engineer with a bachelors of science - for what's that is worth, maybe nothing when debating climate ?

All I know is follow the Green Money. It sure isn't because the politicos are concerned for the planet and the future of man, they could care less as long as they get their cut. And they have everyone world wide lapping it up like a dog on spilt milk.

It's all concocted legislation will be passed to spend wildly and for them to have "I'm Your Savior" political talking points each election time and that "They are so very concerned for Earth".
The polar bears were supposed to disappear, but there are 30% more polar bears than in 2005.
Sea Ice may retreat in the Artic and increase in the Antarctic, or vice versa. We all will live to see dreadful winters with ships frozen in ports

I think the rivers flowing with toxic chemical wastewater and fertilizers and the over-fishing of seas has a much large impact on our environment than fossil fuels from vehicles or especially gas stoves (what a virtue signaling load of crap that one is).

China literally has floating cities of processing ships (up to 300 trawlers in one group) depleting the fish and squid off the coasts of Ecuador, Argentina, Chile and Venezuela. These harvesting floating cities never leave. They are doing the same in the Philippines and North Korea. They destroyed their own fishery from over fishing - so now they want to kill off other oceans.
 

flyinroom

Silver
Aug 26, 2012
3,812
697
113
The polar bears were supposed to disappear, but there are 30% more polar bears than in 2005???
Really?
chico bill,
I'd like to know your source for that.
As per the map that is being used for discussion in this thread, the water temps in Hudson Bay and the Arctic Ocean are heating up to the point that large sections of the ice cap are melting.
The ice is the natural habitat for the polar bears.
How is it possible that their numbers are increasing when their habitat is decreasing at a rapid rate?
I'm not saying you're wrong...
I'd just love to see some solid fact based reference for that statistic.

Here's mine.
Now show me yours.

 
  • Like
Reactions: ben jammin

El Hijo de Manolo

It's outrageous, egregious, preposterous!
Dec 10, 2021
4,247
2,783
113
Dominican Republic
Folks let me make this simple. For 4.5 billion years, species, land and oceans have come and gone. One day the Earth will be a dead planet. The human effect on the Earth is less than notable. We will be sucked into a black hole (the sun), be hit by an asteroid, or the core will melt the Earth billions of years before the human element can cause the same level of damage.
 
  • Like
Reactions: XQT

XQT

Well-known member
Dec 7, 2022
469
425
63
Puerto Plata
It's hot somewhere, it's cold somewhere.
The wheel hasn't been reinvented and sliced bread is still for sale.
We are living in times where the Climate Changes just as it did for or fathers, grandfathers and great great grandfathers.
Not a darn difference

Tree rings reveal that it has not been this warm in the past 1,200 years​


You are entitled to your own opinions, just as people believed that if they sail to the end of the world they will fall off the edge.

Columbus disagreed and set forth without maps and precise knowledge.
The catholic church threatened Astrologers, as the facts would contradict their teachings and the existence of god.

Scientific facts show your opinion to be factually wrong.
Every time science has new facts findings are updated, that's how science and facts work.

Believes and opinions are just that, believes.

In the time of your ancient ancestors world population is estimated to be 2 Million 10,000 years ago.
Today we have over 8 Billion people.
Also industrial activity may have changed somewhat from the time of your ancestors,
It may have an impact on climate, if you can imagine.

The only constant is change, to which humans have contributed in our short span of existence.
The physical laws of the Universe exist, wether we understand them or not.
 

XQT

Well-known member
Dec 7, 2022
469
425
63
Puerto Plata
I'm am not a meteorologist but I am engineer with a bachelors of science - for what's that is worth, maybe nothing when debating climate ?

All I know is follow the Green Money. It sure isn't because the politicos are concerned for the planet and the future of man, they could care less as long as they get their cut. And they have everyone world wide lapping it up like a dog on spilt milk.

It's all concocted legislation will be passed to spend wildly and for them to have "I'm Your Savior" political talking points each election time and that "They are so very concerned for Earth".
The polar bears were supposed to disappear, but there are 30% more polar bears than in 2005.
Sea Ice may retreat in the Artic and increase in the Antarctic, or vice versa. We all will live to see dreadful winters with ships frozen in ports

I think the rivers flowing with toxic chemical wastewater and fertilizers and the over-fishing of seas has a much large impact on our environment than fossil fuels from vehicles or especially gas stoves (what a virtue signaling load of crap that one is).

China literally has floating cities of processing ships (up to 300 trawlers in one group) depleting the fish and squid off the coasts of Ecuador, Argentina, Chile and Venezuela. These harvesting floating cities never leave. They are doing the same in the Philippines and North Korea. They destroyed their own fishery from over fishing - so now they want to kill off other oceans.
So you seem to partially agree.

Toxic chemical waste water and fertilizers do have a negative effect.
Overfishing with factory ships, killing the whales, sharks and dolphins will have an effect,
Plastics in the oceans, dying marine habitats and dying coral reefs do have an effect.
Just as those human activities do have a negative effect, so do any of our industries and human activities.

I'm not a zero carbon cap now person, as bridge technologies have to be developed.
We will for a foreseeable time have to continue to use fossil fuels.

Yet we need to improve and change what we are doing.

Which should include sewage treatment, garbage disposal and water supply in the DR.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ben jammin

chico bill

Dogs Better than People
May 6, 2016
12,839
6,623
113
So you seem to partially agree.

Toxic chemical waste water and fertilizers do have a negative effect.
Overfishing with factory ships, killing the whales, sharks and dolphins will have an effect,
Plastics in the oceans, dying marine habitats and dying coral reefs do have an effect.
Just as those human activities do have a negative effect, so do any of our industries and human activities.

I'm not a zero carbon cap now person, as bridge technologies have to be developed.
We will for a foreseeable time have to continue to use fossil fuels.

Yet we need to improve and change what we are doing.

Which should include sewage treatment, garbage disposal and water supply in the DR.
We will always have plastics, unless you want everything to return to steel, we will always need asphalt, jet fuel, caulking, solvents, fertilizer, cell phones, epoxies, paint, industrial belts and lubricants, nail polish, antiseptics, solar panels, cell phone antennas on towers, wind turbine blades, roofing, vinyl and rubber - so fossil fuel is not going away, not in the next 200 years.

In fact there are at least 6,000 everyday products that require fossil fuel (oil or N. gas).

The dream of an world devoid of oil being pumped is a fantasy and so may lemmings are shutting down roads in Europe to end all fossil fuels - and probably coordinated the protests on their cell phones.

Zero Carbon is impossible - but if you just buy some of Al Gores carbon credits and say 3 hail Marys you will be absolved of fossil fuel sin.
 
  • Like
Reactions: XQT

chico bill

Dogs Better than People
May 6, 2016
12,839
6,623
113

Tree rings reveal that it has not been this warm in the past 1,200 years​


You are entitled to your own opinions, just as people believed that if they sail to the end of the world they will fall off the edge.

Columbus disagreed and set forth without maps and precise knowledge.
The catholic church threatened Astrologers, as the facts would contradict their teachings and the existence of god.

Scientific facts show your opinion to be factually wrong.
Every time science has new facts findings are updated, that's how science and facts work.

Believes and opinions are just that, believes.

In the time of your ancient ancestors world population is estimated to be 2 Million 10,000 years ago.
Today we have over 8 Billion people.
Also industrial activity may have changed somewhat from the time of your ancestors,
It may have an impact on climate, if you can imagine.

The only constant is change, to which humans have contributed in our short span of existence.
The physical laws of the Universe exist, wether we understand them or not.
Yes change is constant and what may considered as warm places now maybe considered cold places in the next decades.

I lived in Oregon for several years and in the winter of 2008 it was one of the coldest on record.
Portland was snowed in, as was the entire Willamette Valley, which usually has temperate winters - then came an ice storm.

I could not get from Portland to Bend to visit my elderly parents even with chains and my 4-wheel drive for several weeks.
So why was it one of the worst winters ? Who knows - weather always changes.

 

XQT

Well-known member
Dec 7, 2022
469
425
63
Puerto Plata
Folks let me make this simple. For 4.5 billion years, species, land and oceans have come and gone. One day the Earth will be a dead planet. The human effect on the Earth is less than notable. We will be sucked into a black hole (the sun), be hit by an asteroid, or the core will melt the Earth billions of years before the human element can cause the same level of damage.
From bacteria to microbes, to dinosaurs and humans.
We may not exist as long as dinosaurs have, cancelling ourselves.
The planet and universe don't care if we exist.

Make the best of your very brief appearance.
Beer, rum, sex, beach, Jarabacoa, being a missionary or at least assuming the position.
Whatever turns your crank. 🤣 And laugh
 

chico bill

Dogs Better than People
May 6, 2016
12,839
6,623
113
From the following link on 2023:
As people are inundated with claims that the globe is suffering an immediate "climate crisis," and "the hottest July ever" one leading expert in the field is advising people to take these narratives with a grain of salt.

Just the News spoke with Dr. John Christy, an Earth and atmospheric science professor at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, about the 2023 heat wave occurring across the United States. Specifically, Christy addressed the widespread claim that July 2023 was the hottest month on record and why he sees serious problems with declaring this.

"I see the main problems as perspective in time and space. July is always hotter than normal somewhere, so focusing on those spots misses the spatial aspect that there are other non-hotter than normal places," Christy told Just the News. In terms of time, I use US stations with at least 100 years of data, so the present heat can be judged from a better perspective. When compared with other "hot" years, including the notorious 1936 heat wave, the US this year is not in record territory."

EPA data shows that in fact the 1930s were when America’s hottest heat waves took place. According to the Washington Post, the 1936 wave resulted in around 5,000 deaths, and North Dakota hit 120 degrees Fahrenheit that July.

"If you look at decades at a time," Christy continued, "2013–2022 is simply average for heat waves in the US and record high temperatures. Regionally, the West has seen their [sic] highest number of heat waves and record high temperatures in that decade, but the upper Midwest and Ohio Valley have seen their record LOWEST such metrics."

"For the US as a whole, then, things have averaged out."
 
  • Like
Reactions: bob saunders

bob saunders

Platinum
Jan 1, 2002
32,815
6,199
113
dr1.com
So you seem to partially agree.

Toxic chemical waste water and fertilizers do have a negative effect.
Overfishing with factory ships, killing the whales, sharks and dolphins will have an effect,
Plastics in the oceans, dying marine habitats and dying coral reefs do have an effect.
Just as those human activities do have a negative effect, so do any of our industries and human activities.

I'm not a zero carbon cap now person, as bridge technologies have to be developed.
We will for a foreseeable time have to continue to use fossil fuels.

Yet we need to improve and change what we are doing.

Which should include sewage treatment, garbage disposal and water supply in the DR.
Nothing to disagree with there. None of those has a great effect on Global Climate though.
 

chico bill

Dogs Better than People
May 6, 2016
12,839
6,623
113
Nothing to disagree with there. None of those has a great effect on Global Climate though.
The Chinese Ships do emit a lot of diesel fumes however and greatly pollute the oceans as they "processes fish at sea to ship back to China in iced transport vessels
 

ben jammin

Well-known member
Aug 3, 2007
648
160
63
We will always have plastics, unless you want everything to return to steel, we will always need asphalt, jet fuel, caulking, solvents, fertilizer, cell phones, epoxies, paint, industrial belts and lubricants, nail polish, antiseptics, solar panels, cell phone antennas on towers, wind turbine blades, roofing, vinyl and rubber - so fossil fuel is not going away, not in the next 200 years.

In fact there are at least 6,000 everyday products that require fossil fuel (oil or N. gas).

The dream of an world devoid of oil being pumped is a fantasy and so may lemmings are shutting down roads in Europe to end all fossil fuels - and probably coordinated the protests on their cell phones.

Zero Carbon is impossible - but if you just buy some of Al Gores carbon credits and say 3 hail Marys you will be absolved of fossil fuel sin.
No sane person claims carbon fuels should be forsaken for these exact reasons you state. However, why not use them for these purposes and at least try to cut them where we can? Electricity production and personal vehicles being the obvious. And your statement about climate scientists all about the $ is pure bunk IMO. Maybe a very vast minority see profits as their motive but I would bet the house most see science and concern for future generations instead.
 
  • Like
Reactions: XQT and drstock

chico bill

Dogs Better than People
May 6, 2016
12,839
6,623
113
No sane person claims carbon fuels should be forsaken for these exact reasons you state. However, why not use them for these purposes and at least try to cut them where we can? Electricity production and personal vehicles being the obvious. And your statement about climate scientists all about the $ is pure bunk IMO. Maybe a very vast minority see profits as their motive but I would bet the house most see science and concern for future generations instead.
Fair enough on your statement - although there are plenty of protesters in Europe who want to "Just Stop Oil", demanding all fossil fuel be terminated. They are of course nose-ring wearing, purple-haired dunderheads

And renewables do make up to 18% of electricity in the US - 'during daylight summer hours'

However renewables only produce electricity, but none of the other 6,000 items that oil is used to produce, which includes the solar panels on a roof to feedback to the grid. Some utilities in some states and some municipalities are blocking permits on solar hookups back to grids. California is about to implement a tax of up $600/year on any new rooftop solar system.

And to charge those electric cars at night (95% of EVs are charged at night when solar power leaves the grid)
It takes roughly 70 pounds of coal to produce the energy required to charge a 66 kWh electric car battery and would take 8-10 gallons of a barrel of oil ( 22% of a 42 gallon barrel of oil ). This equates to 4 gallons of gasoline if it were refined for fuel.

A full full 295 mile range charge on a Tesla at a Supercharge station costs $6.37 per 100 miles and requires ~ 2 hours (if a spot is available).
A 2023 Hyundai Elantra hybrid (non-plug in model) gets 50 mpg average on gasoline and requires 7 minutes to fill. (55 mpg on highway)

So in Palm Beach, Florida, at $3.65 a gallon, the cost to go 100 miles in a Elantra is $7.30 (93 cents more than a Tesla per 100 miles), however your total range will be 550 miles between fuel fill-ups, while your range on a Tesla Model Y is about 295 miles of range, (ideal with a new battery, using no AC or heat), less distance in cold weather.

So you would be about 140 miles (two hours of driving) behind the Elantra on spring time cross country drive after the first 6.2 hours of the trip, at a driving speed 70 mph.
Or 20 hours behind on a 3,000 mile trip which would be over two days later if driving only 8 hours per day.
This is why it isn't practical now for tractor trailer rigs to go electric, although there are many experimental big rigs being tested.
They can drive a maximum of 11 hours/day by law and they get paid per mile of trip, so they don't want to be parked, even an hour, to recharge.

Interestingly there are people now selling conversion kits for natural gas home generators to charge EVs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: XQT and JD Jones

drstock

Silver
Oct 29, 2010
4,577
2,169
113
Cabarete
From the following link on 2023:
As people are inundated with claims that the globe is suffering an immediate "climate crisis," and "the hottest July ever" one leading expert in the field is advising people to take these narratives with a grain of salt.
That's ONE "leading" expert. There are a much higher number who don't agree.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gadfly
Status
Not open for further replies.