Global Warming Debate

Originally Posted by: R. Shackleferd...as that chart only shows a 1000 and 4000 year history...

Woops...typo alert. I meant to type 1000 and 400,000 year history, as that's what it shows.

Originally Posted by: R. ShackleferdWoops...typo alert. I meant to type 1000 and 400,000 year history, as that's what it shows.

Then I'm really curious because that 7,500 BC temperature spike is (to put it mildly) substantial.

Originally Posted by: R. ShackleferdTo be absolutely fair, you can't say it's higher than it's ever been ....

Quite right, even with the typo.

I managed to upset myself a bit when I read about the >Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum< that I saw referred to in one of the posts on that RealClimate disussion you linked.

What stopped my panic was this:
"Atmospheric carbon levels then are thought to have been about 2-3,000 parts per million (ppm), compared with almost 380 ppm today."

Originally Posted by: earthman buckIt just occured to me that LatS grew up in the very same era I wish I had. I wish I could have been about 13 or 14 in 1967. From 1967 right up until the mid 70's, all music was pretty great, and what better way to spend your youth?

Sorry for the random post, now back to talking about the mean old sun.[/QUOTE]
I turned 10 in the fall of 1962, which meant I had a front-row seat for one of the best musical eras. I wasn't kidding when I said I could teach the History of Rock'n'Roll from memory (if only I could remember it).


[QUOTE=Raskolnikov]Then I'm really curious because that 7,500 BC temperature spike is (to put it mildly) substantial.

Temperature spike?

7,500 BC?

Whatchoo talkin' 'bout? :confused:

Research and grant money.

Nobody..........

It's a ploi to instill a sense of urgency amongst the industrial industry to develop alternative fuel sources... They can put heat on the research groups as well as the industrial sites that burn a lot of fossil fuels and contribute to air pollution to move towards cleaner burning alternative fuels or manufactuering methods... This also creates a niche market for corporatations that are at the spear point of creating alternate fuels... The government isn't seperate from our indusrty like a lot of people are taught to believe... Each representative has their own motives and they're all normally pushed by that particular representatives supporters... The reps and congress are just hands of industry... To create an urgency to create alternate fuels sources... creates a market for ethanol and hybrid cars... hm....? who benefits from that??

Originally Posted by: CW14I'm doing an essay on this issue for English and there's one thing I don't quite understand...

If the global warming theory is a farce (just suppose that it is), what does the government (or anyone for that matter) get out of making the world believe it?

Well, if you ask Greenpeace co-found, Patrick Moore, the Environmental movement has been 'hijacked' by Anti-globalists.

Their objective isn't a greener planet, but a dismantaling of our economic systems.

Originally Posted by: CW14... If the global warming theory is a farce (just suppose that it is), what does the government (or anyone for that matter) get out of making the world believe it?

Examine the Kyoto Protocol, and you will see that its major effect is to transfer jobs and cash in huge quantities to developing nations that are not required to address their contributions to pollution. The US was quite right to reject it as being destructive to the economy without solving pollution problems. The Canadian socialists (Liberal Party of Canada) were suicidally irresponsible in committing Canada to this farce. The concept of sending billions of dollars to India in exchange for 'Green Credits', while their industry continues to pollute, is absurd. That money would be much better spent here on research into alternative fuels, more efficient industrial processes, and cleaning up the effects of pollution by effluent that is actually known to be toxic.

Global warming is very real and very threatening

The highest global temperatures ever recorded in history were broken consecutively 4 out of the last 5 years. One right after the next.

The polar caps at the North and South are both melting and permanently losing megatons of landmass every day.

Sea levels ARE rising.

Increased severity of hurricanes and droughts HAVE been connected to the climate changes.

Here's a real article straight from NASA:
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Study/TimeShelf/

The global mean temperature for the last 120 years is right there. Done deal. Notice that not only is the temperature going up, but the rate of increase is accelerating. The real kicker are the effects discovered it has on environmental behavior.

Here's an article from the Washington Post on the government censoring data from national research institutes, including NASA:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/10/AR2006021001766.html

The numbers straight from the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) under the U.S. Department of Commerce. They are the largest database of climate, temperature, and precipitation trends in the world:
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/anomalies/anomalies.html

And for yet another perspective, which mainly deals with the motives:
clicky

Originally Posted by: KoreldyreGlobal warming is very real and very threatening

The highest global temperatures ever recorded in history were broken consecutively 4 out of the last 5 years. One right after the next.

The polar caps at the North and South are both melting and permanently losing megatons of landmass every day.

Sea levels ARE rising.

Increased severity of hurricanes and droughts HAVE been connected to the climate changes.

Largely because the ground we stand on is only seperated by a few 100 miles of crust from a large molten lava core. If you're wondering where the heat is coming from.... I think that might be a good source...?? Or what about the gigantic ball of burning gas that heats our planet everyday... you know... the Sun?? I think that's pretty hot too...

Everyone gets all data happy about this subject. Sure, you're showing me a bunch of recorded data about how the Earths temp is rising... You know what I will show you... The starting date that those recording where FIRST taken... MOST likely they were started in the last 100 years... This Earth is, if carbon dating is in fact a science... thousands upon thousands of years old. That data gives roughly a 0.0001% representative sample of the Earths temperatures. Not exactly a good amount of representative coverage to assume that the Earth is suddenly melting... Whose to say that this doesn't happen every hundred years or so...?

When you take your temperature when you're feeling sick... and it's above 98.6 degrees (or whatever that is in Celcius)... do you assume that your body temperature has never been that high before in your life just because you don't have recorded data to back it up??? I don't think so... Just because someone starting writing down the Earths temperature doesn't mean that it's never been this hot before. I think everyone wears blinders becasue they have all this solid evidence by numbers that only shows us 0.0001% of a representative sample... not hardly enough evidence to convince me that we actually have control over this situation... We don't tell Mother Nature what to do... she pretty much does whatever the F she wants... As has been evident through all the natural disasters throughout history

Wrong

1) Samples of deep ice have been taken from both polar caps which have been frozen for several hundred thousand years and have trapped CO2 and other greenhouse gases in them, they show the exact amount of CO2 at each point in time going back that far, the pattern is completely consistant. That is unrefutable fact. This is not some "natural trend" that occurs every set amount of time.

2) CO2 and other greenhouse gases have been PROVEN to be the cause of global warming, the levels of which have never come even close to today in history. Again, the highest global temperatures ever recorded in history were broken consecutively 4 out of the last 5 years. One right after the next. The levels of CO2 are completely out of control and the temperature is rising directly proportional to it. All proven facts.

3) don't you think it's the least bit alarming that the temperature increase has been not only consistently going up, but accelerating in increase?

If this is "expected" because it's a 0.00001% representative sample of history of the earth and this sort of thing happens all the time throughout the course of the planet, find me another time in history where the earth has had this many humans and this much strain and CO2/pollution. You won't find it.

Funny all the people who claim global warming is fake only talk in speculation and no proof, when there is an overwhelming compilation of evidence being presented by every single scientific research organization.

Playing Devils Advocate.

If the polar caps are melting then how do they (the scientists) know that the samples they are taking from the ground are correctly dated?
If the caps are melting then the "tops" have been eroding so they are actually lower so they have probrably lost "years".

Also how would the green house gases and CO2 levels trapped at the coldest points of the earth have any relation or bearing on warmer regions?

And if this has happened in the past then the caps have melted before so samples taken from the existing caps would be up to interpretation.

Global warming activists have "proof" but it is all speculative and circumstantial IMHO.

Global warming refutists have the same type of evidence. I feel that scientists are theorizing and activists are taking these theorys and running with them with out thinking about it and actually presenting both sides of the story. What you have is 2 sides 1 saying I have this proof it is and side 2 saying well I have this proof it isn't.

We could just be witnessing The Earth taking care of itself and going about it's natural changes.

global warming is real. i dont think that can be denied. in the uk there used to be a heat wave once every 30 years now it is more like once every 2. we never used to get severe weather now we get floods most years.

now i am sure there are factors that affect this that arnt related to man eg the sun warmin up or watever. (although it actually cools down in its cylce).

but we do contribute. we do afffect it. it is true in the past mother nature did watever the f she wanted but in those days man wasnt nearly as widespread or had anywhere near the level of technology. we are making a large difference.

and if its your argument that it happened before so it doesnt matter if it happenes again is silly, i mean when it was a godd deal warmer, eg the time of the dinosaurs. all of the middle of america was underwater and britian was a=only abunch of very tiny islands.

evne if we are not the only cause, even if the world will heat up even if we dont pollute we can still reduce the rate at which this happens. and surely that would be benificial.

anyway thats my rant for the day. didnt mean to offend anyone but thats wat i think.

Originally Posted by: Fret spiderglobal warming is real. i dont think that can be denied. in the uk there used to be a heat wave once every 30 years now it is more like once every 2. we never used to get severe weather now we get floods most years.

now i am sure there are factors that affect this that arnt related to man eg the sun warmin up or watever. (although it actually cools down in its cylce).

but we do contribute. we do afffect it. it is true in the past mother nature did watever the f she wanted but in those days man wasnt nearly as widespread or had anywhere near the level of technology. we are making a large difference.[/quote]
I mostly agree with you.

It is hotter right now. We do, in part, contribute to what's going on.

However, for the last ten or fifteen years, this debate has been completely domineered by anti-globalism activists, sensationalist journalism and by politicians looking for an easy leg-up (censoring music is apparently no longer perceived as a vote-winner in the Gore camp). Here in the US, up until GW Bush was elected, ANYBODY in the scientific community who dared raise objections or concerns with the rhetoric of the global warming alarmists have seen their funding evaporate, their reputations smeared and their careers smashed on the rocks. And that's here -- I can only imagine how it is in the EU for a scientist to speak out against the global warming claims, so to suggest that there has been any legitimate scientific debate over global warming is ridiculous.

Thus, when I see that the scientists who formed the current hypotheses about global warming are the same quacks who turned out to be completely wrong about an impending ice age and that the voices singing dooms day tales about global warming all have political agendas, I'm inclined to be skeptical. I think we all would be wise to be.

It's not that I don't think we should take care of this planet, but if this current rise in global average temperature is 70, 80 or 90 percent natural, then obviously there are a lot of other things we can do to improve this planet which will deliver much more results for the money and effort we invest into them.


[QUOTE=Fret spider]and if its your argument that it happened before so it doesnt matter if it happenes again is silly, i mean when it was a godd deal warmer, eg the time of the dinosaurs.

EG: No, the average global temperature has been scientifically proven to have risen significantly higher significantly faster something like three times since the Last Glacial Maximum. For much of the life of our species, homo sapiens (say nothing of our earlier ancestors), the climate has been much warmer than it is now. Of course, it's also been much, much colder, but the point of it is that the planet and almost every species walking on it right now has survived much warmer climates than we see today.

Originally Posted by: Koreldyre
3) don't you think it's the least bit alarming that the temperature increase has been not only consistently going up, but accelerating in increase?

Considering that we live on a planet that has a molten lava center... in a solar system that revolves around a gigantic burning ball of gas... No, I don't find it alarming that the average temperature of ice has went up. There's heat all around it... I didn't listen a lot in my ME435.01 Thermal Dynamics class... but I think when you surround ice with heat... it melts...

Obviously I'd be a fool to denounce the fact that our industrial sites don't contribute atleast a minor bit to the rise in temps... My argument isn't against the fact that CO2 levels have went up... or that the ice is melting... It's that people are quick to judge industry and point fingers... Most are trendies that see an oppertunity to argue a "good cause" without stepping back and see the blatanltly obvious facts.

You speak of this evolution of species on the Earth... that I won't find any other time in history when moer humans and more air pollution existed... All I take from that is that you acknkowledge that the data that you try to use to back up your arguments is based on 0.0001% of the life of our planet and depsite any amount of science... it would be impossible to tell the exact temperature of the climate at any given point in history. Like I said... people watch National Geographic or read an article with lots of numbers, whether they're legitiment or not... and assume that they all there is to know... No one knows... it'll be a long time before someone does know. My guess is it's best just to leave it to the people that watch less NG and are experts in the field....

The Sun revolves around the Earth and it is flat..........................

Here's an experiment to demostrate what causes your new fangled "global warming"........ Take an ice cube out of the freezer and place it in the fridge... and watch it melt. The ambient air is less than 32 degrees... 0 celsius... therefore it melted... now imagine a planet with polar ice caps floating in a solar system that revolves around a giant burning ball of gas that superimposes its intense heat rays on the said planet... seems like it'd probably eventually melt... wouldn't you think? Perhaps industry is speeding the process...? Im just saying that we will never know and we (our bodies) will never see the end result...

These are my ideas... Ideas and opinions that I've manufactured after many term papers on the subject... after reading many books from right wing to left wing and everything in the middle about the topic... These are the opinions that have survived the massive data saturation of this topic. 100 years worth of temperatures doesn't tell me anything besides how warm or cold it is...

If the Earth is going into a melting stage... no amount of data will stop it. But I know, numbers are pretty when you write a bunch of them down on a piece of paper... In the end... that's all they are, numbers on a piece of paper. Evidence of the oversaturation of the debate with mindless and blatantly obvious numbers.

In the end, I'm not saying I disagree. I'm just saying that there is so much more that can be at fault... forces that we have no control over... and that has just as much validity as the claim that humans are causing a meltdown.

I've come across a few new links and such I thought I'd share.
First is a quote from a famous hurricane expert responding to the link of global warming and hurricanes:

Originally Posted by: Dr. GrayI think if you go to ask the last four or five directors of the national hurricane center – we all don’t think this is human-induced global warming. And, the people that say that it is are usually those that know very little about hurricanes. I mean, there’s almost an equation you can write the degree to which you believe global warming is causing major hurricanes to increase is inversely proportional to your knowledge about these storms.

And here is his more in-depth statement to the Senate:CLICKY

And here's a site similar to realclimate.org, but with a more skeptical viewpoint:CLICKY

And finally, here is another skeptical site that has lots of links to other articles:CLICKY

That's why I play an acoustic guitar. No electricity being used from coal fired power plants, creating electricity and pumping noxious fumes into our atmosphere.

Originally Posted by: 40ftsmurfThat's why I play an acoustic guitar. No electricity being used from coal fired power plants, creating electricity and pumping noxious fumes into our atmosphere.

Right...and the computer you're on is solar powered I presume? :rolleyes: