The Official Global Warming/Climate Change Thread

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

To say nothing of the central east coast of North America having a nice thick coat of snow, including Washington. I'll bet their snow removal budget is shot.

You see that global warming really means heating up the ocean with the result of more severe and prolonged disturbances. I used to be pretty good with weather when I was an active sailor but now things seem to have gone to hades in a hand basket.

[Boggy1 45]

FYI; deleting posts actually makes the page bump problem worse. For every deleted post, you need to add another post to get the new page to register!

[Duke87 1,070]

Originally posted by: N_O_Body

To say nothing of the central east coast of North America having a nice thick coat of snow, including Washington. I'll bet their snow removal budget is shot.

You see that global warming really means heating up the ocean with the result of more severe and prolonged disturbances. I used to be pretty good with weather when I was an active sailor but now things seem to have gone to hades in a hand basket.quote>

One problem that the proponents of "climate change" have is a matter of poor PR in this regard... they claim that areas drying out are the result of global warming. They claim that huge rainstorms are the result of global warming. They claim that blizzards are caused by global warming... they seem to be all over the place contradicting themselves, so far as the average uneducated Joe can tell. The idea that blizzards are linked to global warming is particularly counterintuitive (snow=cold, less cold=more snow???).

Now, all this makes sense to me, and I can understand how these claims are not contradictory... but that cannot be said of most people. These guys need to do a better job explaining things to the masses. Al Gore tried, but ended up getting embarassed because he presnted a lot of data in a biased manner and even got a few things factually wrong... which his opponents, of course, were more than willing to call him out on. Dishonesty just gives the naysayers fodder. As does not practicing what you preach (Al, if you're going to complain about carbon emissions and waste, lose the private jet, please).

[LarksTonguesInAspic 28]

When the Northern Europeans started getting tremendous amounts of snow and cold that they weren't used to (about 500 years ago) did they start blaming their campfires and horses? Areas like The Laplands got a severe weather shift in about the 1500s, who did they blame then? Did they have an AlGorius then, drawing biased and half-truthful pictures of doom on the side of his travelling horsecart?

[Easy Bakes 253]

Originally posted by: N_O_Body

This thread has the page bump problem. This post can be deleted when there are more mosts on this page.quote>

time to start another one?

[morriswalters 16]

Here's an interesting piece related to the present conversation.

www.nytimes.com/2010/02/11/science/earth/11climate.html

[morriswalters 16]

Originally posted by: manticorefan

When the Northern Europeans started getting tremendous amounts of snow and cold that they weren't used to (about 500 years ago) did they start blaming their campfires and horses? Areas like The Laplands got a severe weather shift in about the 1500s, who did they blame then? Did they have an AlGorius then, drawing biased and half-truthful pictures of doom on the side of his travelling horsecart?quote>

I suspect they were more interested in staying alive.

P.S.

I just can't spell interested

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

Originally posted by: morriswalters

Originally posted by: manticorefan

When the Northern Europeans started getting tremendous amounts of snow and cold that they weren't used to (about 500 years ago) did they start blaming their campfires and horses? Areas like The Laplands got a severe weather shift in about the 1500s, who did they blame then? Did they have an AlGorius then, drawing biased and half-truthful pictures of doom on the side of his travelling horsecart?quote>

I suspect they were more interested in staying alive.

quote>

Agreed! This is what we should be working on. Cutting emissions is only a partial solution at best. Oceanic warming has already caused more Tropical Transition Storms and will cause even more. The summer of 2010 should be a doozy. The next couple of years may wipe out coastal cities in general. I am afraid we have already passed the tipping point.

[mightygoose 92]

it is fairly certain that we have passed the tipping point for significant climate change, it's just a case of limiting any further damage.

[Easy Bakes 253]

Originally posted by: N_O_Body

Originally posted by: morriswalters

Originally posted by: manticorefan

When the Northern Europeans started getting tremendous amounts of snow and cold that they weren't used to (about 500 years ago) did they start blaming their campfires and horses? Areas like The Laplands got a severe weather shift in about the 1500s, who did they blame then? Did they have an AlGorius then, drawing biased and half-truthful pictures of doom on the side of his travelling horsecart?quote>

I suspect they were more interested in staying alive.

quote>

Agreed! This is what we should be working on. Cutting emissions is only a partial solution at best. Oceanic warming has already caused more Tropical Transition Storms and will cause even more. The summer of 2010 should be a doozy. The next couple of years may wipe out coastal cities in general. I am afraid we have already passed the tipping point.quote>

Thats what im afraid will happen, the poor science, or at least the fudging of the data will just kill any attempt to

encourge people/compaines to start reducing  over all polution, clear cuting and Aquiculture.

[beebs 129]

Originally posted by: manticorefan

When the Northern Europeans started getting tremendous amounts of snow and cold that they weren't used to (about 500 years ago) did they start blaming their campfires and horses? Areas like The Laplands got a severe weather shift in about the 1500s, who did they blame then? quote>

Well no.. but scientific knowledge was severely limited, as compared to today. If I had to guess, they looked to their faith for answers rather than that crazy science stuff, or anything else in this mortal world.

And like morriswalters said, they were probably also more interested in staying alive.

[Risu 0]

My opinion is that Global Warming ISN'T ENTIRELY MAN MADE. All we end up doing is making things like this worse anyhow. Especially when there are other eco-nightmares out there that people like Al Gore can fuss about. Such being resource depletion, animal mass-extinctions, and human overpopulation. It's kinda like the AIDS crisis in the 80's. We moved on to Swine Flu.

Oh and, if this post gets deleted, it only drives home the point that no one can tolerate any opinion that clashes, even a little, with their own.

Edited - Inappropriate language.

-beebs

[Ocram's Razr 964]

First of all, I greatly dislike it when they refer to NYC as New York and not New York City (there are a lot of people in upstate New York) and I absolutely despise it when they call Washington DC Washington (there is only one Washington and that is the state, use DC if you want to refer to the capital).

Second of all, the sun was in a warming period and is now entering a cooling period. That means that temperatures will be a little skewed from predictions.

Third of all, we have the technology to lower emissions. Cutting electricity and car use, using more energy efficient technology, using advanced power plants, and many other things can help lower emissions. The United States is likely to increase carbon dioxide emissions by 7 triangles (Scientific American's unit for carbon dioxide) when it is possible to absorb more pollution than we emit by 2 triangles maximum. Even a hydrogen economy is possible with Generation IV nuclear power plants.

Lastly, climate change is real and irreversible. The only good thing is that I will not be alive to see the worst of it.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

Unfortunately for climate change, the old adage remains true, especially for the Congress of The United States of America and similar slow moving political bodies. If you always do what you've always done, you'll always get what you always got.

This includes sticking your head in the sand or some place even more improbable.

[svachon 3]

Fact or fiction?
Science or junk science?
Theory or scientific fact?

[Easy Bakes 253]

Originally posted by: Meg

It is happening.  The question is why.

Some say it's a manmade thing.

Some say it's a natural weather cycle.

Why can't it be both?

and, regardless of the cause, shouldn't we be doing what we can to reduce the effects?

quote>

If it is a natural effect such as the sun becoming hoter or more active periodicly not much we can do about that.

We already know about the 11 year sunspot cycle,and we still have no clue how sunspots affect our climate, why not a 100 or 200 year cycles we know nothing about? Lack of real data is a problem when you consider natural variations

in global  weather patterns.

but your right we shoudls stop dumping crap in the oceans and rivers and reduce air polution as well.

[Meg 368]

It is happening.  The question is why.

Some say it's a manmade thing.

Some say it's a natural weather cycle.

Why can't it be both?

and, regardless of the cause, shouldn't we be doing what we can to reduce the effects?

[nathanthemayor 1,263]

Well at least we get control over the part that we are causing, even if the cause is natural. So at least we can do our part to help reverse it.

[Slashback 136]

Originally posted by: Meg

and, regardless of the cause, shouldn't we be doing what we can to reduce the effects?

quote>

Exactly - and why take the chance and don't do anything?

To the question about fact or fiction: It is remarkable, that the global warming comes when we pollute the most (read: I think it's about 90% manmade)...

[Barbarossa 51]

.

  Edited September 8, 2012 by Barbarossa  

[fukuda 351]

Originally posted by: svachon

Fact or fiction?

Science or junk science?

Theory or scientific fact?quote>

What our thermometers and satellites measure is fact, no matter how ugly or inconvenient is.

 

(click on the picture for more info)

Whatever wild idea we may have about what causes our results is an hypothesis.

Hypotheses with enough evidence, predictive ability and experimental proof are called theories.

The only conflictive points about climate change atm are the hypotheses, climate change itself is a fact (unless all our measuring devices are broken, which is highly doubtful)

[fukuda 351]

Right. Why should we reduce the effects of water levels rising and worse weather? They're natural after all... So are earthquakes and diseases

[psander5 198]

All of the evidence suggests that climate change is happening, but by what degree and cause is still uncertain. There's an awful lot of evidence to say that we are to blame, at least in part.

The problem I have is with vehement climate change deniers who are more concerned with protecting the assets of their own lifetimes than ensuring a safe future for all of humanity.

I prefer to look at it like this:

Let's first assume that climate change deniers are right, and that it's not man-made, and everything will peak soon and balance up once the cycle completes.. so we do nothing. Well, in that case we would have saved an awful lot of money and protected the economies of the world of today. Yippee. If they are wrong however, we will lose far, far more than that. The world's ecosystems would collapse, causing all sorts of problems amongst the 7 billion of us, ranging from straight forward mass famine and drought to the subsequent political mess as we fight (words and weapons) over the scraps that are left.

Now let's assume instead that climate change acceptors are right, and that we are, by our own activities, sending the world towards a preventable but irreversible catastrophe... so we do something about it. Sure, it will cost a lot, and take an awful lot of changes in lifestyle to achieve it... and maybe some economies would suffer for a while, but we will all live, and our children will live, and theirs and so on in perpetuity! Plus the air will taste nice! If they're wrong then all we've done is spend a lot of money making the world a nicer place.

Now, the misers who deny man-made climate change might like their air to be thick with smog, or their oceans to be bereft of life, or their serf class to be begging for scraps of food outside the gates of their industrialist palaces, but I like my Earth in a habitable state, so I'd prefer to err on the side of caution.

As has been said by others, we should endeavour to stop polluting the Earth in either case.

[svachon 3]

Originally posted by: Meg

It is happening.  The question is why.

Some say it's a manmade thing.

Some say it's a natural weather cycle.

Why can't it be both?

and, regardless of the cause, shouldn't we be doing what we can to reduce the effects?

quote>

If it's natural, no why should we?  And how do we know that these effects are no cyclical and perfectly normal. 

[svachon 3]

Originally posted by: nathanthemayor

Well at least we get control over the part that we are causing, even if the cause is natural. So at least we can do our part to help reverse it.quote>

Although no one would argue we should cut pollution, here's the problem;  the only way we could reverse it is to go back to the horse and buggy.  For a problem we don't know if it really even exists.  And we would never get all nations to co-operate (China, Soviets??). 

[svachon 3]

Does it bother anyone that these scientist credablity comes into question with the email scandal. Here are some excerpts from over 1079 emails and 72 documents, hacked into.

But perhaps the most damaging revelations - the scientific equivalent of the Telegraph's MPs' expenses scandal - are those concerning the way Warmist scientists may variously have manipulated or suppressed evidence in order to support their cause.

Manipulation of evidence: I've just completed Mike's Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd from 1961 for Keith's to hide the decline.

Suppression of evidence: Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4?Keith will do likewise. He's not in at the moment - minor family crisis. Can you also email Gene and get him to do the same? I don't have his new email address. We will be getting Caspar to do likewise.

Attempts to disguise the inconvenient truth of the Medieval Warm Period (MWP): And, perhaps most reprehensibly, a long series of communications discussing how best to squeeze dissenting scientists out of the peer review process. How, in other words, to create a scientific climate in which anyone who disagrees with AGW can be written off as a crank, whose views do not have a scrap of authority...

[Meg 368]

Originally posted by: svachon

Originally posted by: nathanthemayor

Well at least we get control over the part that we are causing, even if the cause is natural. So at least we can do our part to help reverse it.quote>

Although no one would argue we should cut pollution, here's the problem;  the only way we could reverse it is to go back to the horse and buggy.  For a problem we don't know if it really even exists.  And we would never get all nations to co-operate (China, Soviets??).  quote>

Even if it is natural, we can stop making it worse.  Or, to put it more accurately, reduce the amount by which we are making it worse.   Going back to the horse and buggy days is not realistic but there are many things that we could be doing that we are not.

My personal favorite is the hybrid car.  Maybe some people need a pickup truck or an SUV but millions of us do not.    Laugh all you want at my Prius but it's saved me over $5,500 in gas since I bought it in 2004. 

Bottled water is another pet peeve of mine.  Being able to obtain cold, portable water while out and about is wonderful.  I wished for that when I was a kid.  But why bring in bottled water in from Maine or Connecticut?  or worse, France or Fiji?   The water here in Maryland is perfectly good.   Why waste the energy it takes to transport it from somewhere else?

I could go on but my point is, these things do not have to be painful.   (Why bring in cantaloupe from California when we grow fine cantaloupes here in Maryland?)

and, regardless of the cause, shouldn't we be doing what we can to reduce the effects? quote>

If it's natural, no why should we?  And how do we know that these effects are no cyclical and perfectly normal.  quote>

Hurricanes, tornados, earthquakes, and blizzards are also natural but we still take precautions against them.   People in California bolt their bookcases to the walls so some minor rattling won't knock the books off the shelves.   People in Kansas have storm cellars so they can go underground when the tornados come.   People in northern climates make sure they have non-perishable food so they can still eat when the blizzards come.

The weather is changing.  We need to adapt.

[fukuda 351]

I didn't know quote-mined e-mails were consistent evidence of anything now.... Standards of evidence are pretty low nowadays... No matter how much media beating and quote-mining you do, you'll need some empirical measurements of that cooling-down or lack of change. Incredulity or ideology won't cut it.

Satellite and ground data are available everywhere in the net... Show me consistent data or calculations since you want to talk science...

[svachon 3]

How about this as reported by the BBC (nov 2009) -- Despite the explosive nature of some of the messages - which revealed apparent attempts by the CRU's head, Professor Phil Jones, to destroy global temperature data rather than give it to scientists with opposing views.

Have you EVER heard of a scientist destoying data??? This was the orginal data put into computer modelst to initially show that globalwarming was taking place. Ask yourself why a scientist who has data that could change the world would destoy it? Are they truly looking for the truth?

After Einstein develop this Relativity theory, he spent the rest of his life trying to disprove it. Because if he could not it must be true. A man is search of the truth. Is that what we have here?

[svachon 3]

Originally posted by: fukuda

I didn't know quote-mined e-mails were consistent evidence of anything now.... Standards of evidence are pretty low nowadays... No matter how much media beating and quote-mining you do, you'll need some empirical measurements of that cooling-down or lack of change. Incredulity or ideology won't cut it.

Satellite and ground data are available everywhere in the net... Show me consistent data or calculations since you want to talk science...quote>

Hi, I love you quote in your signature, "belive nothing no matter where you read it... unless it agress with your own reason and your own common sense."  Common sense tells me that no real scientist would destroy data that supports his sciencific theory.