Global Warming?

[Gopher4Life]

Maybe it will help the four inches of snow melt in New Orleans.

[mesothelioma]

G4L, there is no way you could be this obtuse. BTW, this is a great weekend for global warming skeptics to stick their hand out of the window and reassure themselves that everything is just A-ok

[diehard]

Global warming is out the window. It is officially "climate change." The Earth's climate has never been stable, it has been in constant change sine 'the beginning,' even before record keeping. Science is supposed to been proven and understood, not ideological.
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=2158072e-802a-23ad-45f0-274616db87e6
I'm not advocating this view either, but.... Well, maybe a little, but I am pretty 'Green' in my thinking.

[Gopher4Life]

meso,

Thank God for global warming. The snow in NO has already melted without the need to purchase shovels.

Memo to global warming freaks: that kool-aid is downright intoxicating, isn't it?

[Sour1729]

meso,

Thank God for global warming. The snow in NO has already melted without the need to purchase shovels.

Memo to global warming freaks: that kool-aid is downright intoxicating, isn't it?

Message to ignorance: nice scientific data in this thread. New Orleans has snow so global warming must not exist! Laughable.

[The Big L]

Global warming is out the window. It is officially "climate change." The Earth's climate has never been stable, it has been in constant change sine 'the beginning,' even before record keeping. Science is supposed to been proven and understood, not ideological.
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=2158072e-802a-23ad-45f0-274616db87e6
I'm not advocating this view either, but.... Well, maybe a little, but I am pretty 'Green' in my thinking.

Yes it should be called "climate change", because calling it "global warming" will cause people like G4L to say it's false if it gets colder somewhere (though I think/hope G4L was joking).

I do not understand the people that don't believe human activity is impacting the Earth's climate. I think the debate among scientists is about the severity of the impact, and it's outcome.

[Gopher4Life]

>>(though I think/hope G4L was joking)<<

At least one of you woke up this morning with sense of humor intact.

[alltimetwinsfan]

...Global Warming is the single reason we need to keep the raised floor at the Barn...just in case climate change forces flooding, then we have a place to go to keep our feet from getting wet!

;)

[Gopher4Life]

Maybe the only sensible reason...

[diehard]

Yes it should be called "climate change", because calling it "global warming" will cause people like G4L to say it's false if it gets colder somewhere (though I think/hope G4L was joking).

I do not understand the people that don't believe human activity is impacting the Earth's climate. I think the debate among scientists is about the severity of the impact, and it's outcome.

I think you did not open the link.

[bga1]

There is no scientific evidence that shows human activity to be a major force in climate change or "global warming". Currently we are in the midst of a cooling period. The percentage of carbon that is produced by humans is miniscule in proportion to the total produced. There are scientists that "believe" that humans are the cause and those scientists are getting all the cash for research. No one is giving out any money to researchers that "believe" that humans are not a significant cause. The only thing we know for scientific fact is that the climate of the earth DOES warm and cool over periods of hundreds of years. Many say we are more likely to cool next than warm. The global warming hysteria is on its way to getting debunked.

[diehard]

Message to ignorance: nice scientific data in this thread. New Orleans has snow so global warming must not exist! Laughable.

You may want to open the link I posted as well as the links within it.

[alltimetwinsfan]

...Global Warming is the single reason we need to keep the raised floor at the Barn...just in case climate change forces flooding, then we have a place to go to keep our feet from getting wet!


Maybe the only sensible reason...

Hey, we've finally found common ground...get it? Common Ground?!?! HAHAHAAAAA......

[The Big L]

There is no scientific evidence that shows human activity to be a major force in climate change or "global warming". Currently we are in the midst of a cooling period. The percentage of carbon that is produced by humans is miniscule in proportion to the total produced. There are scientists that "believe" that humans are the cause and those scientists are getting all the cash for research. No one is giving out any money to researchers that "believe" that humans are not a significant cause. The only thing we know for scientific fact is that the climate of the earth DOES warm and cool over periods of hundreds of years. Many say we are more likely to cool next than warm. The global warming hysteria is on its way to getting debunked.

The earth's climate has tipping points, that's what is the most worrisome. People don't see change happening, and so they think no impact is being made, but that isn't necessarily true.

Global temperatures have been trending up a lot in the last 30 years or so. While the whole glacier melting thing is quite overblown (we have been in an age of glacial retreat for a long time), added heat does produce stronger storms/hurricanes. You can blame Hurricane Katrina on bad luck, but hurricanes will only grow stronger as temperatures rise.

[diehard]

I think you did not open the link.


Seriously, you need to read what over 600 climatology scientists had to say at the IPCC. It is too early too say the sky is falling. Although most of them seem to say it is an ideology that is total BS, I think it needs to be carefully researched, approached from a point of non-junk science, and then addressed in a common sense method rather than all the panic and screaming I here from normally otherwise 'normal' people. Even among the scientists promoting the theory of man made climate change they were heard to say, "but what if we are making a mistake, then what?" Some common sense may be setting in. After all, it's not nice to fool with Mother Nature.

[The Big L]

Seriously, you need to read what over 600 climatology scientists had to say at the IPCC. It is too early too say the sky is falling. Although most of them seem to say it is an ideology that is total BS, I think it needs to be carefully researched, approached from a point of non-junk science, and then addressed in a common sense method rather than all the panic and screaming I here from normally otherwise 'normal' people. Even among the scientists promoting the theory of man made climate change they were heard to say, "but what if we are making a mistake, then what?" Some common sense may be setting in. After all, it's not nice to fool with Mother Nature.

Who is the "you" you are referring to?

[MNSnowman]

I think you did not open the link.

You may want to open the link I posted as well as the links within it.

I think you did not open the link.

Seriously, you need to read (the link)

Has anybody clicked on this guy's link ... please let us know before he dies of frustration!

[Gopher4Life]

Snowman,

Sounds like an interesting, but shallow and over-hyped hypothesis to me. But I don't claim to be a scientist. Maybe we should follow the money.

>>Has anybody clicked on this guy's link?<<

Although I usually prefer links to be hot and saucy, I clicked on it.

“I am a skeptic…Global warming has become a new religion.” - Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, Ivar Giaever.

“Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly….As a scientist I remain skeptical.” - Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman in the world to receive a PhD in meteorology and formerly of NASA who has authored more than 190 studies and has been called “among the most preeminent scientists of the last 100 years.”

Warming fears are the “worst scientific scandal in the history…When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.” - UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning PhD environmental physical chemist.

“It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of scientists who don’t buy into anthropogenic global warming.” - U.S Government Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of the Hurricane Research Division of NOAA.

“For how many years must the planet cool before we begin to understand that the planet is not warming? For how many years must cooling go on?" - Geologist Dr. David Gee the chairman of the science committee of the 2008 International Geological Congress who has authored 130 plus peer reviewed papers, and is currently at Uppsala University in Sweden.

“Gore prompted me to start delving into the science again and I quickly found myself solidly in the skeptic camp…Climate models can at best be useful for explaining climate changes after the fact.” - Meteorologist Hajo Smit of Holland, who reversed his belief in man-made warming to become a skeptic, is a former member of the Dutch UN IPCC committee.

“Many [scientists] are now searching for a way to back out quietly (from promoting warming fears), without having their professional careers ruined.” - Atmospheric physicist James A. Peden, formerly of the Space Research and Coordination Center in Pittsburgh.

[weezy]

The global warming debate is always interesting to me. Despite the excessive amount of contradictory information, people still seem to form such firm positions on the issue. People tend to grab onto the information that suits there viewpoint and write-off all other information as either ignorant or a scare tactic. There are credible "experts" and facts on both sides of the issue which make it possible for both sides to be "right".

[Jike Spingleton]

New Orleans has snow so global warming must not exist!


Near-record highs expected here in New Orleans for the next three days. Baby polar bears do not approve.

[bigtenchamps1899]

the issue is a political football.
but for those who love to label conservatives as hatemongers, pleas read the following article:
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20081214/D952LKP00.html

my favorite line is form the "objective" reporter from AP: [because 2008 is on track to be a slightly cooler year] "skeptics are already using it as evidence of some kind of cooling trend, it actually illustrates how fast the world is warming."
question: if a cooler year does not indicate that the world is not warming, what evidence could ever be provided to the paragons of science that they are wrong. it seems as though the argument has been framed in terms that cannot be falsified, and if something is not falsifiable then it is not science.

[MinnesotaMadman]

C'mon... don't you guys see that ad on TV that says we have to save the polar bears... you know... that animal whose numbers have been increasing rapidly over the past 30 years! Most polar bear populations are still increasing... we must save them! All them! No polar bears must die. Ever.

I believe that, over the past 30 some years the Earth has warmed... however, I don't believe it will be catastrophic nor do I believe it is caused by humans. Just a few reasons why I think this.

1) The Earth goes through periods of warming and cooling as part of a natural climate cycle. Recently the Earth has been in a cycle of having an ice age about once every 10,000 years and we're actually getting close to when you would expect there to be another ice age. Through studying Medieval History I have learned about the Medieval Warming period. From 600-1300 the world experienced whether that was warmer than today's conditions. Such conditions allowed for greater yields and the ability to grow crops further north (wheat in Norway, Grapes in England).

2) From World War I to the mid 70's, a period of time in which fossil fuels were being poured into the atmosphere at an exponential rate, the Earth actually cooled.

3) Al Gore is wrong. His graph pitting temperature vs. the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is misleading. He claims the graph shows that carbon drives temperature when in fact the relationship is reversed.

4) The biggest supporters of the Global Warming Theory are politicians and scientists. Politicians want global warming to exists because it allows them to have some control over industry. Politicians in countries such as Russia and China want emissions laws to go into effect because they, as developing nations, don't have to abide by the same rules as nations that are already developed. Scientists want people to believe global warming is human created and a dangerous threat because it creates demand for their climate research, which means they get more grant money. Grant money from the government... run by politicians... who want global warming to be widely believed.

5) The IPCC is a joke of an organization. They write policy based on the research before the research is even conducted or analyzed. How can policy be suggested based on a report that isn't yet written? The report itself is written by hundreds of scientists who write only about a page each and have no control over the editing process. Then, at the end, their name is tacked on the report and people take this to believe they support all the ideas contained in the report. Any dissenting opinion is likely to be "supported" by much fewer scientists, but this doesn't mean their objections aren't valid.

I don't think that we should just go around polluting the Earth because we can. I think it is important to protect the air we breath and the land on which we live, I just don't think we have to derail our economy to do so. Making cleaner burning energy is still good for the Earth and so are more fuel efficient cars. These decisions however shouldn't be made out of fear or through false propaganda that Greenland is going to melt, but through reason and in a climate (pun completely intended) of compromise and innovation.

[The Big L]

question: if a cooler year does not indicate that the world is not warming, what evidence could ever be provided to the paragons of science that they are wrong. it seems as though the argument has been framed in terms that cannot be falsified, and if something is not falsifiable then it is not science.




1) The Earth goes through periods of warming and cooling as part of a natural climate cycle. Recently the Earth has been in a cycle of having an ice age about once every 10,000 years and we're actually getting close to when you would expect there to be another ice age. Through studying Medieval History I have learned about the Medieval Warming period. From 600-1300 the world experienced whether that was warmer than today's conditions. Such conditions allowed for greater yields and the ability to grow crops further north (wheat in Norway, Grapes in England).

3) Al Gore is wrong. His graph pitting temperature vs. the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is misleading. He claims the graph shows that carbon drives temperature when in fact the relationship is reversed.


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bb/1000_Year_Temperature_Comparison.png

Big10Champs-Just because one year is cooler doesn't mean the Earth is not warming. It's true. This doesn't mean it's impossible to prove science wrong. Look at the graph I linked. It's not a linear or black or white thing. You can't take one year, you have to look at the overall trend. We are trending up. I can't find the graph that has the CO2 levels, but they have risen exponentially over the last 30 years as the temperature has risen. Whether there is causation is a matter for debate.

MinnesotaMadman- I'll start with #3. What??? I haven't seen Gore's movie, so I haven't seen the graph, but are you implying that temperature drives CO2? CO2 most definitely drives temperature, that's basic science. Without Carbon Dioxide the world would be a very cold place, CO2 traps the heat from the sun. The debate is about how much impact our man-made CO2 emissions are having on the increase in temperature.

As for #1, global temperatures don't have much of an effect on glacial advances/retreats, at least in North America. The direction of ocean currents determine how glacial activity behaves.

[bigtenchamps1899]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bb/1000_Year_Temperature_Comparison.png

Big10Champs-Just because one year is cooler doesn't mean the Earth is not warming. It's true. This doesn't mean it's impossible to prove science wrong. Look at the graph I linked. It's not a linear or black or white thing. You can't take one year, you have to look at the overall trend. We are trending up. I can't find the graph that has the CO2 levels, but they have risen exponentially over the last 30 years as the temperature has risen. Whether there is causation is a matter for debate.

MinnesotaMadman- I'll start with #3. What??? I haven't seen Gore's movie, so I haven't seen the graph, but are you implying that temperature drives CO2? CO2 most definitely drives temperature, that's basic science. Without Carbon Dioxide the world would be a very cold place, CO2 traps the heat from the sun. The debate is about how much impact our man-made CO2 emissions are having on the increase in temperature.

As for #1, global temperatures don't have much of an effect on glacial advances/retreats, at least in North America. The direction of ocean currents determine how glacial activity behaves.
you are absolutely right. but we only have records for a very limited amount of time, yet we know that the earth has been much colder than it is now as well as much warmer (fossils of dinasaurs--cold blooded lizards--are found in north dakota, montana, wyoming which are not conducive to large cold-blooded animals). i have also heard of the trend of co2 levels, but it has been pointed out that rising co2 levels actually follow the rising of temps. yet scientists who suggest that perhaps the rising temps are the cause for the rising co2 levels are attacked ad hominem. i am not trying to prove things one way or another. my main problem is with the way these converstations become twisted by the ADD mass media and end up delineating the argument in terms of "science, the pure offspring of reason" on the one hand and troglodytism on the other.

and by the way i meant to say "fear mongering" in my above post, instead of "hate mongering". i would call it a freudian slip if i believed in such things.

[McGopherFan]

Have I forgotten that I'm supposed to be impossible at this very moment?

[The Big L]

you are absolutely right. but we only have records for a very limited amount of time, yet we know that the earth has been much colder than it is now as well as much warmer (fossils of dinasaurs--cold blooded lizards--are found in north dakota, montana, wyoming which are not conducive to large cold-blooded animals). i have also heard of the trend of co2 levels, but it has been pointed out that rising co2 levels actually follow the rising of temps. yet scientists who suggest that perhaps the rising temps are the cause for the rising co2 levels are attacked ad hominem. i am not trying to prove things one way or another. my main problem is with the way these converstations become twisted by the ADD mass media and end up delineating the argument in terms of "science, the pure offspring of reason" on the one hand and troglodytism on the other.

and by the way i meant to say "fear mongering" in my above post, instead of "hate mongering". i would call it a freudian slip if i believed in such things.

Yep, what you say is true. And that's the debate in a nutshell, is the Earth warming on it's own, or are we making a significant impact. I learn towards the idea that we are making an impact, but I'll be the first to say we need much more research on the subject, and nothing is scientifically certain or proven.

Sadly, like you said earlier, this has become quite political. I think it's gotten to the point where if any research comes out for or against "global warming", it will be instantly rejected by the opposite political side. I too have been disappointed in the media's role, opting for scare tactics, and helping divide the public into "believers" and "non-believers".

I do think we should be very aware of our actions and how they might affect the world, not just pollution, but deforestation, dams, hazardous waste, ect. As we learn more about our impact, we can maximize human activity with less damage to the Earth. My fear is that the global warming debate will divide so many people, these other issues will go overlooked.

[bga1]

There is one major culprit to the politicizing of global warming. Al Gore. He hyped it and pumped it with assumptions and falsehoods. Then he claimed it was indisputable and that opponents were to be disdained. All this propaganda in an attempt to gain notoriety for himself and the concept of man made global warming. In his mind I'm certain he felt that the ends justified the means and that the cause was noble. But the methods now obscure the search for facts and the hysteria overshadows the science.

[Caravan Shaker]

courtesy of Richard Strimple at http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/12/something_else_for_al_gore_to.html, I thought this was hilarious.

Something else for Al Gore to worry about
letter to the editor
I don't know if anyone else has noticed, but I have detected a new crisis that I have named "the daylight change crisis". I first noticed it sometime around the end of June this year. I started paying attention and created computer models and sure enough I was right! We are losing daylight at an astonishing rate. Each day we are losing approximately 2 minutes of day light and my computer models predict total darkness by next July.

I have been able to detect this phenomenon around the entire Northern Hemisphere. And here is the scary part: the day light appears to be leaking to the Southern Hemisphere.

I thought I should bring it to the attention of great scientists like Al Gore so he can help solve this new crisis.

[nasa35]

The earth's climate has tipping points, that's what is the most worrisome. People don't see change happening, and so they think no impact is being made, but that isn't necessarily true.

Global temperatures have been trending up a lot in the last 30 years or so. While the whole glacier melting thing is quite overblown (we have been in an age of glacial retreat for a long time), added heat does produce stronger storms/hurricanes. You can blame Hurricane Katrina on bad luck, but hurricanes will only grow stronger as temperatures rise.


"trending up alot in thirty years" ????????????????????????

You must be a parrot, at least find some differing scientific data so you can at least form a sensible and grounded opinion. Reading stuff that just supports your view, whether factual or not, only encourages ignorance.,

[Gopher4Life]

>>Reading stuff that just supports your view, whether factual or not, only encourages ignorance.<<

Maybe the global warming zealots should take that advice.

[MNSnowman]

>>Reading stuff that just supports your view, whether factual or not, only encourages ignorance.<<

Maybe the global warming zealots should do the same.Uh, G4L, he's on your side and disagrees with the "global warming zealots" (as you put it). Take more time to read first and type second. ;)

[MinnesotaMadman]

If you look at the ice core data, you will find that:
Over the last 16,000 years the Earth has warmed.
Over the last 10,000 years the Earth has cooled.
Over the last 2,000 years the Earth has cooled.
Over the last 700 years temperature has been close to constant.
Over the last 100 years the Earth has warmed.
Over the last 8 years temperature has been close to constant.

The last two readings are not statistically significant. The time periods are too short.

So is the Earth Warming?

It depends.

[Gopher4Life]

Snowman,

Thanks. I did read it. I mistyped.

BTW, "my side" is that the jury is still out and neither side should be so quick to jump to a conclusion. I do think the impact of man has been overblown.