Global Warming

[Slim]

I'm more worried about he poles swapping over than I am about global warming...

[dr del]

Indeed.

That the birds and fish cope with it ok is kind of reassuring but our technology isn't exactly that smart yet.


dr del

[Foschi Exotic Serpents]

I'm more worried about he poles swapping over than I am about global warming...

The poles do that regularly too.. In fact, the last pole shift wasn't that long ago. Was it just a couple years? I'll have to look it up.

*** I should have said they are "shifting" regularly.

Check this out. I read this earlier last year.

http://m.aol.com/news/default/getCon...tampa-airport/

[Mike41793]

We haven't been around long enough to actually be able to tell how quickly the changes should happen, we are talking about cycles that take hundreds to thousands of years.

I agree that wee defiantly aren't doing the right things, and maybe even that we are helping it along... but in the end the Earth has was to deal with the excess C02. This isn't her first time around the block

We havent been around long enough but by looking at the different layers of the earth scientists have been able to pinpoint what the temps were, to a fairly accurate degree, over the past hundreds of thousands of years.

[Mike41793]

What are you talking about? None of the global warming projections have actually been met. Read through this very carefully and open your mind. Especially the parts I've quoted. The planet is doing what it does.. The next 15 years will be the tell all.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...ing-again.html


"The supposed consensus on man-made global warming is facing an inconvenient challenge after the release of new temperature data showing the planet has not warmed for the past 15 years."

"Based on readings from more than 30,000 measuring stations, the data was issued last week without fanfare by the Met Office and the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit. It confirms that the rising trend in world temperatures ended in 1997."

"CO2 levels have continued to rise without interruption and, in 2007, the Met Office claimed that global warming was about to come roaring back. It said that between 2004 and 2014 there would be an overall increase of 0.3C. In 2009, it predicted that at least three of the years 2009 to 2014 would break the previous temperature record set in 1998. So far there is no sign of any of this happening. But yesterday a Met Office spokesman insisted its models were still valid."

"Dr Nicola Scafetta, of Duke University in North Carolina, is the author of several papers that argue the Met Office climate models show there should have been steady warming from 2000 until now."

"If temperatures continue to stay flat or start to cool again, the divergence between the models and recorded data will eventually become so great that the whole scientific community will question the current theories, he said."

He believes that as the Met Office model attaches much greater significance to CO2 than to the sun, it was bound to conclude that there would not be cooling. The real issue is whether the model itself is accurate, Dr Scafetta said. Meanwhile, one of America's most eminent climate experts, Professor Judith Curry of the Georgia Institute of Technology, said she found the Met office's confident prediction of negligable impact difficult to understand.

The responsible thing to do would be to accept the fact that the models may have severe shortcomings when it comes to the influence of the sun, said Professor Curry. As for the warming pause, she said that many scientists are not surprised."

"She argued it is becoming evident that factors other than CO2 play an important role in rising or falling warmth, such as the 60-year water temperature cycles in the Pacific and Atlantic oceans.

They have insufficiently been appreciated in terms of global climate, said Prof Curry. When both oceans were cold in the past, such as from 1940 to 1970, the climate cooled. The Pacific cycle flipped back from warm to cold mode in 2008 and the Atlantic is also thought likely to flip in the next few years .

Pal Brekke, senior adviser at the Norwegian Space Centre, said some scientists found the importance of water cycles difficult to accept, because doing so means admitting that the oceans, not CO2, caused much of the global warming between 1970 and 1997.

The same goes for the impact of the sun, which was highly active for much of the 20th Century.

Nature is about to carry out a very interesting experiment, he said. Ten or 15 years from now, we will be able to determine much better whether the warming of the late 20th Century really was caused by man-made CO2, or by natural variability.

Meanwhile, since the end of last year, world temperatures have fallen by more than half a degree, as the cold La Nina effect has re-emerged in the South Pacific.

We're now well into the second decade of the pause, said Benny Peiser, director of the Global Warming Policy Foundation. If we don't see convincing evidence of global warming by 2015, it will start to become clear whether the models are bunk. And, if they are, the implications for some scientists could be very serious."

The earth hasnt warme in the past 15 years...Ok big deal. If you look at a BIG graph of like the past 800,000 years then we are on the rise higher than the averages have been before.

[Mike41793]

A chart like this is what i was referencing: http://www.helpsavetheclimate.com/ipcc1.gif
Yea i know the site this came from can ruin the actual validation of the chart but you get the idea...

[Foschi Exotic Serpents]

The earth hasnt warme in the past 15 years...Ok big deal. If you look at a BIG graph of like the past 800,000 years then we are on the rise higher than the averages have been before.

It's a planet... A huge, terrestrial planet with a metal core (until proven otherwise), silica, molten stuff, etc.. It's also rather close to the sun which has great effects on its weather among other things. It has a moon, which also has great effects on these things. Oh, and there are other planets whose orbits sometimes cause them to align rather close to the earth. This also has huge effects on the earth. We're experiencing 2 of these major alignments right now, this year. Are you forgetting these tiny little details? It's doing what this type of planet does..

George Carlin said it best when he said the planet will be fine. Long after mankind is gone, this planet is going to be here and there will be life on it.

[Mike41793]

It's a planet... A huge, terrestrial planet with a metal core (until proven otherwise), silica, molten stuff, etc.. It's also rather close to the sun which has great effects on its weather among other things. It has a moon, which also has great effects on these things. Oh, and there are other planets whose orbits sometimes cause them to align rather close to the earth. This also has huge effects on the earth. We're experiencing 2 of these major alignments right now, this year. Are you forgetting these tiny little details? It's doing what this type of planet does..

George Carlin said it best when he said the planet will be fine. Long after mankind is gone, this planet is going to be here and there will be life on it.

I disagree. And for the record im not a hippy or anything lol but im just saying we are destroying the planet. In soooo many ways.

[Foschi Exotic Serpents]

I disagree. And for the record im not a hippy or anything lol but im just saying we are destroying the planet. In soooo many ways.

I agree that we aren't doing anything good for the planet with all of our garbage, waste, gasses, etc.. But I don't believe that we are the cause of global warming.. Considering the new evidence, and the fact that there was much less accumulation of garbage and pollution back during the last thermal maximum... If we used THAT as an excuse, then we'd have to say the garbage and pollution accumulation causes global cooling.

I bet if you were alive back when they first suggested the earth was round, you would have been certain they were wrong. You seem the type to refuse to believe anything new once something's already in your head. I bet you could fit more information in your brain, and the other information that has been there so comfortably for so long would not be a bit upset about it though... You should give it a try.

[Jabberwocky Dragons]

A chart like this is what i was referencing: http://www.helpsavetheclimate.com/ipcc1.gif
Yea i know the site this came from can ruin the actual validation of the chart but you get the idea...

Unfortunately (or fortunately for the millions upon millions of taxpayers dollars being funneled towards them), the IPCC was caught with their pants down creating fraudulent data points and deleting every other data point that didn't fit their graphs. I know nothing about the website you linked to but the place they're getting their information from is 100% fradulent. I'm open to hearing about man caused Global Warming but to date have not seen one scientificly rigorous, peer reviewed study that hasn't been rocked by scandal (famous hockey stick graph, East Anglia emails, etc).

Here is a link to one of many, many articles about it:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/c...eneration.html

Here is a great quote from the linked article about the so called "science" and open mindness that goes on that the IPCC:

They have come up with every possible excuse for concealing the background data on which their findings and temperature records were based.
This in itself has become a major scandal, not least Dr Jones's refusal to release the basic data from which the CRU derives its hugely influential temperature record, which culminated last summer in his startling claim that much of the data from all over the world had simply got "lost". Most incriminating of all are the emails in which scientists are advised to delete large chunks of data, which, when this is done after receipt of a freedom of information request, is a criminal offence.