Global Warming - running out of time to prevent ECONOMIC disaster

Claymore

Claymore

Executive Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2004
Messages
8,340
BandwidthAddict said:
An Inconvenient Truth?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be surprised, to be honest. Though I haven't seen it, most documentaries that are trying to make a point tend to exaggerate the thrust of their argument, and can be thin on facts. That's the nature of such things - they're really presentations done by salespeople, rather than scientific articles backed by references and data.
 
B

BandwidthAddict

Expert Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
2,380
This little article is great. The wittle enviro-religious nutjobs hate it when people don't BELIEVE in their excrement:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/jul/15/climatechange

P.S. I did not know that WeatherSA was a right-wing propoganda site. Things you learn.

P.P.S. Still waiting for the warmening.

P.P.P.S. Check out NYT circa 2000 with their lil scare on the "north pole is melting" track .. then they retracted it. Yep. Because it is normal for the arctic ice to melt in SUMMER!!! In March, it was around 14 million square and thicker than normal. Oh well, just like you guys to get all HOT over nothing :)

P.P.P.P.S. Did you check all the volcanoes under the arctic ice?

P.P.P.P.P.S. You talk about all your peer reviewed research, but I ain't seen no links to it. Just to the OPINIONS of the so-called scientists. I'll take the opinions of MY scientists over YOUR scientists any day.

POD.S. http://epw.senate.gov/public/index....ecord_id=865dbe39-802a-23ad-4949-ee9098538277
 
T

Teleological

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2007
Messages
836
Still have a few questions:
This Schwartz paper says:
The resultant equilibrium climate sensitivity, 0.30 ± 0.14 K/(W m-2), corresponds to an equilibrium temperature increase
for doubled CO2 of 1.1 ± 0.5 K.
Click to expand...
Meaning:
There is a likelihood of a of 1.1 degree Kelvin increase (as a result of CO2) within the next 70 years (time it will take to double the CO2 at the current rate). Is that really so huge? Is it all that catastrophic? Extra CO2 yields bigger crops too...

Also:
Here is an interesting article on research done by South African researchers on water resource management and the synchronous linkage between hydrometeorological processes in South Africa and elsewhere, and solar activity. And no evidence could be found of trends in the data that could be attributed to human activities.
If people are interested in their opinion, why not contact them?
 
A

Alan

Honorary Master
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
62,475
Claymore said:
I wouldn't be surprised, to be honest. Though I haven't seen it, most documentaries that are trying to make a point tend to exaggerate the thrust of their argument, and can be thin on facts. That's the nature of such things - they're really presentations done by salespeople, rather than scientific articles backed by references and data.
Click to expand...

True.

BandwidthAddict said:
This little article is great. The wittle enviro-religious nutjobs hate it when people don't BELIEVE in their excrement:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/jul/15/climatechange
Click to expand...

As per the usual leftist modus operandi. Man made GW is now firmly protected by the 'politically correctness' of the loony left luddites and the lemmings that soak it all up.
 
Last edited:
B

BCO

Honorary Master
Joined
Dec 17, 2004
Messages
13,229
alanf85 said:
As per the usual leftist modus operandi. Man made GW is now firmly protected by the 'politically correctness' of the loony left luddites and the lemmings that soak it all up.
Click to expand...

Excellent use of alliteration.
 
T

Teleological

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2007
Messages
836
Thought this might spark some debate:
Myth of Consensus Explodes: APS Opens Global Warming Debate

Forum on Physics & Society: Editor's Comments

American Physical Society: Climate Sensitivity Reconsidered

Interesting figure here:

Mean global surface temperature anomalies (°C), 2001-2008

figure1.gif

Since the phase-transition in mean global surface temperature late in 2001, a pronounced downtrend has set in. In the cold winter of 2007/8, record sea-ice extents were observed at both Poles. The January-to-January fall in temperature from 2007-2008 was the greatest since global records began in 1880. Data sources: Hadley Center monthly combined land and sea surface temperature anomalies; University of Alabama at Huntsville Microwave Sounding Unit monthly lower-troposphere anomalies; Linear regressions.​
 
Last edited:
B

BCO

Honorary Master
Joined
Dec 17, 2004
Messages
13,229
Teleological said:
Thought this might spark some debate:
Myth of Consensus Explodes: APS Opens Global Warming Debate

Forum on Physics & Society: Editor's Comments

American Physical Society: Climate Sensitivity Reconsidered

Interesting figure here:

figure1.gif
Since the phase-transition in mean global surface temperature late in 2001, a pronounced downtrend has set in. In the cold winter of 2007/8, record sea-ice extents were observed at both Poles. The January-to-January fall in temperature from 2007-2008 was the greatest since global records began in 1880. Data sources: Hadley Center monthly combined land and sea surface temperature anomalies; University of Alabama at Huntsville Microwave Sounding Unit monthly lower-troposphere anomalies; Linear regressions.
Click to expand...

Now this is very interesting.

Thanks for posting some quality material here Telic.

The Daily Tech article is a bit misleading though - the APS has not "changed its viewpoint" and still endorses the IPCC conclusions. The APC did, however, acknlowledge that there is "considerable" dissent within the scientific community.

Personally, I'd be extremely happy if IPCC science turned out to be wrong, and that we're not the cause of GW, but it's a bit early to start celebrating just yet. Also, even if CO2 is not the cause of global warming, I don't think that means people should continue with the wanton exploitation of the planet's resources with no regard to the future.

Edit: also Telic, in the interest of balance, and in the spirit of the APS debate, here's the "other side of the story" from the same APS newsletter:

http://www.aps.org/units/fps/newsletters/200807/hafemeister.cfm
 
Last edited:
T

Teleological

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2007
Messages
836
BlueCollar said:
Now this is very interesting.

Thanks for posting some quality material here Telic.
Click to expand...
Schweet, civil debate FTW.:)

BlueCollar said:
Personally, I'd be extremely happy if IPCC science turned out to be wrong, and that we're not the cause of GW, but it's a bit early to start celebrating just yet. Also, even if CO2 is not the cause of global warming, I don't think that means people should continue with the wanton exploitation of the planet's resources with no regard to the future.
Click to expand...
CO2 probably does add to the warming effect, it is just the magnitude that needs to be determined in order to assess whether our activities will really have such a huge affect in the long run. Who knows, maybe the CO2 we are pumping into the atmosphere can be used to generate more food?

BlueCollar said:
Edit: also Telic, in the interest of balance, and in the spirit of the APS debate, here's the "other side of the story" from the same APS newsletter:

http://www.aps.org/units/fps/newsletters/200807/hafemeister.cfm
Click to expand...
Thanks.
Wonder if this Schwartz and the one above are related :p.
 
B

BCO

Honorary Master
Joined
Dec 17, 2004
Messages
13,229
Not sure if they're related, but the Schwartz you linked is "a highly respected researcher (deservedly so) in atmospheric physics, mainly working on aerosols." (from Realclimate).

Still his method apparently falls short a bit on this study (I'm no climate scientist, so I make no claims to actually understanding the nitty gritty of this article). A critical look at Schwartz' study can be found here:

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/09/climate-insensitivity/
 
B

BandwidthAddict

Expert Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
2,380
Hurrooo!! Me from anihc, the southern end of sanity. *drool*

Ok, this is a good one. *rolls in oil for the booma*

Here is a nice list of peer-reviewed articles letting us know that global warming is, well, neither global, nor warming. Yeah, you nutjobs can go ahead and ignore it, I know you will:

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index....ecord_id=84E9E44A-802A-23AD-493A-B35D0842FED8

BTW, this BLOG entry was pretty cool, it is a speech by some political dude asking for sanity in not passing the kill America's economy bill, nice references (also where I got the above):

http://www.globalclimatescam.com/?p=183

Can we just kill this insanity now? I am sick, and freezing my butt off. I need me some warmening NOW!!!!! Please use more CO2, oh wait, that does not work. Well, FART MORE!!!! I hereby announce the campaign to warm this cooling world with the power of FARTS. FART POWA 4EVA!
 
B

BCO

Honorary Master
Joined
Dec 17, 2004
Messages
13,229
BWA - the word is "warming," not "warmening". At least learn to spell the term you're talking about correctly before trying to debate the issue.
 
A

Alan

Honorary Master
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
62,475
GW has hit PMB. 30C in the shade today in the middle of winter
 
B

BandwidthAddict

Expert Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
2,380
BlueCollar said:
BWA - the word is "warming," not "warmening". At least learn to spell the term you're talking about correctly before trying to debate the issue.
Click to expand...

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

Oh BC, is your pet cause losing it. Oh shame, you tried so hard to kill America but they barely felt it. SA felt it, yep. They did. Hope you are happy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top