Cold, hard facts take the heat out of some hot claims

[MelBridgeman]

Originally Posted by octothorp

I think it's been clearly demonstrated that Mann's graphs are based on bad models, and he should pretty much be excluded from any debate on climate change for that reason alone; he's one of those guys who seemed to have a point he wanted to make, and created a model that he thought would prove it. Not that such scientists don't exist on the other side of the debate.

However, the warming trend has been produced by several other independent climate analysts working independently and often using entirely different methods; never so dramatic as in the Mann data.

Similarly, adjusting the temperature in the 1930s upward and the temperature in the 1990s downward by about a tenth of a degree doesn`t really have any bearing one way or another over the warming trends of the last two thousand years; I`ve seen only one data set that suggests that the 1900s were not the warmest of the last couple thousand years (one data set had the 1900s as the second warmest after the 1000s).

I don't think anyone is trying to deny that we are seeing a warming trend. The debate is what is causing it and not if its happening. If there are inaccuracies in this data, where else are there inaccuracies....

[Azure]

Nothing wrong with developing alternative energy sources.

We're going to run out of oil one day anyways. Might as well start working on the 'other' sooner than later.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Cowperson

Or why Martian icecaps have been retreating in the same time frame.

Cowperson

Mmmmm... I think I am going to head to Tim Hortons for a Marian IceCap.

[GoinAllTheWay]

Originally Posted by Cowperson

Or why Martian icecaps have been retreating in the same time frame.

Cowperson

Seriously? That is a pretty interesting tidbit, where did you get info on that?

[MaDMaN_26]

The Whole:

"Global Warming is real!!"

"No it's not, it's a big lie!!"

"Taste great!"

"Less Filling!"

needs to stop... the end of it is does it matter... regardless of whether its true or not can anyone say that we do not need to start treating our natural resources with more respect? That fossil fuels can and should be used more responsibly in order to ensure we have enough for the next generations to survive? That environmental issues like heavy deforestation, pollution in land air and sea is a problem and that millions of animals are losing there natural habitats to unchecked "progress" as we speak are real problems that need to be addressed? We as a human race need to start treating this planet like its the only one we have, cause I think it is... who gives a $%#% if its warmer this year while we destroy it or just part of a natural cycle of hot and cold.

[MelBridgeman]

Originally Posted by GoinAllTheWay

Seriously? That is a pretty interesting tidbit, where did you get info on that?

its not an interesting tidbit, it's the truth and of course there are some factions of society who would rather not let you know that

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2..._southpole.htm

http://www.space.com/scienceastronom..._011206-1.html

[worth]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

Effective September 1, 2007 the B.C. government has placed a new 0.4% levy on the sale of electricity, natural gas, grid propane and fuel oil that are non-transportation related to support the Innovation Clean Energy (ICE) fund. This levy will be reflected on your FortisBC bill.

The $25 million ICE fund has been introduced as part of the recently released BC Energy Plan. The government has stated that the fund will help support the development of clean power and energy efficiency technologies in the electricity, alternative energy, transportation, and oil and gas sectors.

Above is a little note I got with my power bill today.

It's worthwhile for government to propagate the global warming craze because they will implement new taxes, which is exactly what has heppened here, and people will more or less accept them.

How long before you start being taxed because you drive a car with more than 4 cylinders? Or you drive more than 50km in one day?

I'd rather get the facts straight here before I start getting taxed for something that isn't proven. And this topic obviously is not.

[Azure]

Madman...NOBODY has said that global warming is not happening, and considering what the gas price is...I think everyone would support alternative energy sources.

Like I said on the first page, it is the 'cause'....not the 'effect' that we're debating.

[Nehkara]

I will admit that Climate Change is occuring, but so what? The climate always changes.

We may think it is warm now but what we have to understand is that we have only been able to record the temperature reliably for a very short period of time. On the scale of the planet's history we are only seeing a tiny footnote. It has been this warm many many many many many times and it will continue to be this warm and warmer in future. It will also likely get cold soon, warming trends don't last forever.

Also, apparently our current overall warming trend started 18,000 years ago... long before people even conceived of C02 belching factories and vehicles.

My whole point is that while the temperature has generally been going up for 18,000 years it is very likely not because of us. I actually think it is quite arrogant of us to believe we could affect the planet so easily and so drastically.

Good website:

http://mysite.verizon.net/mhieb/WVFossils/ice_ages.html

Some interesting images:

[MaDMaN_26]

Originally Posted by Azure

Madman...NOBODY has said that global warming is not happening, and considering what the gas price is...I think everyone would support alternative energy sources.

Like I said on the first page, it is the 'cause'....not the 'effect' that we're debating.

My bad I guess... I thought the whole point of the article was to say that the globe was warmer in the 30's so the global warming theory is out the window... or at least there is data to now suggest it is not an absolute theory... if all this is about is whether or not its caused by C02 emissions my bad...

So what’s the end result here - turns out it is C02 emissions and so we are still polluting like never before and spiraling towards some terrible global warming caused disasters at an alarming rate...

or

Its not C02, we don't know what it is but now people have no good reason to stop polluting like crazy and we are still spiraling towards some terrible disaster caused by global warming...

[Nehkara]

Originally Posted by MaDMaN_26

My bad I guess... I thought the whole point of the article was to say that the globe was warmer in the 30's so the global warming theory is out the window... or at least there is data to now suggest it is not an absolute theory... if all this is about is whether or not its caused by C02 emissions my bad...

So what’s the end result here - turns out it is C02 emissions and so we are still polluting like never before and spiraling towards some terrible global warming caused disasters at an alarming rate...

or

Its not C02, we don't know what it is but now people have no good reason to stop polluting like crazy and we are still spiraling towards some terrible disaster caused by global warming...

We can't lie to people just because it is convenient.

Honestly, we don't know what is going to happen. Global warming could stop at a dead halt tomorrow.

The liklihood is that it isn't us at this point, so we will just have to go along for the ride the planet is taking us on.

[Nehkara]

From the website I posted:

3. Total human contributions to greenhouse gases account for only about 0.28% of the "greenhouse effect" (Figure 2). Anthropogenic (man-made) carbon dioxide (CO2) comprises about 0.117% of this total, and man-made sources of other gases ( methane, nitrous oxide (NOX), other misc. gases) contributes another 0.163% .

Approximately 99.72% of the "greenhouse effect" is due to natural causes -- mostly water vapor and traces of other gases, which we can do nothing at all about. Eliminating human activity altogether would have little impact on climate change.

[monkeyman]

Originally Posted by MelBridgeman

its not an interesting tidbit, it's the truth and of course there are some factions of society who would rather not let you know that

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2..._southpole.htm

http://www.space.com/scienceastronom..._011206-1.html

"Remember, though," adds Smith, "there are two polar caps on Mars--north and south. While the south polar cap is vaporizing the north polar cap is growing.

[Slanter]

Here's the Arctic sea ice extent as of today:



Note that the deepwater route through the northwest passage is open for the first time in at least five years (not sure if it's been open in the past few decades or not).

Here's a graph that shows the trend in arctic sea ice extent anomalies for the end of July...


Minimum sea ice extent occurs in september, so we still have a ways to go. Previous low was in 2005.... So to sum up, we're almost certainly going to have another record low year.

Take it how ever you want... I think it's a pretty strong indication of what we're doing.

[Nehkara]

Originally Posted by blankall

IF this is true and can be confirmed by more sources, it would be very interesting. Still doesn't explain the rate of glacier/iceberg melting we see in the poles.

A lot of glaciers are growing as well. How is that explained?

I'll tell you how: Regional climate change... same as always.

[Nehkara]

Originally Posted by Slanter

Here's the Arctic sea ice extent as of today:



Note that the deepwater route through the northwest passage is open for the first time in at least five years (not sure if it's been open in the past few decades or not).

Here's a graph that shows the trend in arctic sea ice extent anomalies for the end of July...


Minimum sea ice extent occurs in september, so we still have a ways to go. Previous low was in 2005.... So to sum up, we're almost certainly going to have another record low year.

Take it how ever you want... I think it's a pretty strong indication of what we're doing.

No it's not. It is an indication that the climate is changing, it is not an indication that we are doing it.

[worth]

Originally Posted by Slanter

Take it how ever you want... I think it's a pretty strong indication of what we're doing.

Sorry, but this is the most ridiculous comment in this thread.

How you can make that connection without any supporting evidence and without taking into consideration other variables is beyond me.

Just because temperatures are rising or ice is melting, and there are humans producing CO2 on the planet's surface, it's foolhardy science to come to the conclusion that humans are the cause of the problem.

[automaton 3]

Thanks for posting the graphs Nehkara. I took a class in World Climate in undergrad a few years back where we looked at similar historical numbers, and discussed the current warming trend - in the greater scheme of things it hardly even categorizes as a "blip" so far.

No question that the continued destruction of forests, burning of fossil fuels, pollution, ect. are all detrimental to the environment though.

[MaDMaN_26]

Very recently "the worlds leading climate scientist agreed" that global warming was a direct result of Humans burning fossil fuels...

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/...warming02.html

So one guy says hey these NASA numbers are wrong, it was a bit warmer in the 30's - and this report that came out in February is now completely blown away... is that what this thread is arguing?? The worlds scientists all used NASA's number and only their numbers... I don't buy it...

[Thunderball]

As funny as this may sound... I almost think people WISH that climate change was human activity related, so that efforts could be made to stop it. Right now, its essentially like riding towards a waterfall in a barrel... no idea how bad the fallout is gonna be, except that you know its coming and coming fast.