Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Geeze China and Africa seem to be the main ones causing Global warming They better shut down a few more coal power plants on the east coast....
Actually, I guess the problem is that the whole thing has been politicized. So that actually answers why all objectivity has left the building. I mean, you have to pick a side right? Red or blue? If you don't your just waisting your voice as a citizen. Nevermind
You know, I always have to wonder. According to scienctific theory the warmest period in the last million years was between 2,500 and 9,000 years ago and there is evidence of Antartica having been mapped without the ice caps. If that theory is true and the man-made global warming theory is also true. What did man do to cause that warming spell then correct to reverse it?
I'm not trying to be a smart-ass. I'm being sincere and honestly wondering why someone would buy in 100% to the theory without any question when there is evidence that there were much warmer times than what we see right now? It just seems that there are people 100% convinced it is real and those that are 100% convinced it is a hoax and that objectivity has been completely disregarded.
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2013/09/paleoclimate-the-end-of-the-holocene/What are your sources for the theories re the hottest period and mapping of antarctica? I'm not familiar with them.
Why do you assume that man had something to do with the previous warming period?
Man made global warming doesn't state that man is the only influence on climate.
A good test of objectivity is to ask some one what evidence would change their mind on the subject.
Like, how many e-mails indicating that inconvenient evidence inconsitent with the agenda need to be squelched woud need to be revealed before someone's mind were changed?
Or how many consecutive years of vritually unchanged temperatures in the satellite record would it take to suggest, at the very least, that we aren't on a runaway train to temperature disaster?
Or how many years of the "mainstream" scientific temperature models being wildly inaccurate?
If it is ever "de-bunked" it might alter my thinking.Or how many times does the email story have to be debunked before you quit trotting it out as if it proves something?
Do you accept the RSS satellite temperature records as accurate? Would a regression analysis of its data showing a significant warming trend change your mind?
If my belief in anthropogenic global warming relied "scientific temperature models" instead of basic physics years of wildly inaccurate models might change my mind. If such a thing existed.
It is energy balance plain and simple.
What are your sources for the theories re the hottest period and mapping of antarctica? I'm not familiar with them.
Why do you assume that man had something to do with the previous warming period?
Man made global warming doesn't state that man is the only influence on climate.
A good test of objectivity is to ask some one what evidence would change their mind on the subject.
I'm merely asking that people quit cheerleading for political parties
If it is ever "de-bunked" it might alter my thinking.
So, sys and pilt what are you two doing to correct this man made global warming thing? Surely you aren't just posting on a message board about this troublesome topic. Please let us know what you two are doing to correct this devastating problem, and what we can do to get behind you in your effort. I await your enlightned responses.
I don't assume, that was tongue in cheek. I was merely pointing out that there is evidence of very warm periods. So warm in fact, that ancient civilizations may have ventured much farther south that originally thought. There is enough there that both sides have plenty to consider in formulating an opinion. Instead, we see it being politiced and each side screaming "yay, team!".
However, we don't have facts, just theories based on a very limited model..
Therefore, I do not want government taking such information and running with it as an opportunity to sieze power on a national or global scale which will surely lead to the oppression people. I do however support local governments taking action with the consent of thier citizens and doing all they can to reduce pollution. All of us only benefit from a cleaner environment.
The word warming still is accurate, and people still call it that. Climate change came about because it is exhausting to have to explain over and over that global warming doesn't mean a uniform and uninterrupted increase in temperature.Like birthers? Really?
How about like those who conveniently changed from "global warming" to "climate change" when the word warming no longer accurately supported them agenda.
crickets
The warmest period over the last 12,000 years was from a 5-9,000 years ago, and the temperature anomaly was about 0.2C. 1986 was the last year that was that cool.
Can you point me to the information about ancient civilizations? Sounds interesting.
Facts:
CO2 is a green house gas.
Industrial activity has increased the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere.
Increasing green house gases in the atmosphere changes the radiative energy balance of the earth.
The earth's climate is sensitive to changes in energy balance.
I think you have to be careful since just like some people pick their position on climate change based on whether they are team blue or red, some people pick team blue or red based on their position on climate change.
Really good point, Dong! Wow, I just don't have an answer for that! I don't drive a prius, so I'll bet all those scientists are really lying and it's a big conspiracy.
I'm really glad you're weighing in on this. Any other good points you'd like to share?
Like birthers? Really?
How about like those who conveniently changed from "global warming" to "climate change" when the word warming no longer accurately supported them agenda.
Yeah, did you hear about those oncologists that conveniently TOTALLY changed their theories and treatments for cancer? Ha! Obviously charlatans!
BOOOOO to the scientific process!!!!! Here's to scientists never changing their minds!
Facts:
There have been many volcanic eruptions that have released more Co2 in one eruption than man has in his entire history.
Solar activity can directly effect the energy balance thus affecting the climate
Existing climate data based on actual occurances is a very small subset of data when you consider that it is based on roughly 100 years.
So as I stated, we have a very limited model and theories based on that model with nothing that can becalled 100% definitive. It seems as if you believe I am arguing against man having an effect. When in fact, I stated that I believe it is a combination of natural cycles and pollution accelerating the effect.
Not calling you a science denier, but you may be scientifically illiterate.Here's an article today highlighting a Duke study on global warming stating what Prof. Dyson has repeatedly said: The computer models are WRONG.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...t-changes-natural-variability-says-study.html
I don't think the volcano thing is true. Even the biggest volcanic eruptions in history released CO2 on a ~100 megaton scale. Humans on a yearly basis release ~25 gigatons.
In science the only facts are those which have already occurred and are provable by withstanding scientific scrutiny. Everything else is speculation.Not calling you a science denier, but you may be scientifically illiterate.
"The research claims that natural variability in surface temperatures over the course of a decade can account for increases and dips in warming rates. But it adds that these so-called 'climate wiggles' could also, in the future, cause our planet to warm up much faster than anticipated."
"By comparing our model against theirs, we found that climate models largely get the 'big picture' right but seem to underestimate the magnitude of natural decade-to-decade climate wiggles,' Brown said."