Global Warming

[USMC the Almighty]

That proves nothing because all gases are different. Less CO2 doesn't mean it's not a lot. Actually 370 ppm is a lot of carbon dioxide. I suggest taking a chemistry class.

My point exactly. With that much CO2 already in the atmosphere, believing that humans can affect the temperature of the globe that much is laughable.

1 degree is a lot, and the temperature is rising exponentially because the rate at which it rises is also going up. Did you look at my graphs?

Yes, and they are estimates. First, how do we know what the temperatures were 1000 years ago? They're estimates based on computer models which as I noted, are poor at predicting temperature and climate changes. Secondly, one of your models guesses that earth's temperature has risen about .7 degrees in 100 years. Is it me or does that seem remarkably consistent?

1 degree isn't the margin of error. Where did you get that?

I picked it up from one of the dozens of articles and books I've read on this topic.

Actually it doesn't, because they have temperature stations everywhere and simply average them every year.

Temperature stations every square inch? Mile? Every country? Continent? Asserting that taking the earth's temperature does not required limited precision and some guesswork is just comical.

Except global warming has been proven and isn't the same as a disease epidemic because it doesn't pass. And if scientists were funded by the government they would discredit global warming because Bush doesn't want to admit he was wrong.

Of course it can just pass. Look at your models. There are no straight lines. It behaves in a cyclical motion. To treat every change in temperature or climate as directly relating to the actions of humans and something to fret about is ridiculous.

Global warming doesn't help crops grow. In the short term the rise in CO2 helps the quantity (though diminishes the quality) of crops, but changes in rainfall and more storms caused by this very same rise will greatly hurt agriculture. Also many crops in Africa are already straining to thrive because of high temperature and little rainfall, and global warming would make this worse.

Higher temperatures? Haha, it's 1 degree over 100 years at most. It's also nteresting that you note crops in California are "straining to thrive because of" record low temperatures and wildly uncommon freezing temperatures.

You never provided evidence that global warming isn't happening.

Because I'm not sure yet. 1 degree over 100 years doesn't seem like something to get all frantic about. Earth's climate is always changing and there is nothing we can do about it. Earth can just as easily swing into an ice age. Pesonally, I'd take a little warming over an ice age. Any day.

 

[USMC the Almighty]

Source? I'd like to see the logic behind this ridiculous statement.

Just google or wikipedia it. You'll find hundreds of papers supporting my theory.

 

[USMC the Almighty]

How do you explain this graph and the rise in temperature then?

I'm pretty sure you didn't read my post before blindly copying your graph. The graph validates my point. I'll repost it:

And Earth can just as easily take a turn for the colder.

A general characteristic of your is to assiduously ignore the fact that the earth and its climate are dynamic; they are always changing even without any external forcing. To treat all change as something to fear is bad enough.

People who blame humans for global warming do not understand the natural internal variability of climate change.

Paraphrased from Richard Lindzen, Professor of Atmospheric Science at MIT.

 

[USMC the Almighty]

In the short term the rise in CO2 helps the quantity (though diminishes the quality) of crops, but changes in rainfall and more storms caused by this very same rise will greatly hurt agriculture.

If the models are correct, global warming reduces the temperature differences between the poles and the equator. When you have less difference in temperature, you have less excitation of extratropical storms, not more. Claims for starkly higher temperatures are based upon there being more humidity, not less--hardly a case for more storminess with global warming.

 

[saggyjones]

My point exactly. With that much CO2 already in the atmosphere, believing that humans can affect the temperature of the globe that much is laughable.

We put all that CO2 in the air. Did you look at my graph of CO2 output, or are you ignoring everything I post?

Yes, and they are estimates. First, how do we know what the temperatures were 1000 years ago? They're estimates based on computer models which as I noted, are poor at predicting temperature and climate changes. Secondly, one of your models guesses that earth's temperature has risen about .7 degrees in 100 years. Is it me or does that seem remarkably consistent?

You are truly the most naive and uneducated person about global warming I have ever met. You deny facts unless they agree with you and you can't see the impact of a small temperature change over time. There's no point in arguing with you because in my book you are an impossible person. But I'll argue anyway because I care about our planet.

I picked it up from one of the dozens of articles and books I've read on this topic.

Such as?

Temperature stations every square inch? Mile? Every country? Continent? Asserting that taking the earth's temperature does not required limited precision and some guesswork is just comical.

Once again you are denying facts that even those on your side don't deny.

Of course it can just pass. Look at your models. There are no straight lines. It behaves in a cyclical motion. To treat every change in temperature or climate as directly relating to the actions of humans and something to fret about is ridiculous.

If you look at the past ice age cycles and see the one now it's way above the norm.

Higher temperatures? Haha, it's 1 degree over 100 years at most. It's also nteresting that you note crops in California are "straining to thrive because of" record low temperatures and wildly uncommon freezing temperatures.[/QUOTE\

Once again you fail to see the impact of 1 degree.

When did I mention California? Africa is not the same as California.

Because I'm not sure yet. 1 degree over 100 years doesn't seem like something to get all frantic about. Earth's climate is always changing and there is nothing we can do about it. Earth can just as easily swing into an ice age. Pesonally, I'd take a little warming over an ice age. Any day.

here are some global warming effects

 

[saggyjones]

Just google or wikipedia it. You'll find hundreds of papers supporting my theory.

Why don't you give me some sources, since it's your point? I think you can't find any and you're trying to get away from it.

 

[saggyjones]

I'm pretty sure you didn't read my post before blindly copying your graph. The graph validates my point. I'll repost it:

And Earth can just as easily take a turn for the colder.

A general characteristic of your is to assiduously ignore the fact that the earth and its climate are dynamic; they are always changing even without any external forcing. To treat all change as something to fear is bad enough.

People who blame humans for global warming do not understand the natural internal variability of climate change.

Paraphrased from Richard Lindzen, Professor of Atmospheric Science at MIT.

If you look at the cycles of ice ages our temperature now is much higher than it's ever been. Once again you are denying facts and assuming that the earth spontaneously changes temperature.

If not humans, what do you attribute the massive rise in CO2 and temperature (which are directly proportional by the way) to?

 

[saggyjones]

If the models are correct, global warming reduces the temperature differences between the poles and the equator. When you have less difference in temperature, you have less excitation of extratropical storms, not more. Claims for starkly higher temperatures are based upon there being more humidity, not less--hardly a case for more storminess with global warming.

Source for this?

 

[USMC the Almighty]

If not humans, what do you attribute the massive rise in CO2 and temperature (which are directly proportional by the way) to?

(a) no they're not directly proportional.

(b) I attribute the slight "warming" to the sun, earth's naturally dynamic climate, etc.

 

[USMC the Almighty]

So you stop crying "source" everytime you don't have a comeback, I'm going to lay out the majority of sources that I used:

http://upi.com/NewsTrack/view.php?StoryID=20051110-083624-9769r
http://www.skepticism.net/articles/2002/000033.html
http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110008597
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/07/the_real_inconvenient_truth.html
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ar...s/2006/06/why_liberals_fear_global_warmi.html
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/?page=article&Article_ID=2319
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/tyne/5283278.stm
http://eddriscoll.com/archives/008880.php
http://boortz.com/nuze/200610/10092006.html#hurricane
http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2006/s2720.htm
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/...0907.xml&sSheet=/news/2006/04/09/ixworld.html
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/03/0306_060307_sunspots.html
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/?page=article&Article_ID=2703
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060111/sc_nm/environment_methane_dc
http://www.ncpa.org/ba/ba230.html
http://www.free-eco.org/articleDisplay.php?id=294
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/?page=article&Article_ID=2526
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A53178-2002Mar19&notFound=true
http://techcentralstation.com/062802B.html
http://www.ph.net/htdocs/pinatubo/index.html
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7915
http://www.hudson.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=publication_details&id=3539
http://www.hudson.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=publication_details&id=3583
http://www.infoplease.com/spot/disaster2.html


Global Warming on Mars: Those Aliens and Their Damn SUVs
http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=17977&CFID=5195862&CFTOKEN=90852445

 

[saggyjones]

(a) no they're not directly proportional.

Proof? Because I have some.

The increase in temperature is linearly proportional to the greenhouse gas levels.

http://brneurosci.org/co2.html

(b) I attribute the slight "warming" to the sun, earth's naturally dynamic climate, etc.

It's not a slight warming, as my graphs (which you deny for some unknown reason) show.

So you think the earth is spontaneously warming for no reason? And that past cycles mean nothing? That doesn't seem very logical?

 

[saggyjones]

So you stop crying "source" everytime you don't have a comeback, I'm going to lay out the majority of sources that I used:

http://upi.com/NewsTrack/view.php?StoryID=20051110-083624-9769r
http://www.skepticism.net/articles/2002/000033.html
http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110008597
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/07/the_real_inconvenient_truth.html
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ar...s/2006/06/why_liberals_fear_global_warmi.html
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/?page=article&Article_ID=2319
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/tyne/5283278.stm
http://eddriscoll.com/archives/008880.php
http://boortz.com/nuze/200610/10092006.html#hurricane
http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2006/s2720.htm
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/...0907.xml&sSheet=/news/2006/04/09/ixworld.html
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/03/0306_060307_sunspots.html
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/?page=article&Article_ID=2703
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060111/sc_nm/environment_methane_dc
http://www.ncpa.org/ba/ba230.html
http://www.free-eco.org/articleDisplay.php?id=294
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/?page=article&Article_ID=2526
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A53178-2002Mar19&notFound=true
http://techcentralstation.com/062802B.html
http://www.ph.net/htdocs/pinatubo/index.html
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7915
http://www.hudson.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=publication_details&id=3539
http://www.hudson.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=publication_details&id=3583
http://www.infoplease.com/spot/disaster2.html


Global Warming on Mars: Those Aliens and Their Damn SUVs
http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=17977&CFID=5195862&CFTOKEN=90852445

Half of those are opinion websites with the same reasoning as you, a quarter are irrelevant, and the rest are from a very small % of scientists.

 

[USMC the Almighty]

Proof?


It's not a slight warming, as my graphs (which you deny for some unknown reason) show.

Most of the climate community has agreed since 1988 that global mean temperatures have increased on the order of one degree Fahrenheit over the past century, having risen significantly from about 1919 to 1940, decreased between 1940 and the early '70s, increased again until the '90s, and remaining essentially flat since 1998.

People who blame humans for global warming do not understand the natural internal variability of climate change.

- Mr. Lindzen, Professor of Atmospheric Science at MIT.

So you think the earth is spontaneously warming for no reason? And that past cycles mean nothing? That doesn't seem very logical?

The Cooling World
Newsweek, April 28, 1975

 

[palerider]

If you look at the cycles of ice ages our temperature now is much higher than it's ever been. Once again you are denying facts and assuming that the earth spontaneously changes temperature.

I am afraid that you are way off base there. The average mean temperature of the earth now is positively chilly compared to the average global mean of the history of the earth. Here is a simple (but accurate) graph showing the temperature cycles that the earth has gone through over the past 600 million years or so. Atmospheric CO2 concentrations are also shown.

You will note that the average mean temperature of the earth across its history is so warm that ice did not exist at one or both of the poles. You will also note that our atmospheric CO2 concentrations of 400 ppm make the present atmosphere seem positively CO2 starved when compared to past concentrations during both warm and cold cycles.

The fact is that the earth warms and the earth cools and we don't have a clear understanding of the mechanics. We have been exiting the present ice age for a very long time and to date, I haven't seen one whit of evidence that would suggest that we are exiting this ice age in a different manner than the past ice ages.

 

[saggyjones]

Most of the climate community has agreed since 1988 that global mean temperatures have increased on the order of one degree Fahrenheit over the past century, having risen significantly from about 1919 to 1940, decreased between 1940 and the early '70s, increased again until the '90s, and remaining essentially flat since 1998.

People who blame humans for global warming do not understand the natural internal variability of climate change.

- Mr. Lindzen, Professor of Atmospheric Science at MIT.



The Cooling World
Newsweek, April 28, 1975

You didn't answer my question. What is causing the warming?