Global Warming

[Area 51]

Oh man, I want to say something but I promised not to. Thanks for the chuckle though.

[XFBO]

Originally Posted by Area 51

Oh man, I want to say something but I promised not to. Thanks for the chuckle though.

Oh brother, the drama queen is back!!!
Go ahead Area51....... did you really think any of us logical free thinking rational members here believed you'd be gone for good? LOL!

Goodbye for good, Lounge, Ill never ever look back again so dont bother looking for me. LOL!

[cutter]

Originally Posted by sburns2421

The original topic of this thread was not if the Earth is warming, or if humans contributed. The question is whether humans are the LEADING cause (and therefore could lead the cure as well).

Is the straw that broke the camels back the leading cause for broken camel backs?

Scientifically it is very doable that we can slow(if not stop) global warming if we take action now, the longer we wait, the more extreme the change is going to have to be.

Here is a link to show a scientific analysis on how much humans are contributing to global warming.
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=87

Over the last 150 years, carbon dioxide (CO2) concentrations have risen from 280 to nearly 380 parts per million (ppm). The fact that this is due virtually entirely to human activities is so well established that one rarely sees it questioned. Yet it is quite reasonable to ask how we know this.



One way that we know that human activities are responsible for the increased CO2 is simply by looking at historical records of human activities. Since the industrial revolution, we have been burning fossil fuels and clearing and burning forested land at an unprecedented rate, and these processes convert organic carbon into CO2. Careful accounting of the amount of fossil fuel that has been extracted and combusted, and how much land clearing has occurred, shows that we have produced far more CO2 than now remains in the atmosphere. The roughly 500 billion metric tons of carbon we have produced is enough to have raised the atmospheric concentration of CO2 to nearly 500 ppm. The concentrations have not reached that level because the ocean and the terrestrial biosphere have the capacity to absorb some of the CO2 we produce.* However, it is the fact that we produce CO2 faster than the ocean and biosphere can absorb it that explains the observed increase.

[nero]

Originally Posted by sburns2421

The original topic of this thread was not if the Earth is warming, or if humans contributed. The question is whether humans are the LEADING cause (and therefore could lead the cure as well).

thank you...
That was my original topic of discussion.

Virtually no one at all debates that Earth is warming,
The debate focuses widely about:
1- "how much", and if it is a problem at all ???
2.- is man (technology) the major cause, or is it part of normal Earth dynamics ?

Like many debates today it has grown into one of idealogical themes and "goes political" real fast !

[DanST4]

There's a direct correlation between solar output (intensity) and the Earth's temperature. The sun's output has been increasing for many years. However for the past three years solar output has actually decreased, and for the past three years the Earth's temperature has not gone up.

We don't hear much about this relationship, well except from atmospheric specialists studying solar intensity.

No I do not have a non-FOX link.

[998Junkie]

Originally Posted by DanST4

No I do not have a non-FOX link.

I'll take a Fox link if you got it.

[cutter]

Originally Posted by DanST4

There's a direct correlation between solar output (intensity) and the Earth's temperature. The sun's output has been increasing for many years. However for the past three years solar output has actually decreased, and for the past three years the Earth's temperature has not gone up.

We don't hear much about this relationship, well except from atmospheric specialists studying solar intensity.

No I do not have a non-FOX link.

Hmnn, interesting, it's the middle of January in MN and there is no snow on the ground, and we have broken many records for how warm it's been in the recent past, but I guess if you say it's not getting any warmer I'll believe you.

[DanST4]

Originally Posted by cutter

Hmnn, interesting, it's the middle of January in MN and there is no snow on the ground, and we have broken many records for how warm it's been in the recent past, but I guess if you say it's not getting any warmer I'll believe you.

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN GLOBAL WARMING AND CLIMATE CHANGE

Climate Change—Beyond Withering Weather

Climate change is about much more than how warm or cool our temperatures are. Whereas "global warming" refers to increasing global temperatures, "climate change" refers to regional conditions. Climate is defined by a number of factors, including:

• Average regional temperature as well as day/night temperature patterns and seasonal temperature patterns.
• Humidity.
• Precipitation (average amounts and seasonal patterns).
• Average amount of sunshine and level of cloudiness.
• Air pressure and winds.
• Storm events (type, average number per year, and seasonal patterns).

To a great extent, this is what we think of as "weather." Indeed, weather patterns are predicted to change in response to global warming:

• some areas will become drier, some will become wetter;
• many areas will experience an increase in severe weather events like killer heat waves, hurricanes, flood-level rains, and hail storms.

[DanST4]

There are a zillion links on Google. Just search for Solar Output vs Global Warming. I'm certain many of your friends on this site will immediately blow holes in any link that shows any relationship between solar output and global warming. But take a look for the fun of it.



From this graph, we deduce that the increase in the intensity of solar radiation received by Earth coincides with the increase in the global tropospheric temperature. The line of temperatures deduced from the analysis of boreholes, trees’ rings, Oxygen isotopes, etc., also matches with the measurements made by thermometers on ground (from 1900 to 2006). The line that definitively does not match up is the line of CO2 concentration, especially for the Medieval Period, when the temperature varied positively in more than 0.6 C, while the CO2 kept on low levels.

[DanST4]

This comparative graph about the effects of Solar Irradiance (SI) upon Tropospheric Temperature (TT) versus Carbon Dioxide (CO2) upon TT clearly demonstrates that the observed Δ TT depends almost exclusively of the SI, instead of on the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere.

The red shaded area in the graph indicates the deviation of the TT observed in nature with respect to the expected temperatures from the algorithm applied by the IPCC that was adopted for delineating the Kyoto Protocol (:: Δ TT - :: Δ [CO2]). The discrepancy between the real Δ TT is 1.124, which is a very high uncertainty that allows us to reject the hypothesis about the anthropogenic cause of the increase in the atmospheric CO2 and the Global Warming.

Something extremely important, evidenced by this graph, is that the CO2 concentration began to increase during the Maunder Minimum, perhaps by the great amount of atmospheric dust that obstructed the solar light until reaching the photosynthetic systems with an adequate intensity or a specific wavelength for the process. When the increase of CO2 started, there were neither automobiles nor human industries, and the world human population was very small (about 100 million persons in the world).

[DanST4]

WILL 2007 BE WARMER THAN 2006?

At the beginning of the last year, Jim Hansen said the same about 2006; he was wrong, 2006 was the coldest year in the last five years. If you analyze the note from the newspapers you will find that the prognosis also was endorsed by this Democrat personage, Jim Hansen. But this is not the significant issue. Simply, we cannot predict systematically that 2007 will be a year hotter than 2006.

We can advance that 2007 COULD BE a warmer year than 2006 by the influence of El Niño because, according to our observations, the years with El Niño have been warmer than the years without the natural El Niño Oceanic Oscillation (ENSO). In the news it is also mentioned that everything obeys to the “Global Warming caused by the Greenhouse Gases produced by human activities”; nevertheless, that is tendentious and false information given that the phenomenon El Niño does not have any association with the “Global Warming”, nor with the “Climate Change”.

Perhaps you have already noticed that NASA prognosticated a more powerful solar period than the previous periods observed of Solar Activity (read the note here: http://science.nasa.gov). This makes the history or “prediction” of Jim Hansen and his associates to be a truculent and untrustworthy note because people know that the Sun is the source of energy for the whole Solar System.

Judith Lean made a reconstruction of the Intensity of the Solar Radiation for NOAA and she found that for the last 400 years the Intensity has been increasing considerably (0.202%). The change found by Judith Lean was 3.27 W*square meter. From the experimental data, the terrestrial tropospheric temperature increases 0.175 C by each W*square meter emitted by the Sun or coming from the Interstellar Medium, which would totalize a change of 0.61 C, a change that coincides with the change experienced by the atmospheric temperature (0.62 C) in the last 400 years.

Live unafraid. We think that we must stop the pollution, the deforestation, etc.; but we must not to say lies nor distort science for terrifying the people.

[DanST4]

Here's the link to the above article. Pretty hot that 2006 huh? Well, no it wasn't. In fact 2006 has been one of the coldest years since 1997.

Or so they say... I am not a scientist and I cannot go out and take atmospheric temperature readings to verify the data.

[sburns2421]

Originally Posted by cutter

Hmnn, interesting, it's the middle of January in MN and there is no snow on the ground, and we have broken many records for how warm it's been in the recent past, but I guess if you say it's not getting any warmer I'll believe you.

It is interesting, because Colorado/Kansas/Missouri are having their worst winter in many, many years. A few weeks ago we had 4 inches of ice with a foot of snow on top of it. This weekend two inches of ice is forecasted.

Last winter I drove my XK8 every day without problems, it was a very mild winter.

[DanST4]

Dec. 21, 2006: Evidence is mounting: the next solar cycle is going to be a big one.



Solar cycle 24, due to peak in 2010 or 2011 "looks like its going to be one of the most intense cycles since record-keeping began almost 400 years ago," says solar physicist David Hathaway of the Marshall Space Flight Center. He and colleague Robert Wilson presented this conclusion last week at the American Geophysical Union meeting in San Francisco.

[998Junkie]

Federal Way schools restrict Gore film
'Inconvenient Truth' called too controversial

Condoms don't belong in school, and neither does Al Gore. He's not a schoolteacher," said Frosty Hardison, a parent of seven who also said that he believes the Earth is 14,000 years old. "The information that's being presented is a very cockeyed view of what the truth is. ... The Bible says that in the end times everything will burn up, but that perspective isn't in the DVD.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/...ml?source=mypi

[mtmansl]

From what I heard on the radio, his movie was being taught as incontrovertible fact in other schools, which pissed some parents off. I would be a little upset as well, if I was a parent there. I am suprised he couldn't just send it through the internet though, seeing how he invented it and all.


Matthew

Originally Posted by 998Junkie

Federal Way schools restrict Gore film
'Inconvenient Truth' called too controversial



http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/...ml?source=mypi

[mtmansl]

More evidence of global warming...


http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?se...cal&id=4929652

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070113/D8MK2L380.html

http://vortex.plymouth.edu/uschill.gif

[nero]

Good stuff those charts Danst4...

That's what I think of when I hear the term "scientific data".
Not Al Gore's booming rhetoric.

[XFBO]

Found more proof on how bad this Global Warming epidemic is getting!

Ppl start making your peace now with your fello man.

http://www.weather.com/maps/news/sev...ain_large.html

[Le Kiwi]

As I sit here in the warm Winter sun, watching the "migrating" birds flying in circles (The Clash's "Should I stay or should I go" comes to mind here..) and watching the Spring flowers growing, I would like to add a couple of links that the more thoughtful people may find interesting.

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/science/pastcc.html

and an interesting one about "Solar flairs and activity" being MORE responsable than Humans on eventual Global Warming.

http://solar-center.stanford.edu/sun...glob-warm.html

This is pretty clear and concise, and has a great links section. A few less charts to baffle you with, but very well presented.