RE: Climat Change is not a commie myth.
April 30, 2013 at 3:03 pm
(This post was last modified: April 30, 2013 at 3:19 pm by A_Nony_Mouse.)
(April 30, 2013 at 10:00 am)orogenicman Wrote:(April 30, 2013 at 2:06 am)Godschild Wrote: Hey guys I was just repeating what the news networks were saying. I agree somethings going on, like I said I've noticed a change in the suns effect on my skin over the years and yes I know it's been warmer over the last several years, I use to work outside a lot. I just do not know what's causing the warming and scientist are not in total agreement either. But here it is nearly the first of May and another snowstorm heading across the mid-west. So what's next.
Most scientists do, in fact, have an understanding of the greenhouse effect (a demonstrable natural phenomenon), and agree that you cannot pump 6 billion tons and increasing of GHGs into the world's atmosphere every year and have no effect on the atmosphere. The atmosphere does not exist in isolation from humanity. They are having measurable negative effects. And given the fact that the Carbon cycle takes about 100 years to go full circle, those effects will be around with us for quite some time to come.
Scientists also know that if one builds two greenhouses one with IR reflecting glass and the other without the effect is the same. That means trapped IR is not the cause of the increased temperature of a greenhouse.
According to New Scientist 4 June 2011 pg 6 the human contribution in 2010 for CO2 emissions 30.6 GT up 1.6GT from 2009, G as in giga as in billion tons.
If one prefers "secular" sources this number was repeated in a New York Times article, 12/08/14 31.6 GT human in 2011.
Sure sounds awfuller than the 6GT you mention. But the total atmospheric CO2 750-830 GT making the uncertainty 80GT about +/-5% +/-40GT. One must note the human contribution per year is less than the uncertainty.
If the human contribution were cumulative we can do the following.
As CO2 makes up only 0.03% of the atmosphere this means roughly a 0.04% increase in CO2 per year or or 0.0001% increase in total atmospheric CO2.
Quote:
(April 30, 2013 at 9:56 am)Aractus Wrote: Yes I believe I posted a picture of that letter from the IPCC above for contributing to the award, FYI it's not a joint award - it's an award awarded to the IPCC.
And I don't need to refute any science. In fact I don't even understand why you said that?
In fact, it was a joint award given to the authors of the 2007 IPCC climate report and Al Gore. Mann was one of those authors, and received a certificate from the IPCC in recognition of his efforts that contributed to the award, as were all the other authors. End of story.
Of course you don't need to refute any science. Given that it is highly doubtful that you could argue the issue with a 10 year old, I can understand your reluctance.
To assume that a peace prize, Nobel or otherwise, has any bearing upon the science involved is to assume Peres, Arafat and Kissinger and Ho Chi Minh were the supreme advocates of peace. As the peace prize barely addresses peace the suggestion it supports any science at all is ludicrous.
(April 30, 2013 at 1:19 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote:(April 29, 2013 at 9:31 pm)A_Nony_Mouse Wrote: Remember the Romans grew Mediterranean grapes in Britain. While I expect the quality of the wine was commensurate with the food I have not heard of any such vineyards reopening. However I have read the temperatures in Britain declined from 1940 to 1975 and are now back where they were in 1940.
.
Actually we've had wine grown here since the 1960s.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wine_from_t...ed_Kingdom
While I generally reject that source for being anonymous, it is good to know it is finally getting back to the climate it had 2000 years ago when the Romans were burning so much fossil fuel.
Quote:England has actually experienced cooler weather because of global warming shifting the jet stream and may become as cold as moscow if the North Atlantic current is turned off by de-salination of hese aaround he Arctic.
Global warming may lead to local cooling.
That invented save even lead one crackpot to claim warming could result in an ice age. I am sorry but anyone claiming global warming leads to cooling is going to have to give me the definitions of both warming and cooling they are using.
As to shutting of the GULF not jet stream that is no more than a hypothetical from years ago which has since been rejected one grounds of 1) not that simple and 2) if the Arctic melting stops tomorrow the inertial will continue the flow for a thousand years.
