The Time to Act Is Now- A great read about Global warming

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

I fully expect to get flames here because I do not have the "politically correct" position on the issue.....

some people get flames regardless

I went out this morning and sprayed 5 aerosol cans in the air. Didn't work, It's still -6F.

Still waiting on that global warming, I'd looking to raise property values in Canada

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[ReBirth 0]

Quote

Second sentence starts..."It is now clear......"

It is not clear.

It's clear to virtually every scientific expert in the world. Lay people may argue about it, but that doesn't mean it's not clear. It means they are mistaken.

[gemini 0]

Quote

It's clear to virtually every scientific expert in the world.

Do you have any support for this statement or is it your opinion? I would like a list of the "experts" please.

Quote

Lay people may argue about it, but that doesn't mean it's not clear. It means they are mistaken.

So people who disagree with an issue are mistaken and need to be corrected? Or do they not believe what is being presented as fact?

Blue skies,

Jim

[ReBirth 0]

Quote

I would like a list of the "experts" please.

Open the phone book and look up "Environmental Scientist" Or start here.

No, I've never personally seen a list. But I know people in the field. I'm basing that statement on what they say, what I've read and heard and seen over my lifetime. How about you give me a list of people that dispute it...that are experts in that field. The only people I see claiming it's not clear, are politicians or their supporters, not scientists.

Quote

So people who disagree with an issue are mistaken and need to be corrected? Or do they not believe what is being presented as fact?

In the middle. No, it's not proven fact, it is theory. But it is theory, that virtually all scientists in that field agree with. The people arguing against do so with a lack of expertise and experience on the subject. Sure, there's a slim possibility that all the experts are wrong. You want to bet on it? I don't.

[gemini 0]

Quote

But it is theory, that virtually all scientists in that field agree with. The people arguing against do so with a lack of expertise and experience on the subject.

I don't think either of these statements are true. You keep saying "virtually all" scientists, but the artiocles I have read state the opposite and insist that true global warming caused by mankind is a myth, or at best a theory that does not include sufficient variables to generate reliable answers.

I still owe Bill a few graphs so I will add your request for a list even though you don't have one to give me.

Blue skies,

Jim

[billvon 3,111]

>All of this is based on flawed computer models adjusted to raise the issue . . .

The reason no one buys this line any more is that Alaskans can look out their windows and see proof, right there in front of them, that it's not just a computer model changing.

>Also, those same gloom and doomers keep trying to get somebody,
>hell anybody to say the hurricanes are caused by global warming . ..

No one has said that "global warming causes hurricanes." What causes hurricanes is pretty well understood; warm water below and cool air above. We had a very warm N. Atlantic ocean this year, so we got a lot of hurricanes. Warmer oceans will lead to more frequent and more intense hurricanes. That's not really disputable unless you get into tinfoil hat territory.

[Diversgodown 0]

You should really really read a book by Michael Criton. Called State of Fear. very educational and lots of scientific facts...

***Glory Favors the Bold***

[billvon 3,111]

>the artiocles I have read state the opposite and insist that true
>global warming caused by mankind is a myth . . ..

I have read articles claiming that evolution is a myth, that we never landed on the moon, and that the Holocaust never happened.

Some activists have learned that people are getting a bit more sophisticated in their judgements on crazy theories. So they are starting to add pseudoscience to their arsenal of snappy sayings, soundbites and dogmatic statements. Thus people come up with "intelligent design" and write papers about the complexity of the genome and how it would have taken a designer to do all that. They come up with "solar variability" and write papers about how that's really causing global warming. They do psychological analyses on how a group of people can be brainwashed into thinking that six million people were actually killed. Heck, they often even stick a PhD in there somewhere to make it "real." Then, when someone says "that sounds a bit unsupportable to me" they produce a paper, and say "See? Right here? PhD!"

(Not saying you're crazy, just that some extremists are - and there are surely extremists in the global warming/evolution debates who believe they must 'win' at any and all costs.)

[billvon 3,111]

>You should really really read a book by Michael Criton. Called
>State of Fear. very educational and lots of scientific facts...

I think it's scary that some people think this is a fact based book.

But if we're going by those standards - ever see the Day after Tomorrow?

[Diversgodown 0]

Quote

>You should really really read a book by Michael Criton. Called
>State of Fear. very educational and lots of scientific facts...

I think it's scary that some people think this is a fact based book.

But if we're going by those standards - ever see the Day after Tomorrow?

If you read it did you notice all the astriks that refer to actuall scientific studies and research, or did you just look at the pictures..

***Glory Favors the Bold***

[kallend 2,146]

Quote

You should really really read a book by Michael Criton. Called State of Fear. very educational and lots of scientific facts...

It's a novel! And the premise that a tsunami can be blamed on human activiity is just plain absurd. "Timeline" was better.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Diversgodown 0]

Quote

Quote

You should really really read a book by Michael Criton. Called State of Fear. very educational and lots of scientific facts...

It's a novel! And the premise that a tsunami can be blamed on human activiity is just plain absurd. "Timeline" was better.

I must have missed that part. Where did it state that a tsunami was caused by human activity??? Who is Timeline by..

***Glory Favors the Bold***

[Darius11 12]

Quote

You should really really read a book by Michael Criton. Called State of Fear. very educational and lots of scientific facts...

Lets see do I trust 2000 international scientists or one guy who is following an agenda?

Quote

DR. RALPH CICERONE In 2001, after 2,000 international scientists issued a landmark report concluding that climate change is a man-made problem, the White House flatly rejected the resounding global consensus, demanding "information based on science." Casting suspicion on the work of foreign scientists, President Bush called for a report by America's elite scientific institution, the National Academy of Sciences -- referring the issue to an NAS panel that included leading skeptics intent on refuting the conclusive evidence of global warming.
But Bush didn't count on Ralph Cicerone. An atmospheric chemist who has spent decades computing pollution levels around the world, Cicerone put up a formidable fight against the skeptics -- and won. The NAS published a corroboration of the international report, broadcasting the message that scientists will not serve as apologists for the president. "It took incredible courage," says Stephen Schneider, a climate expert at Stanford University. "Ralph's team refused to buckle under pressure from the administration." Faced with the panel's strong conclusions, Bush had no choice but to publicly admit to the overwhelming evidence that humanity is causing climate change, even as his administration fails to address it.

Before opting for a career in science, Cicerone played varsity baseball at MIT and was offered a job as a radio announcer for the San Diego Padres. Having spent decades collecting greenhouse-gas samples from sources as varied as tailpipes, rice paddies and cow pastures, Cicerone has proved to be a remarkably savvy political operative. He opposed Bush's ouster of Robert Watson from a U.N. panel on climate change, claiming it would "greatly reduce the emphasis on science." And in June, when Rep. Joe Barton demanded an investigation to discredit three scientists whose data confirmed global warming, Cicerone denounced the move as "intimidating" and demanded that it be halted.

To Cicerone, 62, the politics of global warming seem simpler than the science. "I can't emphasize enough how complicated the climate system is," he says. "So to see all the evidence that has come together recently is staggering. And despite all the political polarization around the issue of climate change, there is more serious interest in it than I have ever seen. That revs me up."

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[billvon 3,111]

>If you read it did you notice all the astriks that refer to actuall scientific studies . . .

Yep. Some of his references include:

Temperature readings from single stations that have shown cooling trends. There are something like ten thousand monitored weather sites in the world; it's easy to find 10 that show whatever you want them to show. It's the AVERAGE that's important, and he glosses over that.

Sea level change analyses. So far sea level changes have been pretty minor because the ice that's been melting has been in the water, and when you melt icebergs the sea level doesn't change. The melt is getting farther and farther inland, though, and once you start melting land ice, you get a pretty rapid increase in sea level change. That's omitted.

He also says some stuff that's just plain wrong. He claims that a Dr. Hansen, one of the earliest proponents of global warming, overestimated its effects by 300%. He did not. He presented three graphs; a best case, worst case and nominal. We're pretty close to the nominal now. His worst case graph showed 300% greater warming.

He claims that higher temperature means more water vapor in the air and therefore fewer clouds. The opposite is true. He also claims that croplands are warmer than forests overall. The opposite is true.

His general point in the author's afterword is that "since we don't know everything about climate change, we know nothing about climate change." That's a silly attitude. If we applied that to medicine, we'd just let sick patients die - after all, if we don't know everything about medicine, how do we know that chemotherapy, or antibiotics, or even asprin, really work beyond a shadow of a doubt? Heck, we don't really know how aspirin works at a basic level. Best not use it then!

But all that's sort of beside the point. It's a novel. It's not meant to be a serious work of science. It is meant to make the author money. If you want a serious piece on global warming, read Nature.

[Darius11 12]

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/_/id/8742359

Quote

JOHN MCCAIN AND JOE LIEBERMAN For a politician, Sen. John McCain doesn't sound very optimistic about staving off global warming. "We're making great progress," he says, "but I'm not convinced that we are going to devise solutions in time to prevent serious damage to the environment."
Not that McCain isn't doing his part. At a time when some Republicans in Congress dismiss global warming as a "hoax" perpetrated by environmentalists, McCain and Sen. Joe Lieberman have forged a bipartisan counterassault to tackle the crisis. The Climate Stewardship Act, which they introduced in 2003, is the only bill that seeks to force American industry to reduce its total emission of greenhouse gases. Under the measure -- modeled on the market-based program which successfully reduced acid rain in the 1990s -- businesses that exceed a federal cap on emissions would be permitted to buy pollution "credits" from companies that cut their output of CO2. "It's an ingenious solution in which polluters are paying pioneers to innovate," says Lieberman.

Although the Senate has twice rejected the measure, McCain and Lieberman have held repeated hearings on the issue, exposing the tactics of their opponents. In one of the most memorable sessions, McCain shot down fellow Republicans who were brandishing a statement signed by "experts" on climate science -- pointing out that Perry Mason and a Spice Girl were among the signatories.

The Bush administration also refuses to support a mandatory cap on climate-warming pollution, arguing for voluntary limits. Lieberman, 63, calls the president's do-nothing approach "monumental negligence," while McCain, 69, attacks it as "disgraceful." But the deadlock will continue, they say, as long as Congress and the White House remain under the influence of polluting industries. In 2004 alone, the energy industry contributed nearly $38 million to congressional candidates.

"We see governors and mayors across the nation taking action on climate change, and yet here in Washington, the special interests rule," says McCain. "But they won't rule forever."

Sad what some will do to hide the truth

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[billvon 3,111]

>Where did it state that a tsunami was caused by human activity???

That's what the bad guys (NERF? something like that) claimed.

>Who is Timeline by..

Michael Crichton.

[wmw999 2,587]

Quote

Michael Crichton.

I've generally liked what he wrote -- it's well-researched, and takes some scientific point and stretches it to a generally-illogical conclusion. E.g. Timeline with time travel, and The Andromeda Strain with mutations of bugs/space travel, Jurassic Park with cloning etc., Airframe with the aircraft industry and a host of other books.

He seems to get really interested in a subject, research the heck out of it, and see where it takes his imagination. Not always excellent, but I nearly always learn something.

But I still don't think that time travel and dinosaur islands are likely.

On the other hand, I thought his autobiography was the most self-indulgent book I ever read

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Diversgodown 0]

Quote

>Where did it state that a tsunami was caused by human activity???

That's what the bad guys (NERF? something like that) claimed.

Quote

And the premise that a tsunami can be blamed on human activiity is just plain absurd.

I know the Nerf part that was just part of the novel. from the line above It seems like he took it as something that actually occured or that someone blamed a tsunami on human activity.

***Glory Favors the Bold***

• Quote

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Second sentence starts..."It is now clear......"

It is not clear.

It's clear to virtually every scientific expert in the world. Lay people may argue about it, but that doesn't mean it's not clear. It means they are mistaken.

If you think I am going to except the"virtually every scientific exert" your mistaken

And just because I put it in quotes doen't make it true.

Now if you said "virtually every quoted and reported scientific expert....." I would believe you.....

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

Nice try......

every heard of climatic cycles?

You want to take it as proof you go right ahead

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kallend 2,146]

Quote

Quote

>Where did it state that a tsunami was caused by human activity???

That's what the bad guys (NERF? something like that) claimed.

Quote

And the premise that a tsunami can be blamed on human activiity is just plain absurd.

I know the Nerf part that was just part of the novel. from the line above It seems like he took it as something that actually occured or that someone blamed a tsunami on human activity.

It's a long time since I read it, but IIRC the bad guys tried to create a tsunami by detonating explosives on an undersea fault line with the idea that polluters would be blamed by the public. Ridiculous premise.

It's a NOVEL, not a peer reviewed scientific journal.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

• Quote

[Diversgodown 0]

I'm not trying to say that pollution is not an issue. But to blame a climate change on it is hard to prove, there are always two sides to a study and it is easy to prove what you want to prove. We know so little about the climate and how it changes over the ages at what is deemed normal. I guess I'm just palying devils advocate here. Pollution does need to be controlled, but enviromentall changes have been happening since the dawn of time and way before Human influence was a factor...

***Glory Favors the Bold***

[wmw999 2,587]

I heard a really good lecture earlier this year; here's a post I wrote about it. His name is Dr. Ron Sass, and he recently retired.

Anyway, he had lots of charts that, while proving nothing (because of the time scale etc), were quite convincing in painting a picture including man-induced warming with the evidence that we are able to gather.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[ReBirth 0]

Quote

Now if you said "virtually every quoted and reported scientific expert....." I would believe you.....

True...I don't know what those who have said nothing have to say on the subject

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Now if you said "virtually every quoted and reported scientific expert....." I would believe you.....

True...I don't know what those who have said nothing have to say on the subject

So if they rebut the claim, they say nothing? Now that is true liberism at work

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln