Why do all the global warming people ignore these factual charts: http://www.dialup4less.com/~donald/MVC-021F.JPG and the facts which show: 1) The temp stopped rising after 1998 leading many to believe we're at the tipping point for another downward trend. 2) The temperature fluctuation looks completely normal going off the trends over the last 20,000 years and we've had multiple periods where it was warmer than current. Again, let's work to clean our air and water but stop the stupid global warming fear crap while some get rich unless someone actually comes up with proof.
Like i said reseg, selecting just the last ten years and using that as your data set makes about as much sense as saying today rained twice as much as yesterday and concluding that by next tuesday we will be under 60 foot of water. Climate does change, it has always changed. The point is, this time, we are having an impact on how quickly it changes and how drastically it changes and when it does change next time it will kill us. What you are saying is like saying people living at the bottom of a volcano should ignore the smoke plumes because the volcano has erupted before.
Look, I'm not arguing just because I picked a side and don't want to be wrong. I really don't want to be the ignorant fool who ignored the warning signs, but I'm honestly not seeing it. I AM seeing water and air quality that needs major work, I'm seeing CO2 levels much higher than ever. But I'm not seeing a warming trend anywhere near the range limits of what we see as "normal" over the last 20,000 years. http://www.dialup4less.com/~donald/MVC-021F.JPG -It doesn't appear to have increased faster than other warming trends -It's not at all the warmest warming trend we've had in the last 20K years -It doesn't appear to be an unexpected warming trend considering it's following the last cooling trend -It appears to have peaked in 1998. We would have expected it to continue a non-stop rise if it's out of control do to CO2 levels. It's not like CO2 effects take a decade break. What facts am I not seeing here that show I'm wrong?
Ok so which of these claims are you refuting. 1. co2 is a "greenhouse gas". 2. we are releasing vast amount of co2 in to the atmosphere. for climate change to not be happening, and more importantly us not to be at least greatly contibuting to it, at least one of the above statments has to be false. so which is it?
Than why do the man made global warming people use the same logic? 11 years is not an insignificant amount of time or data. If 11 years represents one day of data, then we have only been collecting measured data for 14 days and atmospherically measured data for 6 days. Coincidentally, the dramatic upswing has only been in the last 5 days, So by your logic, if the temperature rises for 5 days, we will be cooking in another 2 days. I don't even disagree that the earth is warming, or that we are contributing to it, but your analogy is jacked. Also, why does inconclusive science lead to only one conclusion with one solution, a solution that lines certain peoples pockets well enough to have scientists fudging their numbers to push the agenda? The anti-capitalists love it because it distributes the wealth, and Green folk love it because it channels trillions of dollars into their industry. Its better than any lobbying we have seen to date. Even if the problem and eventual result have been diagnosed correctly, there are other more realistic and gradual solutions that these folk to do not seem to like.
Okay, CO2 is a greenhouse gas and we're contributing to the major increase of CO2 in the atmosphere. I'm with you, now are you with me on THESE facts?: If the CO2 levels are such a huge factor of the Earth's surface temp shouldn't we be consistently getting warmer year after year far beyond a normal warming trend? We're not, and in fact, nothing appears to be abnormal when looking at 20,000 years of warming and cooling, do you disagree?
Not necessarily. You can't conclude from that reasoning that we are "greatly contributing." Water vapor is also a greenhouse gas - actually more so than CO2. It's a matter of degree, how much are we contributing. And not just how much are we contributing to CO2 but how much to greenhouses gasses as a whole. To me, it all seems like exaggerated claims.
No it wouldn't necessarily continue to get warmer consistently. What you are looking at is weather (temperatures over a very short period of time), not climate. It's the equivalent of saying "today isn't as hot as yesterday" and concluding that from that tiny data sample that climate change isn't occurring. yes water vapour is a greenhouse gas nate. my argument has never been against greenhouse gasses, my argument is against excessive release of greenhouse gasses by humans. We need some greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere otherwise the planet wouldn't be able to support life. During the day we would have temperatures in excess of 200 degrees and at night it would be -200. My argument is one against us releasing greenhouse gasses in a way which has an effect on climate, not against the existence of the gasses themselves.
If some here would just shut up they would stop releasing water vapor and lots of hot air. I would think that would be a start.
Ok so which of these claims can you refute: 1. co2 is consumed by man cultivated flora. 2. we reforested millions of square acres of land in the last 100 years. Respectfully yours from a 200 by 100 mile man made oasis called southern California.
Last time I checked, I saw absolutely Zero evidence that global temperatures are supposed to stay the same. Last time I checked, high school science (look up osmosis) told me that the Earth's oceans act as a regulator to keep the atmosphere's CO2 and oxygen at the proper levels. Last time I checked, I saw absolutely zero evidence that mankind is having any adverse affect at all on the global environment, whether it be temperatures or CO2 or anything. I kindly invite anyone to show me ORIGINAL research that proves that mankind is having an adverse effect on the environment. ORIGINAL research - not an opinion piece that cites someone else that references data that isn't available. ORIGINAL research that proves that mankind's affect on the atmosphere is too much for the ocean's regulatory action to deal with.
Oh, last time was how many decades ago? Did you check about our oceans and seas and how they can't cope any longer with the input of human created waste?
Why? Because YOU say so? Or would you like to show us some data, please? It's nothing but complete and total arrogance on your part for you to believe that humans can have any noticeable effect on the global climate. But, O.K., I'm willing to be convinced. You claim that "the oceans and seas...can't cope any longer with the input of human created waste"? Fine. The volume of the Earth's oceans equals a massive 1.37 Billion Km³. Please explain to me how humans can possibly have any significant global effect on the oceans. And don't be afraid to show your math - I have degrees in Electrical Engineering and Engineering Science, along with some Master's work, which qualifies me as being called a Scientist, so be as technical as you'd like to. O.K.? Because you ARE talking about science, right? Go ahead - show me. And please don't reference someone's opinion piece or someone else's conclusions. Even Einstein invited everyone to check his math, so don't show me an opinion piece from someone who regards him/herself has being greater than Einstein. Show us a peer-reviewed paper, please.
Oh yeh? Well Arnie is educated too! He has seen "The Story of Stuff" "The Story Of Cap & Trade". So take that!
Corwin You're asking a bit too much in a forum like this. Instead of feeling happy as a subject idiot use google search and find out yourself. Only that what you find out yourself is something you'd believe. Papers are out of date and it could also help you to broaden your mind. I AM aware of your slavemanship in your current situation, so don't take it as an insult. YOU AND I KNOW WHAT IT ALL MEANS AND WHAT HAS TO BE DONE. Mankind and especially the manipulators are not a false positive in all that, - Bingo.
**I** am not the one making the claim about our oceans and seas - YOU made that claim - no, it seems you made a PRONOUNCEMENT, didn't you? Let me get this straight - you made a pronouncement that the seas "can't cope any longer with the input of human created waste", and you insist that **I** prove that YOU are right??? O.K., I did a Google search and I found absolutely no scientific evidence anywhere proving your claim. Satisfied, cupcake?
ocean acidification a good search term to start with. I myself have witnessed the mass dying of corals, in one of the world's most popular diving spot. First they changed colors, before they died. MERRY X-MAS