quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML
Is there replicable experimental evidence to support the cause and effect? Or just observation? I have provided observation of apparent anomoly that suggests there is no cause and effect: i.e. glaciation while high levels of CO2 remained. So, what we have here is theory and anomoly that disputes the theoretical construct. Seriously, Ken, science is not democratic. It is not done by a vote in a political institution. "Settled science" is not a scientific statement. It is a political statement. Good science welcomes divergent views and does not condemn the sceptics personally. Neils Bohr debated vigorously for years against Albert Einstein's scepticism over quantum mechanics. Although Bohr won out and the Copenhagen interpretation of QM became dominant, there arose two alternative interpretations [hidden variables and multiverse] through which some physicists view the same events. However, while debate goes on, one group does not try to silence the other or denigrate them personally. When science fails to tolerate opposing views it fails to be science; it becomes politics. In this case the proposed political remedies, the Kyoto Protocol, could imho lead to disaster for the world's growing population. So, again in answer to tweke's comments: we do not need to question motives in order to be sceptical of the science of the AGW theory.

quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63
Leftists don't have much room to talk either, since the Communist Bloc countries were pretty atrocious when it came to environmental policy.

I don't think it's valid to blame liberals and socialists for the actions of a communist dictatorship.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

Do you also reject the denialist's claim that is only based on the last 12 years?

Huh?

K.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63
I'm just saying that there's nothing inherent about their position that automatically puts them on the moral high ground that they can say that it's all the Republicans' fault. I think there's enough to blame to go around on all sides.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

bullshit.

The increase in CO2 predates the warming.

You should have put a colon after "bullshit."

The rise in atmospheric CO2 over the past 100 years has occurred mostly in the last 40-45 years. Nothing surprising there, of course. But most of the rise in temperature during that 100-year period occurred in the first 40-45 years.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


And now on "Settled Science," the latest climate news!

Hotter summers 'may kill 5,900 every year', warns first national risk assessment of climate change

Britain’s first national risk assessment of climate change has warned there will be major increases in flooding, heatwaves and water shortages that could kill thousands of people a year. The Government-funded research called said annual flood damage will cost the UK up to £12 billion by the 2080s if nothing is done to adapt to extreme weather.

British summers will get hotter while winters will be milder and wetter, according to the £2.8 million report. It warned the hotter summers could result in up to 5,900 extra deaths a year by 2050.... However, authors admit to uncertainties within their computer models

In other climate news...

Forget global warming - it's Cycle 25 we need to worry about

The supposed ‘consensus’ on man-made global warming is facing an inconvenient challenge after the release of new temperature data showing the planet has not warmed for the past 15 years. The figures suggest that we could even be heading for a mini ice age to rival the 70-year temperature drop that saw frost fairs held on the Thames in the 17th Century.

Based on readings from more than 30,000 measuring stations, the data was issued last week without fanfare by the Met Office and the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit. It confirms that the rising trend in world temperatures ended in 1997.

Meanwhile, leading climate scientists yesterday told The Mail on Sunday that, after emitting unusually high levels of energy throughout the 20th Century, the sun is now heading towards a ‘grand minimum’ in its output, threatening cold summers, bitter winters and a shortening of the season available for growing food.

Tune in next week for more "Settled Science."

K.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
You cannot make claims about a past climate change if you don't understand what caused that change and no one has anything approaching a valid theory of what caused the previous glaciation cycles. Antartctica moving over the South Pole certainly contributes but beyond that we simply have no data.

quote:

The present warming is occuring and was preceded by a masive increase in CO2 levels from a sourco sequestered from the biosphere for at least 300 million years. No other changes have occured that could be causing this sort of drastic rise in global temperatures.

quote:

The denialists spent years claiming there was no warming but the data is now unavoidable so they've switched to claiming we don't know the caue or that it won't continue. Why should anyone believe the denialists, with their obvious political and economic motives, after how spectacularly wrong they have been up to this point?

quote:

As to restricting GHG emmissions that would lead, as it already has, to clean energy innovations and the growth of new high tech industries. US politicians beholden to th traditional energy companies have almost guaranteed that the US will lag far behind the innovators in these new emergent indistries. So when we do finally come to our senses and stop burning fossil fuels for power we may very well exchange OPEC for Germany and China as the nations who hold our energy production capacities ransom. Our descendants, if there are any, may very well curse us as they ship their money overseas.

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
You cannot make claims about a past climate change if you don't understand what caused that change and no one has anything approaching a valid theory of what caused the previous glaciation cycles. Antartctica moving over the South Pole certainly contributes but beyond that we simply have no data.

Ken, the evidence is quite clear in any graph of the Vostok ice core. At best CO2 rise is correlated with temperature rise; it does not precede temperature. Secondly, at 135,000 years glaciaton occurs while CO2 levels remain extremely high for about 15,000 years. Clearly an anomaly to the AGW theory. Who am I to believe? You or my lyin' eyes? Have a look at the freakin graphs.

quote:

quote:

The present warming is occuring and was preceded by a masive increase in CO2 levels from a sourco sequestered from the biosphere for at least 300 million years. No other changes have occured that could be causing this sort of drastic rise in global temperatures.

Huh? WTF? You invented that, right?

quote:

quote:

The denialists spent years claiming there was no warming but the data is now unavoidable so they've switched to claiming we don't know the caue or that it won't continue. Why should anyone believe the denialists, with their obvious political and economic motives, after how spectacularly wrong they have been up to this point?

Ah, there you go again: ascribing motives and name calling with derrogatory labels sceptical scientists. Can't convince you that scepticism in science is healthy and essential, hey? "Settled Science" is an oxymoron!

quote:

quote:

As to restricting GHG emmissions that would lead, as it already has, to clean energy innovations and the growth of new high tech industries. US politicians beholden to th traditional energy companies have almost guaranteed that the US will lag far behind the innovators in these new emergent indistries. So when we do finally come to our senses and stop burning fossil fuels for power we may very well exchange OPEC for Germany and China as the nations who hold our energy production capacities ransom. Our descendants, if there are any, may very well curse us as they ship their money overseas.

*sighs* The AGW equivalent of the WMD warnings that lead us into war with Iraq.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Raiikun

quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59


So why was it 50 degrees here yesterday when it`s usually below zero from December through mid February?


Not that you`re a scientist or anything.

Well as some of us were constantly reminded last winter about this time when my area was having record low temperatures quite regularly, "weather is not climate." =)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

If it tones down the hysteria over runaway global warming and children growing up without knowing what snow is, I count it a plus.

quote:

Yada yada yada, more nonsense blaming the left for anything you dont like.
Well he is consistent if nothing else.
Do you have any facts to back up this bullshit or not ? My guess would be not, given I am right leaning and worried about mans effect on the earth.
I am on the right also and I was worrying about the effect long before the global warming folks started up. Of course I was a liberal back then so I am not sure if it counts.

quote:

I thought this article explained it rather well.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

I will admit something that will make some of you label me as "out there" but, I am not so sure that the "hole in the ozone" isn't an "escape valve" by design, put there to give all the pollutants and crap in our air some way to get out of our atmosphere.