Global warming overblown?

I don't necessarily disagree with Setanta's overall assessment here. I'm open to be convinced that the Kyoto treaty would accomplish anything constructive.

I'm as passionate as the next person in not wanting all wild rivers dammed or all old growth forests pillaged. I love all wildlife and, as we all do, I want clean air and water and for my food supply to be free of poisons.

But look how far we have come. The nation's most polluting factories now emit nothing harmful to the most fragile canary. Autombiles that once belched lead into the air and water and soil have been reined in and will continue to be made even more efficient and cleaner running as we demand it. All this has been accomplished in a few short decades.

Think what we'll accomplish in the next 50 years. Imagine the wonders of science yet to be discovered, new efficient, clean fuel sources that will be invented, and perhaps we will find ways to raise the standard of living for the poorest of the world's poor so they will be persuaded to want a clean environment and will learn to value their resources as we do.

The human creature has such capacity for good. I believe we have only scratched the surface. It's just too early to panic and think we are destroying the earth.

Re Setana 6;37 pm: It is good you identified the underling causes, but we still need specific solutions. I suggest a free (no frills) local and urban bus system. Free gets you to your destination quicker and safer as the driver is not distracted by collecting fares. Some of us can't resist a bargain, so more people will use the free buses. More riders means more buses more often with stops closer to your starting place and destination. Wherever the system is working Judges can revoke drivers licenses of persons caught driving impaired, with bad attitudes and unsafe driving skills. This will reduce the carnage on the roads, perhaps sufficient to cover the entire cost of the free busses. Normally I detest Socialism, but this one appears attractive, and it would cut pollutants, assuming the busses were well designed. IMHO high speed rail is too costly and often accomplishes little. Neil

I would not consider such a solution to necessarily be socialistic. There is no constitutional guarantee of personal transportation. The IXth and Xth amendments, it seems to me, place this clearly in the realm of the states. Therefore, such a solution would require fifty separate efforts to implement. I think it is a good idea; i don't think one can count on politicians, especially fifty sets of politicians, to recognize good ideas, let alone implement them.

As for your perceived need of specific solutions, that begs the question, which is whether or not there is a problem of global warming, and is the reason i have responded to this thread. I am not convinced that a global warming problem has been proven to exist. I suspect it is true, but i don't have good cause to say that i, or anyone else, knows this to be the case.

In the event that it were "proven," or simply that a majority of people accepted that it were "proven," i would be about the last person to whom someone would appeal for solutions. You can ask me for specific solutions until you are blue in the face; however, i recommend saving your breath for the actual act of breathing, as the exercise would profit you nothing.

Well its not getting any cooler is it Set?

Neil I really do wonder sometimes about American attitudes to public services.

I am all for people making private profit. Conversely I dont see any role for the state in the manufacture of steel or fairy lights. But making private profit out of someone's unfortunate ill health is both an inefficient way of providing for a nations' health care, and downright immoral. A national health service free at the point of use makes economic sense as well as being a mark of a civilised society. Similarly education should be free and available to all irrespective of ability to pay.

It seems that so many Americans see such ideas as tantamount to revolutionary communism, yet you are proposing a free transportation system! I don't understand.

Steve--two thousand years ago, the northern hemisphere was so significantly warmer than it is now, that the Romans successfully planted vinifera vines in what is now Yorkshire. There is archaeological evidence in AS middens of plant and insect species which today have a range no further north than southern Spain. The coast of North Africa was sufficiently fertile and "green" that it was a granary for Italy.

By 1200, people in Europe began to notice that the climate was getting cooler. As new building methods, and improved wool garments arose, and the process of reacting to the cooler climate with "technological" solutions was continuous thereafter, i have always considered that the "Industrial Revolution" had its origins then and there, and not in England 500 years later. This cooling became so pronounced that lakes in northern Scotland would freeze over in August, by the beginning of the 17th century. This cold spell seems to have reached it's "depth" in the early 18th century--in 1709, western Europe experienced a winter so cold that birds dropped dead from trees and rabbits froze to death in their borrows. Starving wolves breached the barriers at the gates of Paris, and hunted victims in the streets at night.

On the scientific side, and i am claiming no expertise, i would note several questions. Data from accurate measurement is only available from certain parts of the planet for about a century--in most parts of the planet, there is no such data, and even in our contemporary world, there are regions where no local weather data is collected. Scientists have taken note of processes in the oceans which seem reactive to average annual temperature, and which seem to have a regulatory effect on climate--but the details of the "mechanisms" and their effects are not yet known. Much of the predictive side of "global warming" studies has relied upon computer modelling, which in turn relies heavily on random number generation--hundreds of thousands and sometimes millions of such randomly generated numbers are needed for the "models." A few years ago, code writers became aware that random number generation programs only seemed reliable--thousands of iterations demonstrated "patterns" in number generation, which throws the concept of "randomness" right out the window. The "climatological" community has remained mute on this topic, even when questioned about it.

As i noted, i suspect that there is a prospect that human activity is causing a "global warming problem." As i have just noted, i don't think that the data are sufficiently complete to be reliable, i think there is good reason to question "climate modelling" programs, we don't yet know the force of oceanic change in response to mean temperatures, and the historical record shows that we have been coming out of a "cold spell" for centuries. Fox noted above what she described as "global cooling hysteria." I don't think it ever reached the level of hysteria, but many of the "elder statesment" in the global warming community were making a living out of predicting a new "mini-ice age" thirty and more years ago. Their problem was the lack of hysteria--they were attracting too few research grant dollars. How much more gratifyingly profitable is the near-hysteria over global warming.

I use a lot of salt in my diet, Steve . . .

Very well stated Setanta. (You don't know how difficult it is for me to say that. )

Well I don't claim any expertise in climatology, although I did take an applied science degree course (so many years ago, the world seemed much warmer, well rosier anyway). Or should that be cooler?

And I accept that scientists go after research grants with all the caution of pirhanas smelling blood.

But I do think global warming is a real phenomenum for these reasons (some more anecdotal than others)

the general scientific consensus says so
its hot in my office right now
ice core samples from Greenland have yielded atmospheric CO2 concentrations going back at least 400,000 years. CO2 concentration now, has never been higher
Carbon dioxide is a green house gas
The UK govt chief scientific advisor (not some neo hippy greeno freak) is on record as saying global warming and climate change is a bigger threat to us all right now than international terrorism.
The insects in my garden look foreign to me.
The plants in my garden have a longer season and some survive all winter that shouldnt. (Or maybe thats Mrs Steve doing something I donk know about)
Whilst the climate does change, (and we are due for another ice age in about 20,000 years) the trick is to spot abnormal trends. And this has been very difficult to do...but the trend has now been established from a whole variety of data measurement techniques, and it is abnormal and it is worrying.

Go easy on the salt Set. Or should that be salt and pepper set?

I believe i have sufficient imagination to make the surmise, Fox . . .

Steve, you articulate well why i linger in doubt, because the theory of global warming does have a great deal of plausibility, not the least of which is recognizing the human penchant for "fouling the nest." My problem is a lack of parameters from which to judge.

Fair enough Set, none of us are in command of all the parameters.

Did everybody see the movie "The Day after Tomorrow"? It created a flurry of dicussion for awhile re whether it was plausible or junk science. Then I ran across the following just so we would have something other than global warming to worry about.

Nature 'mankind's gravest threat'

We are making good progress in reducing the threat of asteroid impacts
Giant tsunamis, super volcanoes and earthquakes could pose a greater threat than terrorism, scientists claim.
Global Geophysical Events, or "Gee Gee's", as they are nick-named, are not being taken seriously enough, they say.

The global community needs to monitor these risks, and develop strategies to cope in the face of a catastrophe.

However, we are making good progress in reducing the threat of asteroid impacts, the researchers said during a briefing at the Royal Institution, UK.

Battening down

Since 9/11 we have become acutely aware of the threat of terrorism. Governments worldwide are battening down the hatches and ratcheting up the security.

But, in terms of grave threats, are we really looking in the right direction?

Giant walls of water that can devastate coastal cities, volcanoes so big that their ash crushes houses 1,500km (932 miles) away, giant earthquakes and asteroid impacts. These are very rare events and, if we are lucky, nothing like them will happen in our lifetimes.

But in the longer term, Gee Gee's may be our undoing if we do not take action. According to researchers, careful preparation could potentially save thousands of lives.

We need to raise awareness, identify threats and improve surveillance

Bill McGuire, Benfield Grieg Hazard Research Centre
"In any one year the chances of one of these things happening is probably much less than 1%," said Bill McGuire, director of the Benfield Grieg Hazard Research Centre. "But in the longer term it is 100%.

"We need to raise awareness, identify threats and improve surveillance.

"We need to plan what we will do if these things happen."

Super eruption

Volcanoes and earthquakes are relatively common occurrences, but Gee Gee's are on an altogether different scale.

The last "super volcanic eruption" was back in April 1815, when Tambora in Indonesia exploded violently, in what was the largest eruption in historic time.

The eruption column reached a height of about 44 km (28 miles), ash fell as far as 1,300 km (800 miles) from the volcano - and an estimated 92,000 people were killed.

Rare though they are, events this catastrophic need to be taken very seriously.

The potential threat that scientists currently have their eye on is an insecure rock - the size of the Isle of Man - in the Canary Island of La Palma.

The rock is in the process of slipping into the sea and Professor McGuire fears that when it finally collapses, the resulting tsunami will cause massive destruction along the coasts of countries like the USA, UK and many on the African continent, within a matter of hours.


The global community needs to monitor the risk posed by Gee Gee's, scientists claim
"Eventually the whole rock will collapse into the water, and the collapse - when it happens - will devastate the Atlantic margin," said Professor McGuire.

The triggering factor could be the eruption of the volcano on La Palma, called Cumbre Vieja, which could feasibly blow "anytime", according to Professor McGuire.

Many researchers working in the field of Gee Gee's would like better monitoring of Cumbre Vieja, so that advance warning can be given for the possible collapse of the rock.

"We need to be out there now looking at when an eruption is likely to happen," said Professor McGuire. "Otherwise there will be no time to evacuate major cities."

Cosmic threat

Global governments are not entirely ignoring the threat of Gee Gee's, however.


Work funded by the US government is swiftly tackling the threat posed by asteroids
The greatest danger to humanity comes from asteroids, but work funded largely by the US government is swiftly tackling this threat.

The European Space Agency (Esa) and Nasa are planning missions to test how the course of asteroids and comets can be altered by an impact.

Esa's mission Don Quijote will send a spacecraft crashing into the surface of a space rock to measure the effects. In 2005, Nasa's Deep Impact will monitor the outcome of blowing a hole in comet Tempel 1.

Scientists hope this will help them learn how to destroy or deflect an asteroid on a collision course with Earth.

According to Benny Peiser, of John Moores University, UK, the threat of cosmic mega disasters will be essentially "abolished within 30 years".

"A quiet and largely unnoticed technological revolution is dramatically accelerating the rate at which near-Earth asteroids (NEAs) are discovered," he said.

In 1995 we knew about 300 NEAs, today we know about 3000 - and within 20 years we could be aware of 90% of all nearby space rocks, he says.

"For the first time in the history of evolution we are closing this window of vulnerability."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3549812.stm

Warmest night time temperature ever recorded in the UK last night. (23.2 C Ely, cambs)

23.2 C . . . what's that in Flebbenheigel?

Good question!

now you take off 32, then multiply no sorry divide by 5/9th er no you cant take off 32 first that would leave a negative number and it was really hot last night, so you ADD 32 and multiply by the reciprocal of the the first number you thought of, oh sod it

About 76 digress Flabbenheiggel

Yeah, I always remember the -32 and x 5/9ths or is it add 32 and multiply by 9/5ths and then look at a chart. I don't remember kilometer conversion to miles either.

Of course life would be much simpler if it was minus 40 all the time, because its the same temperature. There must be some point in the solar system where this tempertature prevails, possibly the back side of Mars or a crater on Titon. We should go there immediately and compare thermometers.

Miles and kilometers (thats kill- OM eters, not kilo-meters like kilogrammes) is different. As are inches and centimetres, as NASA found out recently.

If it is "centimetres" why isn't it also "kilometres"?

Britain mystifies me. You still drive on the left, but you let the Frogs talk you into the metric system, We on the other hand have adopted the truly reasonable choice - we drive on the right and use the Imperial system of dimensions. Even NASA uses inches and pounds -now.

You know I just knew someone would pick up on that. My spelling mistake. Should be meter all the way through.

let me just spell that out

kilometre
kilometer
centimetre
centimeter

dodecahedron

watermeter
micrometer

yes definitely meter. Though somewhere in the distant recesses of my mind, it ought to be metre.

Why do we drive on the left? Amusement value only. Why do you drive on the right?

We run into fewer Frogs going the other way. But yes, it is, or was, an arbitrary choice.

Seems to me if you had to yield on just one, switching to the left and keeping the traditional units would have made more sense. However no doubt EU industry standards and the like carried the day.