Global Warming...New Report...and it ain't happy news

timberlandko wrote:

No one can dismiss global warming - the fossil record clearly shows the cyclical nature of climatic shifts. What is undemonstrated is the role humankind plays in the phenomonon. Many doubt the hype being bandied about by the doomsayers - the evidence simply isn't conclusivee, and in fact inmany respercts is contradictory. Much more study needs to be done, and certainly it is prudent for humankind to wean itelf from fossil fuels and otherwise improve the rather shoddy record of polution and contamination we have established. But whether that will have any impact whatsoever on climatic change remains a matter of conjecture, dispute, and partisanship.

Personally, I'm relatively encouraged and comforted by the fact the doomsayers have picked up the chant; knowing their track record, I've set my mind at ease. Now, of course, I could be wrong. There well may come a first time for the doomsayers to be right. Is this that time? Looking at the odds and the hard evidence, the smart money has to go against them.

Let me echo your comments: "No one can dismiss global warming - the fossil record clearly shows the cyclical nature of climatic shifts. What is undemonstrated is the role humankind plays in the phenomonon."

From historic observations of the sun, it is clear that its radiation level fluctuates in somewhat predictsable multi-year cycles. I would expect global temperatures to be influenced more by the sun's radiation levels than humans.

Do you know of a good website where those solar cycles and their effects are plotted and discussed?

0 Replies

ican711nm wrote:

Do you know of a good website where those solar cycles and their effects are plotted and discussed?

No, but you reminded me of this article I read just yesterday Smile

Quote:

Distant Object Found Orbiting Sun

Astronomers have found a large object in the Solar System's outer reaches. It is being hailed as "a great discovery".

0 Replies

JustWonders wrote:

...
Astronomers have found a large object in the Solar System's outer reaches. It is being hailed as "a great discovery".

<Of course, you and I both know that there will be some here who will say that this is the work of Halliburton's overlords on Titan to broadcast mind-control waves in order to keep us under Dubya's control :wink: >

Golly, I would have guessed: this is the work of Dubya on Titan to broadcast mind-control waves in order to keep us under Halliburton's overlords control :wink:

By the way, thanks for the link.

0 Replies

ALL OF THE FOLLOWING LINKS INICATE THAT THE SUN'S RADIATION HAS BEEN INCREASING ABOUT 0.05% PER DECADE SINCE THE LATE 1970s.

I found these links today seaching for: sun radiation

The articles and graphs allege that the trend in the sun's radiation has possibly been increasing since the early 19th century. This increasing trend probably accounts for a significant part of earth warming.

www.gcrio.org/CONSEQUENCES/winter96/sunclimate.html

www.space.com/scienceastronomy/sun_output_030320.html

http://aom.giss.nasa.gov/srsun.html

0 Replies

I find this all very sad: people seem to be going out of their way finding reasons (some plausible, some less so) why global warming is nothing to do with burning forests, burning coal and oil, and increased levels of CO2 and other chemicals in the atmosphere.

I think, while doubt exists, we should be erring on the conservative side, and not on the side of "That may be a waterfall downstream, but it may not. Let's head straight for it at full speed to find out".

We are taking part in the biggest experiment ever, planet Earth, and it may not be a reversible one.

0 Replies

McTag wrote:

...

I think, while doubt exists, we should be erring on the conservative side, and not on the side of "That may be a waterfall downstream, but it may not. Let's head straight for it at full speed to find out".

There is a downside and an upside for whichever path (steam) we choose. Our problem is not a choice between a path with only a downside and another path with only an upside. We must continually re-examine our path to find the one or ones that have more upside than downside. The downside of not burning stuff needs to be examined as carefully as the downside of burning stuff.

We are taking part in the biggest experiment ever, planet Earth, and it may not be a reversible one.

Scientists allege humans first evolved about 200,000 years ago. On that basis, I say we humans have been taking part in the biggest planet earth experiment in the last 200,000 years, and that experiment is not reversible by humans, only the nature of that experiment is reversible or changeable or modifiable by humans. Maybe that expeiment will succeed and maybe it will fail. We help it fail by not taking the right chances, and by taking the wrong chances (including the chance of doing nothing). Either way we must take chances to succeed; either way we must risk the uncertainties of life to postpone the certainty of death.

0 Replies

I don't think the planet is going anywhere. It loves carbon too much. The people may not be able to live here anymore, but the planet will do just fine.

0 Replies

Dennis Miller?

0 Replies

Relax

Burning fossil fuels will not kill us. What will kill us is fighting over those remaining hydrocarbons. Dead people dont consume any fossil fuels, and hence the long term effect of carbon emissions will be pretty minimal for those homo sapiens who survive (and probably wish they had not).

Just trying to cheer people up a bit.

0 Replies

Tks Steve, I feel a lot better now.

Seriously, the drought & current famine (exacerbated by late rains impeding transport) in Niger, seen on our TV screens this weekend, is apparently four times greater than the Ethiopia famine of (4?) years ago.
In other words, colossal.

0 Replies

You succeeded, of course, Steve Sad

Interesting possibility turning the huge coal reserves still available into gas, for power plants.
The price of diesel has gone through the roof, hasn't it? Americans still pay pretty little. Here it's 93p (1.34, US$1.64) a litre. US$3.53 a gallon. How does that compare with other places?

0 Replies

Steve-

Not only dead people don't consume fuels.Unborn people don't either.

When do you predict the big fight for?

0 Replies

I cant look at the pictures anymore. Been trying to avoid the front page of the Guardian on my desk.

What can I do? Give money, ok done that bought the t shirt etc

Climate change and global warming is upon us now. More is in the pipeline. We need to take drastic action NOW if we are to avoid global catastrophe in 70 years time. But thats not our problem is it? Much better to turn on the cd and aircon as we drive towards the cliff, after all it wont be us who will go over it.

0 Replies

Well glad I'm spreading a little light and cheer on this cold dull August Monday.

Hi Clary nice to hear from you, will send you a pm.

I was going to fill up with diesel yesterday until I saw the price. 93.9 p/l. So I only put £20 in.

Spendius, I believe the "fight" is already engaged. Gulf wars 1 and 2 were all about the control of oil. Its quite possible we will see "water wars" and other resource conflicts in future.

0 Replies

There's little doubt in my mind that we WILL see water wars in the future.

We are running out of water here in the States at a pretty fast rate; aquifers being used up and all that noise.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Steve-

Fair enough but what's your view on making the babies who will get it.

0 Replies

Anyone NOT noticed uny unusual weather this year?

Drought Threatens Crops and Shuts River in Midwest

By ALEXEI BARRIONUEVO
Published: August 15, 2005
CHICAGO, Aug. 14 - Rick and Rhonda Richards drove two and a half hours last Monday from Nashville to Metropolis, Ill., to hit the slot machines there, only to find that Harrah's riverboat casino had closed two nights before for the most unexpected of reasons: low water levels on the Ohio River. A drought ravaging parts of the Midwest this summer had left the boat nearly on the river bottom, making it difficult to board and disembark.

<more>

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/15/national/15drought.html?hp&ex=1124164800&en=e0971a78d104697f&ei=5094&partner=homepage

0 Replies

).

Steve (as 41oo) wrote:

So I only put £20 in.

Since I'll have no luggage, I bring 20 kg (that's about 19 l and the canister) on Thursday (which is indeed with 0.73 GBpence still cheaper than the same in Nahe wine :wink:

0 Replies

McTag wrote:

Anyone NOT noticed uny unusual weather this year?

Two unusual weathers actually. (Grammar?) Unusually warm in America, unusually cold in Germany, especially just before I came back. (My father tells me that while I was away, it was freezing in some spots of the Odenwald, something that hasn't happened in an August in decades.) (The Odenwald is a mountain range where my parents live -- more like a hill range, actually.) I'm curious if it adds up to 'unusually warm' or 'unusually cold' on the global scale.

Oh, and while I have heard several Americans casually blame their heat waves on global warming, I have yet to observe a German who sees our cold front as evidence against it.

0 Replies

The trend in the sun's radiation intensity has been increasing since 1800. Over this period that increase is estimated to be about 10%.

We are confronted with a real paradox. If it weren't for the fact that the CO2 in the earth's atmosphere deflects much of the sun's radiation away from the earth, we'd all be toast. On the other hand, the radiation of heat back outside the earth's atmosphere from the radiation that is not deflected by the CO2 and does reach the earth's surface, is reduced by the CO2 in the earth's atmosphere.

0 Replies

Global Warming...New Report...and it ain't happy news

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know