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

Taylor believes entirely in global warming,

I don't think anyone here is arguing that the planet was not in a warming trend since about the mid 70's.

Until you can explain these you are doing nothing more than pointing at the grand canyon as evidence the hoover dam can't exist.

Taylor believes entirely in global warming,
How inconvenient that you include people on your list that believe entirely in global warming ican.

Taylor is reluctant to blame human activity-specifically, increased emissions of greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide-for [global warming's] apparent acceleration? Because the bigger picture tells him there are more powerful cycles at play.

The argument by okie and ican has repeatedly been that there isn't warming because.

Cow 'emissions' more damaging to planet than CO2 from cars

By Geoffrey Lean, Environment Editor

Sunday, 10 December 2006

Meet the world's top destroyer of the environment. It is not the car, or the plane,or even George Bush: it is the cow.

A United Nations report has identified the world's rapidly growing herds of cattle as the greatest threat to the climate, forests and wildlife. And they are blamed for a host of other environmental crimes, from acid rain to the introduction of alien species, from producing deserts to creating dead zones in the oceans, from poisoning rivers and drinking water to destroying coral reefs.

The 400-page report by the Food and Agricultural Organisation, entitled Livestock's Long Shadow, also surveys the damage done by sheep, chickens, pigs and goats. But in almost every case, the world's 1.5 billion cattle are most to blame. Livestock are responsible for 18 per cent of the greenhouse gases that cause global warming, more than cars, planes and all other forms of transport put together.

Burning fuel to produce fertiliser to grow feed, to produce meat and to transport it - and clearing vegetation for grazing - produces 9 per cent of all emissions of carbon dioxide, the most common greenhouse gas. And their wind and manure emit more than one third of emissions of another, methane, which warms the world 20 times faster than carbon dioxide.

Livestock also produces more than 100 other polluting gases, including more than two-thirds of the world's emissions of ammonia, one of the main causes of acid rain.

Ranching, the report adds, is "the major driver of deforestation" worldwide, and overgrazing is turning a fifth of all pastures and ranges into desert.Cows also soak up vast amounts of water: it takes a staggering 990 litres of water to produce one litre of milk.

Wastes from feedlots and fertilisers used to grow their feed overnourish water, causing weeds to choke all other life. And the pesticides, antibiotics and hormones used to treat them get into drinking water and endanger human health.

The pollution washes down to the sea, killing coral reefs and creating "dead zones" devoid of life. One is up to 21,000sqkm, in the Gulf of Mexico, where much of the waste from US beef production is carried down the Mississippi.

The report concludes that, unless drastic changes are made, the massive damage done by livestock will more than double by 2050, as demand for meat increases.

He accurately pointed out the earth's temperature/CO2 cycles and, as accurately, noted the CO2 increase in the last two centuries. He also noted that the underlying cycle should cause a rapid cooling period soon. These are fundamental truths that AGW cultists, such as yourself, persistently refuse to acknowledge.

Wheather the cyclic cooling will occur before any additional warming or whether the man-made CO2 increase will significantly disrupt the underlying cycle are issues about which he made no assertion.

That is a false argument rosborne...

Because warming occurs for other reasons in no way shows that man can't contribute.

I agree 100%. We don't have enough data to determine that man-made co2 is changing our climate for the worse. I heard that cow's fart produces a great deal of co2, and we all know that human's continue to breed cows for one of our food source.

I believe that the real confusion comes into the picture, because scientists are conflicted on global warming, and co2's contribution.

What we can probably assume is the fact that this planet will probably have another ice age, so this so-called warming issue is somewhat moot.

oh, good, we're making progress here. So you'd agree that the fifty or sixty "scientists" on Inhofe's silly list who maintain that there is no global warming are full of crap, ican? Let's delete them from your total right off the bat, right?

By the way, 2005 was the warmest year on record. 2007 was warmer, until la Nina cooled it a little bit--not very much --at the end of the year. Nina's done, temps rising again. Not much of a case for cooling during the last ten years.

http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/hadcrut3gl.txt
Average Annual Global Temperature Above 1901-2000 Average = TAA in °C:
1987 TAA = 0.179
1988 TAA = 0.180
1989 TAA = 0.103
1990 TAA = 0.254
1991 TAA = 0.212
1992 TAA = 0.061
1993 TAA = 0.105
1994 TAA = 0.171
1995 TAA = 0.275
1996 TAA = 0.137
1997 TAA = 0.351
1998 TAA = 0.546
1999 TAA = 0.296
2000 TAA = 0.270
2001 TAA = 0.409
2002 TAA = 0.464
2003 TAA = 0.473
2004 TAA = 0.447
2005 TAA = 0.482
2006 TAA = 0.422
2007 TAA = 0.405
2008 TAA = 0.324
2009 TAA = 0.404 (average for January - September)