glOBaL waRMInG

Actually, what we have done to the environment has STOPPED another ice age. SO be happy that we dont live in
-50 degree F weather. And please, Kerry is behind in the polls by a double digits, people are getting fed up with him and his inablity to have the same opinion two days in a row, but that is for another topic....

"My drum skills > Your drum skills"

quote:

---

Actually, what we have done to the environment has STOPPED another ice age. SO be happy that we dont live in
-50 degree F weather.

---

"Terrorist or tyrant, few may come to the Truth that both are poor choice."
[  Edited by cturtle at   ]

isn't a thesis like a topic sentence or something? Sorry, but I hate words, they need to die. So please rephrase that in a way my tiny brain can understand.

"My drum skills > Your drum skills"

quote:

---

The reversal of the field is perfectly normal

---

"Terrorist or tyrant, few may come to the Truth that both are poor choice."

To be honest, I have no idea. But my friend Zach is studying to be a meteorologist or climatologist, or something like that, and he once ga ve report in class explaining the whole thing, sadly I don't remember a lick of it, so I can't really back up my statement.

"My drum skills > Your drum skills"

http://www.nature.com/news/2004/040906/full/040906-10.html
Scientists had speculated that the whole ice age might have been triggered by an abrupt temperature change, perhaps when a rapid warming period melted a substantial part of the Greenland ice sheet. This in turn would have diluted the North Atlantic with fresh water, damping down the ocean currents that bring warmer water to that area and plunging the area into a deep freeze.

The NGRIP team now suggests that the ice age started much more gradually and was not linked to a fast glacial melt, even though the ice shows a hitherto unrecognized warm spell 115,000 years ago.

The core also reveals that the North Atlantic climate was stable during the last interglacial period, despite being about 5 °C warmer than today. "This provides an analogue for our possible future climate warmed by atmospheric pollution," says Kurt Cuffey, a climatologist at the University of California, Berkeley.

"Terrorist or tyrant, few may come to the Truth that both are poor choice."

quote:

---

Vast tracts of Indonesia's peat swamps have been drained in a misguided attempt to turn them into rice plantations. Now the landscape burns, belching smoke and hastening global warming.

---

"Terrorist or tyrant, few may come to the Truth that both are poor choice."

quote:

---

Global temperatures could rise by as much as eleven degrees Celsius, according to one of the largest climate prediction projects ever run.

This figure is twice the level that previous studies have suggested.

---

quote:

---

The U.S. Senate's leading abuser of science has struck again. Not content with calling the notion of human-caused global warming "the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people" (as he did in a July 2003 Senate floor speech), last week James Inhofe returned with an "update" on climate-change science. In his latest speech, timed to coincide with the final steps toward implementation of the Kyoto Protocol (which the United States won't be joining), Inhofe asserted that "put simply, man-induced global warming is an article of religious faith." Clearly, he hasn't changed his tune.

---

"A fool says I know and a wise man says I wonder."

There is absolutely no evidence for Global Warming. In fact there is actually more evidence that we are approaching another ice age. For example, 90% of the worlds ice is in Antarctica and over the last 20 years Antarctica has been producing ice not losing it. Also, the most accurate temperature gauges have not shown an increase in global temperature and in many places temperatures have been dropping! Furthermore, even if global warming were to occur it would benefit most nations.

Everyone should read State of Fear by Crichton. Its an awesome book and incredibly well documented. It's ultimate argument is that a complex of politicians, lawyers, university and media (PLUM) earn billions by keeping the populace in a constant state of fear and global warming is their favorite subject. I truly feel sorry for all the people they have duped.

"Thinking themselves wise they became fools..."

"Furthermore, even if global warming were to occur it would benefit most nations."
Ecological instability can only f*** us up. I don't care if its too Cold up here in Britain (where I am). It would mean huge problems for agriculture and the environment that would badly affect our economy.

I hear so much conflicting stuff on the issue I don't know. I really would give up decision making to those who know what they're talking about: the scientists, especially the meteorologists.

"Durch Nacht und Blut das Licht"

According to what Ive been reading the current scientific understanding is that Ecological instability is and has always been nature's norm. But the specifics about why it would benefit most nations is that many scientists argue that it would generate greater crop production and greater global economic prosperity. The El Nino was sighted as an example - although it brought a lot of rain and storm damage to the USA (4 billion in damage) it extended the growing season which brought greater economic gains (19 billion).

I highly recommend The State of Fear - its a really fun read and has tons of documentation from scientific journals.

"Thinking themselves wise they became fools..."

Stability is better. I mean, great it might make crops better. But this sort of tinkering of something so important (and given the greenhouse effect, impossible to stop whatever we start) seems incredibly dangerous, despite potential benefit.

Are you advocating global warming?

"Durch Nacht und Blut das Licht"

I agree that stability is theoretically better but the point I was trying to make is that the ecosystem, regardless of man or his actions, is by its nature instable. That the further back you look at the ecosystems record the more evidence you find for abrupt climate changes. And that it may even be possible that the greenhouse effect, if there even is such a thing, is helping to make it more stable.

"Are you advocating global warming?"

No absolutely not. The truth is I have never believed in it. For some reason I was highly suspect from the beginning, maybe because the types of people that so quickly jumped on its bandwagon. But, if you look at the last past 6000 years it seems more likely to me that we would enter into a period of cooling or a new ice age period. And there are a few scientists that think this may be happening.

The problem is that we still know so very little about the climate and all predictors and computer models have been so ridiculously wrong that we can place no faith in them.

"Thinking themselves wise they became fools..."

Nature is unstable, I agree. Climate will change.

However, we don't want it to change too fast. And we don't want any change to be man-caused, because we don't what the long-term consequences of our actions might be.

"Durch Nacht und Blut das Licht"

I agree.

Nor do we want to waste billions on a fraud when that money can be spent on really important issues.

Am I for sound environmental policies - absolutely! But I am not for passing regulations based on irrational fears that have no scientific foundation.

The problem with the greenhouse argument is that there is absolutely no scientific evidence that supports the notion that man has negatively effected the ecosystem.

"Thinking themselves wise they became fools..."