[tony]

Which side of the global warming issue is using the most questionable data?


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/m.../16/do1610.xml

[The Great Fumar]

TONY
This is a great post..........And I believe every word of it .....saw an article once about six months ago that while the Attic cap was thawing , it is now refreezing............ and Antarctica has never thawed abnormally.....

fumar

One thing I am having problems with in the arguments against global warming is that the evidence suggests that the surface of the earth has become warmer after the past few centuries. http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2006/12/17/22147/335

The cyclical argument that this warming just happens as a matter of the cycles of the earth and earth physics over long periods of times does not fit with how much change there has been over the past two centuries in temperatures.

The cycle theory for "global warming" would suggest that change would be more gradual which would fit in with the evidence of the ebb and flow of ice and heat over tens of thousands of years. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovich_cycle

I suppose this kind of thing could have happened in a natural course of events long before any kind of records were kept but there does not seem to be any real hard evidence either way. Look at something called Bond events. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bond_event

Man has mucked up his garden so to speak and cannot just blame it on the most recent storms.

[Sidney Lanier]

I am not a scientist by any means, but I do know what I live with!

During the late spring, summer, and early fall we live in the shadow of the Shawangunk Ridge on which is perched the Mohonk Mountain House, founded in 1869 and still operated by the original family. We can see the Skytop Tower of the Mountain House from our home there. You can see the Shawangunk Ridge behind me in my avatar photo. Spectacular view!

In September we were in Copenhagen, staying at the Marriott Hotel which gives guests a brief news supplement from their respective home countries. We were so surprised to find an article about our home area by New Paltz, NY. This article had to do with 112 years of consistent meteorology measurements that reflect climate change right in our backyard. Following is one salient paragraph from that article, followed by the link to the complete article which is well worth reading.

Just plain, consistent meteorology readings. No agenda, no politics, no conclusion before starting the study. This is what we've lived with in our neighborhood since we live there. I urge everyone to read the whole article; it's quite a marvelous story.

---------------------------------------

"The record shows that on this ridge in the Shawangunk Mountains, about 20 miles south of the better-known Catskills, the average annual temperature has risen 2.7 degrees in 112 years. Of the top 10 warmest years in that time, 7 have come since 1990. Both annual precipitation and annual snowfall have increased, and the growing season has lengthened by 10 days."

---------------------------------------

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/16/sc...th/16moho.html

[TallerTrees]

Global warming, climate change, whatever you want to call it is a HOAX.

[Muncle]

I am not a scientist, nor do I play one on television. I am, however, a bit of a cynical bast*rd. Unfortunately, today it is impossible to have a scientific discussion of global warming/climate change. The subject has taken on the mantra of religion. One is either a believer or a heretic. You either accept all the teachings of the savior or you deny all.

Two aspects of the "debate" make me lean toward the deniers. The first of these is that the believers seldom if ever refute the claims of the deniers. They almost always seem to question the funding of studies and even resort to ad hominem attacks on the scientists. That worries me.


The other aspect is the old stand-by "follow the money" which I expand to "follow the politics." Yes, the existing oil industries have billions/trillions tied up in this fiasco, but so do the Greenies. Politically, we seem to be at odds with the rest of the world, but that is very understandable. If all bought all the global warming line, and bought into Kyoto-type restrictions, the only country to be seriously hampered developmentally and financially would be the US and to a lesser degree some of the Group of 7. And would it have a significant effect? Nobody can say for sure, at least not without genuflecting. But hey, nobody ever got a Nobel Peace Prize for denying the inconvenient "truth."

[NJblue]

Originally Posted by Muncle

If all bought all the global warming line, and bought into Kyoto-type restrictions, the only country to be seriously hampered developmentally and financially would be the US and to a lesser degree some of the Group of 7. And would it have a significant effect?

I think it would have a significant effect ... but the effect would be negative and not positive. If the industrialized world puts restrictions on itself in the form of carbon taxes, etc. it will have the obvious effect of driving up their cost of production. However, the emerging markets like India and China will be all too happy to build more coal-fired generators to provide cheap energy to support their production capability. These coal-fired plants will not only produce as much or more CO2 as the ones that are either shut down or not built in the US and other industrialized countries, but they will also belch out significantly MORE conventional pollution.

The net result of this will be an even greater shifting of production (and jobs)from high cost countries like the US to low cost countries like China. There will be no decrease in CO2 emissions from the production, but there will be an increase in it from all of the ships that carry the stuff from China to the rest of the world. This is a lose-lose scenario for the US, a win-win for China and at best a break-even (but more likely, a lose) for the global climate.

The cynic in me says that if you were to follow the money that you would see the greenies being funded by China because they stand to win BIG if the West unilaterally performs economic disarmament.

http://www.michaelcrichton.net/speec...talfuture.html

[Hawkwind]

10 degrees with a wind chill of about 0 plus 3" of snow on the ground is not my idea of global warming and it is not even December 1. Can't wait to get to TV, 11 days and counting.

[JohnZ]

While climatology is not my realm, the science laboratory is. When crunching data there are "must do's". The first step of data reduction and interpretation is verification of the measurements accumulated to date and assess inherent error (there is error in every measurement). How accurate were the temperature measurements that were acquired ....say....100 years ago? What instruments were used and what was the range of error associated with them? Were they accurate +/- one degree or perhaps more? That would be substantial error range I think. Would it be prudent to adopt a global strategy and commit tremedous resources at significant cost to industry worldwide especially at this time if there is even a shred of doubt at all? I think more very careful study is in order (as is being done now) and make national policy/regulatory change only until we are absolutely certain that global warming is indeed occuring due to human activity i.e greenhouse gas emissions and not just a natural phenomenon.

Food for thought: There is fossil evidence that supports the premise that planetary shifts are a natural occurence and that another ice age is destined for North America. Go figure.

[The Great Fumar]

Well here's one for you......
The mean temp. of the earth has not increased sense 1996 ...
and last October was the coldest sense keeping records..

excuse me while I go turn up the thermostat...

frosty fumar

[Boomer]

I don't know much about this topic. I have not made a study of it. But I know that my gardening show guy in Cincinnati, Denny McKeown, seems to have made such a study.

And this whole thing makes him absolutely livid. In fact, it seems like he goes off at least once during his weekly radio show.

There I am, almost every Saturday morning, just waking up, I flip on the radio to hear about knockout roses and what kind of trees to plant and why my poor hibiscus did not do so well. And one time I even called him up and we chatted away about my ninebark. And he made me feel so much better about it.

And although he is still quite wonderful and I do not plan to give him up, I just know that he is going to blow up over global warming. Something triggers it and off he goes. And he rants for awhile and then he calms down and gets back to smelling the roses. Hey, it's his show.

Anyway, this link is to his website. You can ignore most of it because why would you care about what to plant in Cincinnati. But if you look right in the middle of the opening page, you will find a section titled "What's All the Buzz about Global Warming?"

I think some of you will get along just fine with Denny so here he is. -- just look right in the middle of his opening page and you will find him on his soapbox. Hey, it's his website.

http://www.bloomingarden.com/

Boomer

[cologal]

Originally Posted by TallerTrees

Global warming, climate change, whatever you want to call it is a HOAX.

Well last week here in Colorado we set a new record high of 85 degrees. Today I played golf with the temperature in the high 60's.

Polar bears are drowning, glaciers melting and temperatures rising. Don't know what you want to call it but something is going on.

[The Great Fumar]

WELL HERE'S ONE FOR YOU........
THE EARTH'S TEMP. HASN'T RISEN SENSE 1996 AND THIS PAST
OCTOBER WAS THE COLDEST IN HISTORY..(as long as they have been
keeping records).......
Think I'll get a good book (or a bad one) and curl up by the fire !!!!

frosty fumar

[Russ_Boston]

All I know is that my pool is frozen solid (3-4 inches thick) already and it is not even December.