Global Warming

[karoaper]

Re: Does Anybody Think The Overdue Cali Earthquake Is Almost Here?

No, it actually isn't. Do some research. I don't think you'll find a peer-reviewed publication that draws that conclusion.
It's natural to have cooler or warmer trends over time. It's not abnormally warm. We're talking a couple degrees here.


Other BS is about the ice melting. Yes, the polar caps have melted a little, but overall there has not been a loss of ice because there have been increases elsewhere.

More garbage still is the idea that our use of paper is killing the rainforest or any forest for that matter. What's been destroyed has been for development, not paper. Trees are planted to be cut down for paper.

I thought the only thing that has increased is precipitation, but the actual ice core layers have melted considerably and new ice formation is too slow to catch up with the rapid melting of the ice core. It's like with everything, takes much longer to create than it does to destroy, given the right amount of destructive force.

Also, I have read and heard scientific opinion that one area where even a few degrees can have a large effect is hurricane formation. Warmer waters will create stronger hurricanes. Last year was record-breaking in terms of the quantity of major hurricanes, inluding Katrina and Rita. In general weather and atmospheric processes are typical examples of highly non-linear complexity. A tiny change may produce staggering effects.

Of course I haven't read the scientific literature on global warming, but to me you don't need theoretical proof to warrant attention and alert, empirical proof in the form of measured changes is enough.

[Anahita]

Re: Does Anybody Think The Overdue Cali Earthquake Is Almost Here?

No, it actually isn't. Do some research. I don't think you'll find a peer-reviewed publication that draws that conclusion.
It's natural to have cooler or warmer trends over time. It's not abnormally warm. We're talking a couple degrees here.

Siggie! [hugs] I'm happy to get to talk with you on the forum format. Too few women speak about things that matter.

[For posting simplicity, I'll just "quote" the rest of what you said respond to some points you made.]

But a few degrees, MAKES A HUGE impact on EARTH'S ability to support HUMAN LIFE, let alone biodiversity!

More regarding the above on climate change, the scientific consensus is that global warming is not only happening, but more rapidly than even previously understood. [Extinction of species is also a natural event, but the current (human-caused) extinction rate is at least 1000x higher than background rate.] Evolution can’t keep up with that without killing the cause—I’m trying VERY hard to avoid that. To illustrate: If I weren’t trying to avoid that, why would I care? Hell, just let humanity kill the human race? No. I have several hundred peer-reviewed articles (citations) from well-known scientific journals I can give to you about global warming (if you tell me your main disagreement, I can give you a citation).


"More garbage still is the idea that our use of paper is killing the rainforest or any forest for that matter. What's been destroyed has been for development, not paper. Trees are planted to be cut down for paper."

Correct, paper isn't killing the rainforest. In many places, rainforests are felled because of corrupt governments who take bribes from timber and many other industries. In other places a forest is felled (for the economic/ease reasons) just for old growth timber.

VERY SIGNIFICANT reasons for felling of tropical forests, in many places, is simply because the government of the particular country pushes the urban poor (meaning living off nothing--if 'lucky' maybe $100/year) into the rainforest (like a manifest destiny idea) to eek out a living where a living cant be made (due to the soil characteristics.) That happens often due to money and politics in that country [and INTERNATIONAL TRADE POLICY, almost all of which the US foreign policy is behind]. Some countries view the ancient forests as a tension 'valve' to funnel the poor into (who, unfortunately, tend to conflict with true sustainable practices of indigenous groups in the forest they were forced to invade... ETC. That's a 'quick' version of some 78,000 pages of dissertations on that topic, alone (in mini mini-cliff note-form.)



Karoaper, you are likely more informed that many people in the US. Many people haven't even heard of globlal warming, let alone have the background to debate the issue (these people also don't tend to use the internet and get some other ideas to consider...)

[Siggie]

Re: Does Anybody Think The Overdue Cali Earthquake Is Almost Here?

Siggie! [hugs] I'm happy to get to talk with you on the forum format. Too few women speak about things that matter.

Huh?

Anyway...on to things that matter, I guess.

I said nothing about the impact (or lack of) of a few degrees increase.
I am saying that there are natural fluctuations. Anyone remember hearing or reading about the ice age? We can't say that emissions from cars, pollution, or whatever else has caused an increase in global temperature. There is no control. We cannot seperate what we have done from what would have happened anyway.

Anahita, I'll let you choose the citation. Give me any one(s) you want.

I don't know what you're talking about as far as the extinction of species. What animals are in danger? As far as I know, animals have been taken off of the endangered species list (some that perhaps shouldn't have even been on there), but there haven't been additions.

[Anahita]

Re: Does Anybody Think The Overdue Cali Earthquake Is Almost Here?

Meh. Speak for yourself. I plan to live forever; so far, so good.
"Je suis invincible, intouchable, et immortel." -- Daniel Belanger
[/URL]

Very few people living on the planet are truly invincible.

Should you care? If you have kids, expect to have kids, know anyone with kids, or care about kids... then you should have a self-interest reason to care. Maybe you should care even if you don't, though?

Union of Concerned Scientists is a respected, yet conservative (too much in my HO) science advocacy group that I've supported (yet this is something everyone can get to):

"UCS is an independent nonprofit alliance of more than 100,000 concerned citizens and scientists. We augment rigorous scientific analysis with innovative thinking and committed citizen advocacy to build a cleaner, healthier environment and a safer world."

Main Page

http://www.ucsusa.org/

Global Warming Science

http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science/

That's a site I know off top of my head. I'm looking for specific (if you want a citation), otherwise just google "global warming." Are you skeptical about atmospheric the effects of putting carbon in the atmosphere (that was previously held in oil and trees) in some specific way?

-----

On the artistic side...Here is a very relevant song (literally playing on MMM while I type this) song...

Rain forest
Mist and mystery
Teeming green
Green brain facing labotomy
Climate control centre for the world
Ancient cord of coexistence
Hacked by parasitic greedhead scam -
From Sarawak to Amazonas
Costa Rica to mangy B.C. hills -
Cortege rhythm of falling timber.

What kind of currency grows in these new deserts,
These brand new flood plains?


If a tree falls in the forest does anybody hear?
If a tree falls in the forest does anybody hear?
Anybody hear the forest fall?


Cut and move on
Cut and move on
Take out trees
Take out wildlife at a rate of species every single day
Take out people who've lived with this for 100,000 years -Inject a billion burgers worth of beef -
Grain eaters - methane dispensers.
Through thinning ozone,
Waves fall on wrinkled earth -
Gravity, light, ancient refuse of stars,
Speak of a drowning -
But this, this is something other.
Busy monster eats dark holes in the spirit world
Where wild things have to go
To disappear
Forever

If a tree falls in the forest does anybody hear?
If a tree falls in the forest does anybody hear?
Anybody hear the forest fall? --Bruce xxxxburn

[And now playing is Joan Ozborne... "What IF god was one of us:"...yeah yeah yeah...callin on the 'phone']

I'm really not kidding with the lyric stuff, by the way! I think you might have no idea HOW IMPORTANT this all is....

[Siggie]

Re: Does Anybody Think The Overdue Cali Earthquake Is Almost Here?

Union of Concerned Scientists is a respected, yet conservative (too much in my HO) science advocacy group that I've supported (yet this is something everyone can get to):

"UCS is an independent nonprofit alliance of more than 100,000 concerned citizens and scientists. We augment rigorous scientific analysis with innovative thinking and committed citizen advocacy to build a cleaner, healthier environment and a safer world."

Main Page

http://www.ucsusa.org/

Global Warming Science

http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science/

That's a site I know off top of my head. I'm looking for specific (if you want a citation), otherwise just google "global warming." Are you skeptical about atmospheric the effects of putting carbon in the atmosphere (that was previously held in oil and trees) in some specific way?

Is this for me? Because I didn't ask for an organization of anyone. There are plenty of those and that doesn't mean they know crap. Look at PETA and ALF.
I didn't say peer-reviewed article because I didn't want something specific. I can find plenty of these types of organizations by googling. Those who claim that such a thing exists, have the burden of proof and I'm calling you on it. Cite your sources!

I asked for a reference or two of published peer-reviewed articles in scholarly journals that conclude that there is even such a thing as "global warming." Not something that says that temps this year were higher than last, but one(s) that says that that change has occured because of our actions.

I'm not trying to be a b*itch about it and I apologize if this comes across that way, but this is our third exchange of words here and you have yet to provide a reputable source for this info. Seems almost like you're dragging your feet on purpose or something: asking for clarification when I don't think I was ambiguous, giving me precisely what I didn't want and then saying "is this is or do you want this", when "this" is exactly what I asked for all along. If I had asked you for song lyrics, it wouldn't take this long.

[Anahita]

Re: Global Warming

Is this for me? Because I didn't ask for an organization of anyone.

Not specifically. Like I said, I included that particular site because it is one I knew off the top of my head and it has some quality scientific information (and links) for anyone wanting to learn more. Because other people are reading (and many do not have the ability or desire to locate and read peer-reviewed journal articles) I thought that might be helpful until I better understood your skepticism.

E.g., Global Warming FAQ: http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming...rming-faq.html

I didn't say peer-reviewed article because I didn't want something specific. I can find plenty of these types of organizations by googling. Those who claim that such a thing exists, have the burden of proof and I'm calling you on it. Cite your sources!…

I asked for a reference or two of published peer-reviewed articles in scholarly journals that conclude that there is even such a thing as "global warming." Not something that says that temps this year were higher than last, but one(s) that says that that change has occured because of our actions.

That's what I meant by 'or you could just google global warming.' I was not clear about what (about specific kind of data or the assumptions in the science, or what?) your specific skepticism was regarding global warming. If I understand that it is simply that 'it isn't happening' or 'isn't real' or 'isn't human cause'... that's VERY easy to give peer-reviewed information to counter...

Here are some reports that have thoroughly reviewed the scientific data from multiple disciplines that study climate change. These reports discuss the consensus in the scientific community that global warming is not only real, but also that the recent warming is human-caused. They also discuss unknowns (e.g., what the effects of climate change will be). In addition, these reports are available online (since I highly doubt anyone reading this is going to seek out a journal at the library and read it).

Understanding and Responding to Climate Change, National Academies Report

http://dels.nas.edu/dels/rpt_briefs/climate-change-final.pdf

(National Academies includes: National Academy of Engineering, Institute of Medicine, National Science Foundation, and National Research Council)

[Page 1, paragraph 2)
“The fact is that the Earth’s climate is always changing. A key question is how much of the observed warming is due to human activities and how much is due to natural variability in the climate. In the judgment of most climate scientists, Earth’s warming in recent decades has been caused primarily by human activities that have increased the amount of greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere (fig 1). Greenhouse gasses have increased significantly since the Industrial Revolution, mostly from the burning of fossil fuels for energy, industrial processes, and transportation. Greenhouse gasses are at their highest level in at least 400,000 years and continue to rise.”

[Page 2, Paragraph 2]

“This brochure highlights the important themes and recommendations from the National Academies’ reports on climate change. These reports are the products of the National Academies’ study process, which brings together leading scientists, engineers, public health officials, and other experts to address specific scientific and technical questions. On climate change, such reports have assessed consensus findings on the science…”


Climate Change Science: An Analysis of Some Key Questions (2001), Committee on the Science of Climate Change, National Research Council.

http://darwin.nap.edu/books/0309075742/html/ [This is a longer report (book) that you can buy, or read for free online]


EPA Global Warming

http://yosemite.epa.gov/oar/globalwarming.nsf/content/index.html

" What's Known for Certain?

Scientists know for certain that human activities are changing the composition of Earth's atmosphere. Increasing levels of greenhouse gases, like carbon dioxide (CO2 ), in the atmosphere since pre-industrial times have been well documented. There is no doubt this atmospheric buildup of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases is largely the result of human activities.

It's well accepted by scientists that greenhouse gases trap heat in the Earth's atmosphere and tend to warm the planet. By increasing the levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, human activities are strengthening Earth's natural greenhouse effect. The key greenhouse gases emitted by human activities remain in the atmosphere for periods ranging from decades to centuries." (EPA Page)

[BOLD/italic-emphasis added]

And, before Anonymouse even says it, I’ll point out that "Dragnet Ecology: Just the Facts Ma’am" that I cited in another thread, also deals with the issue of climate change (i.e., interpretation.) E.g., I prefer the use of consensus (rather than certainty) when talking about science. Scientific certainty is usually associated with a p value, rather than being absolute...

Parthiapride asked Anonymouse to elaborate on why he believed global warming science is junk science. Carlin doesn't answer his question.

[Anonymouse]

Re: Does Anybody Think The Overdue Cali Earthquake Is Almost Here?

The song playing on Little Steven's show (see God Father and Mother) http://forum.armenianclub.com/showth...954#post149954 makes sense.

"Worldwide Suicide" by Pearl Jam wouldn't be just metaphor (and a song about war) without 'environmentalists.' Thankfully, most people do care about the planet! Again, happy Earth Day.

I think the 'planet' loves humanity (even though some, mostly in the industrial world, act like __________'s) I don't think the planet would 'be fine' without people (or chimps, whales, dolphins, tigers, jaguars, wolves, elephants, orchids... )



If your goal is the extinction of humanity, this is the logic to follow. But don't be surprise if GOD and EARTH don't agree with you. Fortunately, Carlin is a master of sarcasm. Sometimes advocating the absurd makes the reasonable choice obvious.

Carlin was not being sarcastic.

And there is nothing to indicate that global warming is some sort of undeniable law. It's only conjecture, and a shoddy one at best. There is no fear of human extinction unless humans bomb the crap out each other.

[Anahita]

Re: Does Anybody Think The Overdue Cali Earthquake Is Almost Here?

Carlin was not being sarcastic.

And there is nothing to indicate that global warming is some sort of undeniable law. It's only conjecture, and a shoddy one at best. There is no fear of human extinction unless humans bomb the crap out each other.

You still haven't given anything that backs up anything you've said about the topic. I mentioned before that your opinion that climate science is 'junk science' is misinformed. On exactly what do you base your claims?

You statements aren't supported by science and almost everyone who has studied climate change.

Sometimes advocating the absurd makes the reasonable choice obvious.

If this is what you are doing, then you make sense.

[Anonymouse]

Re: Global Warming

Myths of Global Warming
by Carlo Stagnaro

Is it possible that six centuries are longer than millions of years? Yes, but just at two conditions. First, that such an authoritative source as BBC claims so. Secondly, that it does so for politically correct, socially oriented, and environmental friendly purposes.

It’s not a joke: you just have to check out Richard Hollingham’s reportage from Greenland. The author went to that cold and inhospitable place in order to see with his own eyes the effects of anthropogenic global warming. "Greenland is a massive island locked in ice," he says. "And from the air there is little evidence that it is melting. Its enormous ice cap, a sea of white stretching seemingly forever, overflows into thousands of glaciers... It is only when you get near to the base of the glaciers that you can see how the landscape is changing. A few metres above the ice, the rock is totally bare. A scar running horizontally across the valleys." The phenomenon is so dramatic that new vegetation is growing: "This land was being exposed for the first time for millions of years." Remember: millions of years.

If things are really going this way, well, we have to do something. If really 150 years have been enough to change global climate in such a huge way, then we need to take action. Call it Kyoto Protocol or however else, we need to turn the Earth’s atmosphere to its natural conditions. We have to do it now. Time is running out and we can waste no more of it. Then the question arises: which atmospheric conditions are "normal"?

Hollingham’s article, although indirectly, provides us with an answer: "The Earth's climate has warmed before, albeit naturally. A ruined church on the banks of a fjord marks the remains of a Viking farming civilisation. The sun casts shadows through the arched window to the site of the altar, last used in the 1400s before the area was abandoned when it became too cold to support habitation."

It is quite a surprise that neither Mr Hollingham, nor BBC editors noticed such a clamorous contradiction. How is it possible that Vikings built in 1400s a Church on a land that hadn’t seen the sun for millions of years? And how could they succeed in farming on a land that was supposedly covered by a deep ice layer? Finally, how can we know that the observed, recent global warming is due to man-made emissions, and not to natural causes? After all, BBC journalist tells that our planet used to be warmer centuries ago (at least warm enough for Greenland to be a fertile land) and then, for some reason, it got colder.

It looks like Mr Hollingham has discovered what was and is obvious. There was no need to go all the way to Greenland just to recognize that Vikings were not stupid. When around one thousand years ago they discovered a green land, they called it Greenland. Then that very same land became white: climate had changed, as it always does and always will.

As Mr Hollingham himself claims, "Greenland is turning green." Does it really sound that strange?

[Anonymouse]

Re: Global Warming

For a nice review of the junk science that is global warming, please refer to the following site.

http://www.junkscience.com/