Global Warming, my pet peeve.

Hoosier8

Master
Rating - 100%
21   0   1
Jul 3, 2008
4,733
48
Indianapolis
OK, this is one of those things that just needle me. I like things to make sense and I have a very wide background in many things so the Global Warming religion is one of those things that just has never made sense to me. You have to realize the scale that all of this is happening in and how little information is actually being used to "predict" Global Warming (Climate Change for you PC people). Again, the fact that the Global Warmers models don't include the sun in their predictions is just plain insane.

If we have cooling, it will be much worse for us than warming would ever be. Another thing, we are about 18000 years into the last warming period and may be close to the end of it. See this ----> Google Image Result for http://www.trythenbuy.co.uk/images/image157.gif

INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY

Clicky ---> Today in Investor's Business Daily stock analysis and business news

Posted 12/30/2008

Climate Change: The Earth has been warming ever since the end of the Little Ice Age. But guess what: Researchers say mankind is to blame for that, too.

As we've noted, 2008 has been a year of records for cold and snowfall and may indeed be the coldest year of the 21st century thus far. In the U.S., the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration registered 63 local snowfall records and 115 lowest-ever temperatures for the month of October.

Global thermometers stopped rising after 1998, and have plummeted in the last two years by more than 0.5 degrees Celsius. The 2007-2008 temperature drop was not predicted by global climate models. But it was predictable by a decline in sunspot activity since 2000.

When the sun is active, it's not uncommon to see sunspot numbers of 100 or more in a single month. Every 11 years, activity slows, and numbers briefly drop near zero. Normally sunspots return very quickly, as a new cycle begins. But this year, the start of a new cycle, the sun has been eerily quiet.

The first seven months averaged a sunspot count of only three and in August there were no sunspots at all — zero — something that has not occurred since 1913.

According to the publication Daily Tech, in the past 1,000 years, three previous such events — what are called the Dalton, Maunder and Sporer Minimums — have all led to rapid cooling. One was large enough to be called the Little Ice Age (1500-1750).

The Little Ice Age has been a problem for global warmers because it serves as a reminder of how the earth warms and cools naturally over time. It had to be ignored in the calculations that produced the infamous and since-discredited hockey stick graph that showed a sharp rise in warming alleged to be caused by man.

The answer to this dilemma has supposedly been found by two Stanford researchers, Richard Nevle and Dennis Bird, who announced their "findings" at the annual meeting of the American Geophysical Union in San Francisco. According to them, man not only is causing contemporary warming. He also caused the cooling that preceded it.

According to Bird and Nevle, before Columbus ruined paradise, native Americans had deforested a significant portion of the continent and converted the land to agricultural purposes. Less CO2 was then absorbed from the atmosphere, and the earth was toasty.

Then a bunch of nasty old white guys arrived and depopulated the native populations through war and the diseases they brought with them. This led to the large-scale abandonment of agricultural lands. The subsequent reforestation of the continent caused temperatures to drop enough to bring on the Little Ice Age.

Implicit in this research is that the world would be fine if man wasn't in the way. We either make the world too cold or too hot, a view held by many in high places.

In a speech at Harvard last November, Harvard physicist John Holden, President-elect Obama's choice to be his science adviser as director of the White House Office of Science and Technology, presented a "top 10" list of warming solutions.

Topping the list was "limiting population," as if man was a plague upon the earth. This is a major tenet of green dogma that bemoans the fact that the pestilence called mankind comes with cars, factories and overconsumption of fossil fuels and other resources.

R. Timothy Patterson, professor of geology and director of the Ottawa-Carleton Geoscience Centre of Canada's Carleton University, says: "I and the first-class scientists I work with are consistently finding excellent correlations between the regular fluctuations of the sun and earthly climate. This is not surprising. The sun and the stars are the ultimate source of energy on this planet."

Indeed, a look at a graph of solar irradiance from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration shows little solar activity during the Little Ice Age and significant activity during recent times.

Don't blame Dick and Jane — blame sunspots.
 

elaw555

Shooter
Rating - 100%
15   0   0
Oct 29, 2008
758
16
Speedway, IN
Computer models that predict weather patters are still highly unpredictable even for short term forecasts.

Below is the computer model from the National Center for Environmental Prediction. This map is a forecast of two height levels. These are represented by the red and blue "spaghetti lines".



As you can see, this forecast is for today and the lines are close together, giving us the opportunity to see how accurate the model was when predicting today.

Below is the models forecast for 5 days out, Jan 6.



The lines are farther apart, telling us the model is less certain about what the actual locations of those two height lines will be five days from now.

Below is the forecast for 10 days.



The lines almost cover the entire US continent, and while we could still get a rough average from them, we are much less sure about the location than we were even five days ago.

This is the forecast for Jan 16th.



The lines vary even more than the previous example, and while the give us a rough average to go with, they are nowhere near exact.

If the latest computer models have this much of a +/- factor of error in them at 15 days what kind of +/- are we looking at when "scientists" tell us that the world is going to be 5 degrees warmer in 10 years? I just can't get behind man-made long term global warming when I won't trust a current weather forecast more than 3 days out.
 

sonovasailor

Marksman
Rating - 100%
32   0   0
Oct 7, 2008
391
18
southport
All of this scientific stuff makes my head hurt. All I know is; Us puny humans CAN NOT destroy the earth that God created, with a substance that we exhale and trees turn into oxygen! Global warming is another hoax just like the 1978 ice age and the 1990's Ozone hole! Follow the money! AlGore is a hoax!
 

rhino

Grandmaster
Rating - 100%
24   0   0
Mar 18, 2008
30,906
113
Indiana
The biggest, most annoying element of this crap (as Hoosier 8 noted) is that the sun, which dominates all of this, is virtually ignored in all of the "analysis" and "modeling" that results in the predetermined doomsday scenarios.

No one ever talks about equilibrium.

No one ever talks about the overwhelming source of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is the system of oceans and large lakes that cover most of the planet. The hotter it gets (because of increased incident radiation from the sun), the more CO2 is released from the ocean into the atmosphere. The cooler it gets, the more remains dissolved or returns into solution in the oceans.

If you overlay CO2 concentrations with temperatures, you'll find that the CO2 concentrations correspond to the higher temps, but the changes lag behind the temp changes. That's to be expected by anyone who is not engaged in monumental intellectual dishonesty (or outright lying).

Let's also consider that the "greenhouse" effects of CO2 are dwarfed by that of water vapor. But it's tougher to pin the existence of moisture in the air (also an equlibrium dominated by the sun) on human activity in the minds of the naive than it is to get them to believe their SUVs are killing the planet with their horrible CO2 emissions.

Oh, wait, water is also a product of hydrocarbon combustion! Don't confuse the issue with facts, and logic, though.

The holes are too plentiful to list them all, and trying to make an exhaustive list would likely drive someone crazy because they'd have to think about how people are buying the lies wholesale while they are working on it. Maybe that is part of the liars' plan ... get enough naive people to believe and it will break the will of the honest scientists to continue to respond and refute the lies.

It's the sun, baby. Sun sends us more, we get warmer. Sun sends us less, we get cooler.
 

kludge

Grandmaster
Rating - 100%
5   0   0
Mar 13, 2008
5,356
38
I have been following this for a few years, and studying the causes and effects because I'm a scientist and I really just have to know things for myself.

About a year or two ago scientist discovered that Pluto (yeah, the one WAAAAAY out there) has gotten warmer.

Also, we have photgrapic evidence that the polar ice caps on mars have gotten a little smaller.

We also have photographic evidence of a new storm on Jupiter called the little red spot.

The cause: CO2 emissions on earth.:rofl:



Betcha can't guess what the biggest greenhouse gas on planet earth is...


H2O.

Yup water vapor. Water is a much better "greehouse gas" than CO2 ever pretended to be.

Ever been in Indiana in late July when the temperature is 95 degrees and the humidity is 90%? And it gets downright miserable at night when you're trying to sleep (yeah, I grew up without air conditioning).

Ever been in Arizona on a 100 degree day? And the temperature drops 50 degrees at night.

Ever wonder why? All that water vapor stores heat from the sun during the day and gives it off at night. Sometimes it turns into dew.

All that water regulates the temperature of the earth, it does.


.
.
.

So what about all that CO2?


The atmosphere is about 78% nitrogen 21% oxygen and 0.9% argon. Doesn't leave much room for anything else, does it? CO2? About 0.038%.

Water vapor varies depending on the conditions, of course.

.
.
.

What is a greehouse gas anyway?

In very simple terms...

The earth (bodies of water, rocks, dirt, trees, manmade things) absorbs radiation from the sun and wants to be in equillibruim with its surroundings (space). So during the day the side of the earth facing the sun heats up. Then that side of the earth turns away from the sun and starts to cool off.

The heat is radiated back out into space. (It's being radiated back out into space during the day too, but it's the net effect that we're concerned with.)

The wavelengths from the sun don't heat up the greehouse gasses directly; it's the wavelengths re-radiated by the earth that are easily absorbed by certain gasses (the greenhouse gasses) and this slows down the cooling of the earth at night.

Now (and here is where it gets fun) if you get enough of a greenhouse gas such that it absorbs all of that wavelength or wavelengths that it likes, then adding more of that greenhouse gas doesn't absorb more. It's already all absorbed.

Think of drying up a spill with a towel. Once the spill is dry, getting another dry towel to wipe it up some more doesn't make it drier.


.
.
.

So, I betcha can't guess what the biggest source (BY FAR) of atmospheric CO2 is...

People, right?

Wrong. It's the oceans.

Think of a 2 liter of soda. The CO2 is dissolved in the liquid, and while it's got the lid on, the pressure keeps it dissovled. When you crack the lid the bubbles start to appear and float to the top, and eventually the soda goes flat. Does ALL the CO2 escape? No. It just escapes until it reaches equillibruim (vapor pressure in the liquid = atmosperic pressure; vapor pressure is proportional to temperature; higher temperature means higher vapor pressure and more CO2 escapes).

Sooooo... a hot 2 liter goes flat faster than a cold 2 liter.

What does that mean?

The sun goes through cycles. When the sun heats up the earth heats up and more CO2 is released from the oceans. When the sun cools down the earth cools down and the oceans can hold more dissolved CO2.

.
.
.

It's not us.
 
Last edited:

kludge

Grandmaster
Rating - 100%
5   0   0
Mar 13, 2008
5,356
38
(Or you could have just read Rhino's thread.)

Next time maybe I'll read eveything before I start posting. :)
 

rhino

Grandmaster
Rating - 100%
24   0   0
Mar 18, 2008
30,906
113
Indiana
Heh! No problem with two guys writing the same truth. Way more people are spreading the same ignorance and outright lies over and over, so a little bit of the same on the side of Truth, Justice, and the American Way is a Good Thing.

In the not so distant future, the people who should know better who have been pushing this agenda are going to have to start backpedaling. It will be interesting to read and hear how they're going to deny they lied or deny they jumped on the bandwagon for political reasons. I'm sure some will continue onward with the Pride of Frankenstein and never admit their collusion (whether intentional or not) with the fraud.

This whole debacle is an example of what happens when unethical people in the scientific community choose to tell people with a socio-political agenda what they want to hear rather than admitting their either don't know or that what they want to hear just isn't the case. Once the scientists get invested in the lie, both financially and by their reputation, they paint themselves into a corner and can't find a way out of it. It's like when you corner someone with too much pride to admit they are wrong.
 

kludge

Grandmaster
Rating - 100%
5   0   0
Mar 13, 2008
5,356
38
If you want to know what I think... ok, even if you don't want to know...

There are too many scientists on the government dole or university dole, who without a crisis would lose funding.

A crisis gets more money than learning for learning's sake.

It's very hard not to insert you political/social/religious beliefs into your "scientific method".
 

rhino

Grandmaster
Rating - 100%
24   0   0
Mar 18, 2008
30,906
113
Indiana
You are absolutely correct.

Interesting how the rest of the scientific community is allowing so much "latitude" with the kind of modeling that has been happening the last ten years. In any other field, if it was so obvious (sometimes by direct admission) that the results were preconceived and the model has been adjusted virtually continuously to produce the desired result, the perpetrators would be roasted alive as frauds or at best, idiots.


If you want to know what I think... ok, even if you don't want to know...

There are too many scientists on the government dole or university dole, who without a crisis would lose funding.

A crisis gets more money than learning for learning's sake.

It's very hard not to insert you political/social/religious beliefs into your "scientific method".
 

Hoosier8

Master
Rating - 100%
21   0   1
Jul 3, 2008
4,733
48
Indianapolis
(Or you could have just read Rhino's thread.)

Next time maybe I'll read eveything before I start posting. :)

Both very good. I have known for some time that CO2 in the atmosphere is more a result of heating the oceans and that any man made CO2 is a small percentage of the overall CO2 produced in nature. I read somewhere that at the last conference on "Climate Change", the skeptics now outnumber the true believers. There is no such thing as consensus in science. That is a political term. I am not a scientist but there is hypothesis, theory, and fact in science. So far "Global Warming" is only hypothesis. To elevate this to fact by politicians and then use propaganda to convince the masses to give up their freedom and capital is a crime that I hope is exposed someday. I also hope that Gore, who has elevated this with the religious language like "a moral responsibility", is properly placed in the idiot category sometime in the near future.

The elevation of Climate Change to a cash cow where money starts dictating importance. Clicky ----> The Climate Project

The Climate Project consists of 2,500 dedicated volunteers from throughout the United States, Australia, Canada, India, Spain, and the UK, all personally trained by Al Gore to educate the public about climate change. TCP presenters have reached a combined 4 million people worldwide. Our hope is that by raising the awareness of our fellow citizens about this crisis and informing them about potential solutions, all of us, together, can preserve the climate balance on which humanity and our planet depend.
 

TomN

'tis but a flesh wound!
Site Supporter
Rating - 100%
54   0   0
Mar 22, 2008
2,905
48
Plymouth
It's cold here. I want my global warming. Thanks for bringing my hopes up Algore!!
 

Mrs. Hoppes

Plinker
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Sep 15, 2008
193
16
New Goshen
Hoppes Homestead - Blame Global Warming

Blame Global Warming

Really. Go ahead.

warmlist

It's being blamed on everything from acne (Free Press Release Distribution | Press Release Distribution Services - PressMediaWire.com) to Dafur (The Real Roots of Darfur - The Atlantic (April 2007)) to rapes (Gates of Vienna: Does Global Warming Cause Rape Waves?) to witch killings (Never Yet Melted More Executions of Witches Caused By Global Warming) so go ahead. Blame global warming for what ails you. It's ok. Really. I'll just smile and nod and slowly back away as the witch-killing rapist with a bad complexion blames his problems on global warming. It's a nice change from "My mommy didn't love me." Well, maybe his mother didn't love him because of global warming???

Anyway, as you can probably tell, I am getting highly annoyed at all of this. It is hard to talk about ecological responsibility when garbage like this is being spewed. People aren't going to take it seriously. "Trees are less colorful!" "Trees are more colorful!" "The ocean is less salty!" "The ocean is more salty!" People contradict themselves all in the name of global warming and then wonder why some people don't buy it and other people are in such a panic that they don't know what to do.

Personally, at this point, I don't care. That's right. I don't care about global warming. I care about the environment. I care about ecological responsibility. I care about pollution. I care about eating locally and doing business locally. I care about all of these things. But when it comes to "Global Warming" and what has come out of that, I don't care.
 
Top Bottom