Climatologist Exposes Cracks In Global Warming Foundation

usnewswire ^ | Tuesday, July 13, 2004 | Sean Tuffnell

[Captain Beyond]

bump

[megatherium]

I confess I don't know what effect the magnetic fields have on global climate, I figured not much. Interesting web site, even if some of it doesn't convince me. (I doubt Mars can cause earthquakes, its gravitational effect on Earth is much much weaker than that of the Sun or Moon.)

One article suggests a solar output increase is causing global warming. I remember reading that solar variability can account for maybe 0.4 of a degree of temperature change, but the alleged present 1 degree increase is said to be greater than what solar can account for.

But Mother Nature can definitely throw us some wicked curve balls. The volcano Tambora produced an eruption in 1815 that caused the famous "year without a summer" in 1816, when a snowstorm hit New England in June.

[been_lurking]

Tell that to the mammoths. Our ancestors killed off many of the pleistocene megafauna species 11,000 years ago.

That is an unproveable hypothosis. Unless you know something the rest of the scientists don't.

[been_lurking]

By the way, I want a brand new tent. Mine is getting pretty battered and weather beaten.

Sorry, one per customer only. Please read the fine print.

[megatherium]

megatherium: Tell that to the mammoths. Our ancestors killed off many of the pleistocene megafauna species 11,000 years ago.

been_lurking: That is an unproveable hypothosis. Unless you know something the rest of the scientists don't.

I saw an episode of NOVA a couple of years ago that examined the theories of what caused the extinction of the mammoths. The two theories under consideration were climate change (end of the ice age) and human predation.

Plausible computer models say that human hunting combined with climate pressure could explain the demise of the mammoths, which would have happened in several centuries. The die-off of mammoths and the other pleistocene megafauna in North America occurred over a 400 year period coincident with the arrival of humans, about 11,000 years ago. The climate changes that enabled humans to cross the Bering land bridge must have played a role, but another theory is that humans brought diseases with them that killed the animals. But again, hunting is known to be capable of causing these extinctions. Yet, you are right, proof may be hard to come by.

[been_lurking]

I saw an episode of NOVA a couple of years ago that examined the theories of what caused the extinction of the mammoths. The two theories under consideration were climate change (end of the ice age) and human predation.

You must have been staying at a Holiday Inn while watching Nova.

Note that in your own reply, you used the term "theory." A theory is an idea to be tested and proved. A theory is not a fact. There used to be a bunch of scientists that had theories about a flat planet and a sun that rotated around the earth. Eventually these theories were proved wrong.

Don't believe anything you hear, and only half of what you see.

[megatherium]

You must have been staying at a Holiday Inn while watching Nova.

?

Note that in your own reply, you used the term "theory." A theory is an idea to be tested and proved. A theory is not a fact.

Yes -- a theory in science is a testable hypothesis that explains observations. Sometimes "theory" is applied to things that are completely accepted as fact, such as the "theory of relativity" (this particular theory made a number of predictions which have all been abundantly verified). Sometimes "theory" is applied to things generally accepted as true but perhaps still controversial (the theory of evolution might be an example of this), and sometimes to things which are as yet completely unproved. In the case of our dear departed mammoths, there are competing theories that offer good explanations for their extinction but no convincing test available for eliminating the one theory or the other. I think, however, it is clear that humans were capable of causing the extinction (whether or not they were guilty).

[been_lurking]

I think, however, it is clear that humans were capable of causing the extinction (whether or not they were guilty).

Be that as it may, my original premise was that humans can have no lasting impact on the earth, climate or otherwise. As the earth has continued to survive, even without the presence of Mammoths, then I will stand by my original premise.

By the way, many of these same scientists have a theory that 99.99% of all living species that ever existed on the planet earth are now extinct. If that is true, then any effect man may or may not have on the extinction of species is really quite trivial.

[SunkenCiv]

---

The Real Environmental Crisis: Why Poverty, Not Affluence, Is the Environment's Number One Enemy by Jack M. Hollander

Global Warming in a Politically Correct Climate: How Truth Became Controversial by M. Mihkel Mathiesen foreword by Zbigniew Jaworowski

The Skeptical Environmentalist: Measuring the Real State of the World by Bjorn Lomborg

---

NOT A PING LIST, merely posted to: Been_Lurking; Bohdathone; Boss_Jim_Gettys; Captain Beyond; Cogitator; Dog Gone; Ex-texan; Expatpat; Expat_Panama; Gator Navy; Justa-hairyape; Longshadow; Mainframe65; Megatherium; P8riot; Patrickhenry; Pepsionice; Philosofy123; Presidio9; Rocket1968; Rwfromkansas; Servant Of The 9; Sphinx; Strategerist; Talleyman; Tandem; Valerieusa; Vrwc_Minion