Posted on 07/22/2005 7:22:59 AM PDT by mlc9852
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Global warming is caused primarily by humans and "nearly all climate scientists today" agree with that viewpoint, the new head of the National Academy of Sciences -- a climate scientist himself -- said Wednesday.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
The aliens in the new War of the Worlds tried that.
The sombitches couldn't handle polluted human bodies and our polluted water and died without human intervention, thus saving our sorry butts from extinction.
lets start with the Muslims!
Not too mention how I'm looking sooo forward to starting a citrus and avacado orchard on my 47 acres in the Ozarks.
And their future funding and advancement is tied to their willingness to advance this theory. Computer models are even intentially rigged to ignore natural negative feedback mechanisms to produce scary results. That is how they come up with the ridiculous range of predictions that the earth will warm from 2.5 to 10.7 degrees over the next century. The models at the higher end were intentionally altered to ignore known factors which reduce global warming. They are not an honest bunch as they include those numbers in their range when they talk to the media and publish papers. It is EXTREMELY unlikely that we will warm even 2 degrees over the next hundred years. An honest analysis based on current trends would be -0.5 cooling to 1.0 degree warming. The range 'scientists' publish is simply tin-foil hat kookery.
Will the new head of the National Academy of Sciences push for the increased use of nuclear power as a way to reduce "greenhouse" gases?
They don't. They only know samples from ice cores that are an average of several hundred years. Current CO2 is about 24 % above a sample from several hundred thousand years ago --that sample is the average of several hundred years, so individual years could be and were likely to be above or equal to current levels.
BP = before present. 
Link to Vostok ice core CO2 data -- http://cdiac.esd.ornl.gov/trends/co2/vostok.htm
Yes, the Martian Polar Ice Caps will be gone in 1,000 years.
I thought it was all cow and sheep flatulance.
It must be Barney's fault. I just knew he was a very bad dog!
Sure!
Why just this past Wednesday it was 105, tying a record set in 1878......
But, in 1878 the cause of the "global warming" was cow farts......
Yes, there were a few articles posted here on FR that are still available via search.
I might be willing to go along with this, but then, I'd say we need some massive spending on hundreds of new NUCLEAR power plants, ASAP.
Like so many of his ilk, he sees the atmosphere as his playground where computer models allow him to recreate the earth in his image and to his satisfaction all the while laying the blame for its present sorry state (as he views it) at the feet of the greedy capitalists and their bought-and-paid-for politicians.
Some of his ideas are so far out in left field as to be ludicrous on their face such as this tidbit gleaned from straightdope.com:
Ralph Cicerone, a professor of geosciences at the University of California at Irvine, has suggested spraying 50,000 tons of propane or ethane over the South Pole early each winter. The resultant chemical reaction, he wrote in a 1991 article in Science magazine, would temporarily neutralize the ozone hole. It would also cost a zillion bucks. But if things keep up like they have, we may yet have to do it.
The root of global warming was solved last night. snarks_when_bored caused it.
Sounds like a candidate for the Nobel Peace Prize.
Ironically, the most obvious solution to what is called the most important issue facing mankind is never proposed by globull warmers. Hmmm, I don't get it. However, a tax on rich countries will solve this. Being only an engineer, I guess I am not as smart as these globull warming experts because I don't see how a tax reduces globull warming. I guess I need a computer model to prove it to me.
My above post was inspired by a memory during the endless reading period I underwent while the ozone wars were being fought; I remembered him as being a primary author of such a notion in Science and just went on Google to hunt it down.
Cicerone is the president of NAS and there is a wealth of info on him in a Google search if anyone wants to read more.
Like the poverty pimps, he and his followers would be unemployed if the problems they deplore were to ever be solved.
So they are comparing today against a several hundred year average some thousands of years ago?
Shouldn't we compare the average of the last several hundred years against a like period in the past.
This looks rather cyclical over time.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.