The truth about global warming

The Seattle Times ^ | October 9, 2005 | Sandi Doughton

[isthisnickcool]

The Earth rotates at about 1,000 miles per hour and is moving around the Sun at about 67,000 miles per hour. Maybe we just need to move aaway from the Sun a little.

I'm going to count to three and then everyone lean to the left real fast. That should make the Earth wobble away from the Sun.

1--2--3.....

[Ragnorak]

Well, either it is getting warmer or it is getting colder.

We have had multiple Ice Ages long before humans evolved. That means there were several periods of Global Cooling each followed by a period of Global Warming. Hmmm... Maybe the Earth's temperature goes through cycles like every other thing in the natural world.

Please, these same scientists believe that if it weren't for the Isthmus of Panama rising, which prevented the free flow of water between the Atlantic and Pacific, which changed the salination levels between the Atlantic and Pacific, which changed the ocean temperatures, which changed the trade winds, which changed the rain patterns, which resulted in the deforestation of half the continent of Africa, Humans would never have evolved. But when flood plains actually flood it's a sign of the Apocalypse.

[Jim_Curtis]

1995 was the hottest year on record until it was eclipsed by 1997 — then 1998, 2001, 2002, 2003 and 2004

I guarantee you that they didn't use the same thermometers for every one of these years. They selected the temp readings that would give them the desired statistics.

With winter approaching, ask the Warmist nut jobs this question: "Will a colder than average winter be a sign of global cooling?"...answer: "No, that would be a sign of global warming."...then ask: "Would a warmer than average winter be a sign of global cooling?"...answer: "Don't be silly, that would be a sign of global warming."...then ask: "What would be a sign of global cooling?".

Go ask one them before winter starts, you'll see that I'm right.

[ElkGroveDan]

[gondramB]

"Well, either it is getting warmer"

Over the last hundred years the earth's surface has gotten warmer - no doubt about it.

What is not clear is why and what is not proved is that mankind has any significant effect on recent global warming.

[lonestar67]

"Dr Solanki does not know what is causing the Sun to burn brighter now or how long this cycle would last."


I blame Bush.

[My Right Foot]

Great image. A thumbnail to the full image would be good.

[Tribune7]

I did not mean you.

[postaldave]

you can feel the heat off of that picture.

[jackliberty]

Models have improved greatly in the past 30 years but still can't anticipate all the ways the atmosphere will respond as greenhouse gases climb. The dozen models in use today predict average temperature increases of 3 to 11 degrees by the end of the century.

The first predictions of 10,000 dead New Orleanians after Katrina came from a LSU computer model. (At that point, Nagin was saying, "hundreds, maybe thousands.")

I was a skeptic of the 10,000 figure. Can I get some money from whatever industries?

[Drammach]

The problem is that CO2 has between increasing steadily and rapidly since the early 1800's but global warming didn't start til almost 100 years later.

Then again, I read (somewhere) that CO2 increase "follows" global warming, it doesn't "lead"...

I subscribe to the Solar theory..
And I prefer to call it Natural Climate Change..
I don't care what the scientific "consensus" is on this subject..
There is no explanation for the shrinking of the Martian Polar Ice Caps that can show a human influence..
That's two different planets exhibiting the same climatic characteristics, and that rules out human influence..

[alwaysconservative]

LOLOLOL!

[Laz711]

That is very sound reasoning, I must say so myself.

[alwaysconservative]

Great links; thanks for posting the article AND the rebuttal! Ping to Ernest for your global warming list.

[PeterPrinciple]

"There's a huge disconnect between what professional scientists have studied and learned in the last 30 years, and what is out there in the popular culture," said Naomi Oreskes, a science historian at the University of California, San Diego.

yes there is, thank goodness!!!

[Tribune7]

The Kyoto Treaty would just make things worse, but more expensive.

Yup.

And a crash nuke construction program is based on the assumption the greenies are right -- i.e. that nuclear warming is occuring, it is caused by man, and is a bad thing.

OTOH if they are wrong, nuke building causes no harm and increases wealth unlike the Kyoto proposals.

[Archon of the East]

Yea right no other explanation for "unprecedented" warming


http://www.co2science.org/scripts/Template/MainPage.jsp?Page=BrowseCatalogEnlarged&sProductCode=V7N30EDIT

[BadAndy]

www.geosc.psu.edu/Courses/Geosc320/Sigman.pdf

There is a chart in the link that shows the cycle of CO2 and temperature over hundreds of thousands of years. We are currently at the END of an interglacial period, meaning that the temps will soon be getting MUCH colder and glaciers will return. The good news is we will only have to wait a hundred thousand years before it gets warm again. Read it and weep, there is nothing we can do to stop it.

[gondramB]

" There is no explanation for the shrinking of the Martian Polar Ice Caps that can show a human influence..
That's two different planets exhibiting the same climatic characteristics, and that rules out human influence.."


Between conservatives, that's fine to discuss but in terms of public debate Mars is not the right example - Mars is 150% as far away from the Sun as the earth but the temperature gets up to 68 degrees and the reason is the high concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. That's not the example we want to emphasize.

For internal discussion, Mars is tricky and the Earth and Mars correlating does not mean they have the same causation .

[JPJones]

We need to bring back pirates.

Aye! Arrrr.