Skip to comments.
The Flipping Point (global warming conversion of skeptic Michael Shermer)
Scientific American ^
| June 2006
| Michael Shermer
Posted on 05/25/2006 9:02:16 AM PDT by cogitator
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 341-360, 361-380, 381-400 ... 501-504 next last
To: aruanan
Evangelical preachers are always the last to adopt whatever weird crap has been in the popular culture. And they do it about 30 years late. Francis Schaeffer noted this years ago in The God Who Is There. Perfect. I read that and I wish I had pointed it out.
To: ChadGore; elvisabel78
elvisabel78: Again for your process of elimination you have more variables to over come.
Here are a number of possibilities that could be taking place right here:
Mantle of the earth
We are just now very recently (first time viewed in 1997) been learning the Mantle has currents much like our oceans. This means the mantle is a large body of liquid that is moving which has different pressures and temperatures.
More information I found here:
http://www.geophysics.harvard.edu/geodyn/nasa_report/NASA_Final_Report.html
362
posted on
05/27/2006 2:56:42 PM PDT
by
Steve Van Doorn
(*in my best Eric cartman voice* “I love you guys”)
To: Chaguito
Total Volume of Earth Atmosphere = 5000 TRILLION metric tons.
Proportion that is CO2 = .03%
Proportion of Earth's Annual CO2 output that is human sourced = 2.5%
Actual caclulated Global temperature increase over last 100 years = 1 degree (F)
Proportion of Atmosphere contributing to Greenhouse effect which moderates earth temperatures, constituted by water vapor (H2O) = up to 4%
# of years it took earths atmosphere to evolve from Helium-Hydrogen to its present Nitrogen - Oxegen composition =
about a Billion.
# of years Earth has been in a warming trend = 18000 (since last ice age)
363
posted on
05/27/2006 3:06:33 PM PDT
by
Gail Wynand
(Why not "virtual citizenship"?)
To: aruanan
The IPCC says:
However, over the Northern Hemisphere land areas where urban heat islands are most apparent, both the trends of lower-tropospheric temperature and surface air temperature show no significant differences.
You might be overestimating the impact of urban heat islands.
To: balch3
spend more time listening to Rush and less to these environmentalist Wackos. As a Rush fan you might remember Rush's great caller "Peter the Lawyer" during the Clinton impeachment. Peter Mulhern (as he was later identified) said that conservatives sometimes forget that some of what appears in the New York Times is actually true.
Same thing here. Just because an environmentalist wacko cries wolf, that does mean that there is no wolf. Sure, Kyoto is a economically disastrous non-solution, the IPCC temperature projections are highly speculative, and Algore is a buffoon. Yet CO2 levels ARE rising, almost certainly due to human activity, and that might turn out to have real, bad, consequences.
Rush does not even seem to favor studying this as a potential problem. He flatly states that humans cannot affect the climate. I have plenty of respect for Rush, but here his opinion appears to be grounded in politics, not science.
365
posted on
05/27/2006 3:23:59 PM PDT
by
TChad
To: TChad
If these environmentalist are right and CO2 levels are rising at an ALARMING rate then why dont they pull their money together and farm Plankton which we already know gives us the majority of our Oxygen.
Why would they want to destroy our lives rather then benefit it?
366
posted on
05/27/2006 3:39:22 PM PDT
by
Steve Van Doorn
(*in my best Eric cartman voice* “I love you guys”)
To: saminfl
Probably more the latter.
To: TChad
Off the top of my head; I believe if a dedicated group wanted to compensate for the CO2 created by man they could do it for $10 to $20 million plus maybe $1 million per year expenses farming already known plankton.
All they would need to do is feed the already known spawning areas.
368
posted on
05/27/2006 3:52:28 PM PDT
by
Steve Van Doorn
(*in my best Eric cartman voice* “I love you guys”)
To: TChad
Another thing.. we do know in one of the largest spawning areas for plankton there is Volcanic activity creating warm waters in the area which is very bad for Plankton. I personally believe this is what is creating the higher CO2 in recent years. Only one study has been done on this but it was largely ignored.
BTW - it is fascinating how much Oxygen we get from Plankton. It is better you look that up yourself, few people believe it until they read it themselves.
369
posted on
05/27/2006 4:02:31 PM PDT
by
Steve Van Doorn
(*in my best Eric cartman voice* “I love you guys”)
To: Steve Van Doorn
Why would they want to destroy our lives rather then benefit it? You really want for me to try to describe the convoluted motivations of liberals, and to explain why they are not part of the reality-based community? Before dinner?
370
posted on
05/27/2006 4:08:17 PM PDT
by
TChad
To: TChad
"Yet CO2 levels ARE rising"
depends on what baseline you select. And, so what if they are rising? Variation is a natural and ongoing part of the atmospheric process. Otherwise we might still be in the ice age.
"almost certainly due to human activity"
based upon what? The 2.5% of annual CO2 output that is attributed to human activity? What makes you think the other 97.5% of CO2 production arises from static phenomena? Why cant they be responsible for CO2 level variations? Does anyone think that natural C02 output worldwide is being accurately measured?
"and that might turn out to have real, bad, consequences."
or it might not. What is your basis for considering it something to be concerned about? Since the reltionship of global temperature to CO2 increases are known to be logarithmic it is far more likely it will have no consequences at all if CO2 continues to increase above the level at which its impact on global temperature is likely to plateau. (not much warmer than it is now) see:www.junkscience.com
Antrhopomorphic Global Warming is a non-scientific hoax cloaked in techncal jarjon by pretentious psuedo scientists and political con men like Al Gore. It is rubbish. Total B.S. Their con game, succeeds however any time a regular citizen is persuaded to start hedging his bets and thinking they should waste $20 on a light bulb that has a built in transformer and ballast to be discarded every time it burns out well short of the promised 10,000 hour life (if used less than 3 hrs at time a coating wears off due to the frequence of on/off cycles) or an underweight overpriced automobile that has both an internal combustion system and a battery electric drive system (a good diesel motor in a similiar weight car gets just as many miles per gallon)
Or, oh yeah, lets get on the inefficiency bandwagon (lead by the same folks that brought you MBTE) by paying more to burn more costly and less powerful alcohol based fuels (ethanol) all because of the Global Warming boogeyman and political mandates ordered by enthusiatic bureaucrats and legistlatures.
371
posted on
05/27/2006 6:05:48 PM PDT
by
Gail Wynand
(Why not "virtual citizenship"?)
To: elvisabel78
However, over the Northern Hemisphere land areas where urban heat islands are most apparent, both the trends of lower-tropospheric temperature and surface air temperature show no significant differences.
Lower tropospheric temperatures aren't affected by urban heat islands. It's the land-based thermometers that used to be way out in the country that are now surrounded by city with, sometimes, up to 7 or more degrees higher temperatures than the surrounding non-urban area.
372
posted on
05/27/2006 6:19:01 PM PDT
by
aruanan
To: Chaguito
Perfect. I read that and I wish I had pointed it out.
I remember seeing in our church magazine in the Sandinista days some absolutely stupid articles written by people who had visited Nicaragua and effused about how close to the Lord they felt. Some of these same morons went on and on about how they deprived themselves of all sorts of common everyday pleasures and spiritualized their denial. It was warmed-over 60's radicalism but it seemed so pathetic because it was so obviously behind the times.
373
posted on
05/27/2006 6:33:19 PM PDT
by
aruanan
To: aruanan
Your words here approximate the truth more than those from your earlier post, because you now focus on local urban areas, and not on global land-based temperature records represented in the graphs that we've seen, and that originated this discussion. You first stated:
The land-based temperature records are an artifact caused by urban heat islands.
But the IPCC found that this urbanization heat has had a minimal effect in these records:
Extensive tests have shown that the urban heat island effects are no more than about 0.05°C up to 1990 in the global temperature records used in this chapter to depict climate change. Thus we have assumed an uncertainty of zero in global land-surface air temperature in 1900 due to urbanisation, linearly increasing to 0.06°C (two standard deviations 0.12°C) in 2000. link
To: elvisabel78
And it has also been found that:
- "Contrary to generally accepted wisdom, no statistically significant impact of urbanization could be found in annual temperatures." link
- The trends in urban stations for 1951 to 1989 (0.10°C/decade) are not greatly more than those for all land stations (0.09°C/decade).
- Simlarly the rural trend is 0.70°C/century from 1880 to 1998, which is actually larger than the full station trend (0.65°C/century) link
To: elvisabel78
Thus we have assumed an uncertainty of zero in global land-surface air temperature in 1900 due to urbanisation, linearly increasing to 0.06°C (two standard deviations 0.12°C) in 2000.
Yes, but global land-surface temperatures are extremely spotty outside the developed world. It's in the developed world where there are the most extensive and long-running records that are plagued by the effect of urban heat islands. Besides, the IPCC (especially the political arm of the IPCC) has already demonstrated that it's not an objective, neutral participant in all this.
376
posted on
05/28/2006 6:07:50 AM PDT
by
aruanan
To: aruanan
Again, you spoke about land-based record without exceptions at first. And like i said, any heat due to urbanization has had a negligible impact in global land-based temperature, which is the issue here, since we are discussing global warming. As for the IPCC, The NAS panel commissioned by Bush issued a strong opinion, which in essence, confirmed that of the IPCC. The American Geophysical Union, the worlds largest organization of earth scientists, has also released a strong statement describing human-caused disruptions of Earths climate.
To: elvisabel78
CO2 GW adherents reported parts per million = 380
CO2 PPM that arise from human sources, according to GW theory = 11.4 and possibly growing (but which does not/ can not forecast technological improvements/change, other than as a gross assumption)
Atmospheric PPM not related to Anthropomorphic Global Warming = 999,988.6
Atmospheric H20 (water vapor PPM involved in Greenhouse (earth temperature moderation effect = up to 4000
Ability of pro GW research models to account for local weather variations/localizations = 0
Influence of local weather variations on data points for measuring average earth temperatures = 100% (all data is local)
% of gross C02 production conceded by GW theorist to be absorbed naturally by earth - at least 97.5%
378
posted on
05/28/2006 12:35:44 PM PDT
by
Gail Wynand
(Why not "virtual citizenship"?)
To: Steve Van Doorn
I believe if a dedicated group wanted to compensate for the CO2 created by man they could do it for $10 to $20 million plus maybe $1 million per year expenses farming already known plankton. Sounds great. Do you have a link or two?
379
posted on
05/28/2006 5:20:24 PM PDT
by
TChad
To: TChad
as i said earlier few people realize how much Oxygen we get from Plankton and I believe it is something you need to look up yourself.
380
posted on
05/28/2006 6:22:50 PM PDT
by
Steve Van Doorn
(*in my best Eric cartman voice* “I love you guys”)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 341-360, 361-380, 381-400 ... 501-504 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson