Posted on 05/18/2007 12:20:32 PM PDT by Sub-Driver
See point #5 in my profile; note link #11 in references.
I know you are a beliver in AGW. I am sure the Soros backed hacks at realClimate has spun another fantastic tale. They always repudiate anything that would indicate "natural" causes, but they ALWAYS support anything says it is AGW.
We will never come together on this issue. I respect your beliefs and appreciate your passion. You add to the discussion.
The only thing I know is that the solutions of Gore, et all will destroy our way of life, and KILL millions in the third world. I believe in my heart in the capacity of free humans to adapt and not be afraid of what changes lie ahead. Gore, et al have the irrational obsession with wanting to do something NOW. I believe the reason is that they know as the years pass, this fraud they are trying to perpetuate will unravel big time. Thank you and have a good night.
Thanks for the ping.
Both are true. The question is what is the net effect? The answer is that it can't be measured because of extreme uncertainties in our knowledge of the ocean conveyer and local effects.
The ice core record can't show changes like the current spike in CO2 because, apart from the last 10-20k years, it lacks the resolution to show anything other than many decades or even centuries averaged into single readings.
The article is poorly worded. The 18% or so increase that you pointed out (BTW, I agree it probably mostly manmade) turns into a 3.2% increase in greenhouse warming because the relationship from CO2 concentration to warming is logarithmic.
Hey! There are going to be big bucks in being in the front of the wave of the next panic. Maybe we could cash in!
Because they don't understand that .045% is actually .00045, or 45/100,000. They lose it in the math.
Good! Now we can BLAME the nitwits...
Please cite a source. I would like to review that data. Thank you.
Actually, that's the part that they are lying to everyone about. The warming is not the result of an increase in CO2. It is exactly the opposite. The rise in CO2 preceeds the rise in temperature. The rise in CO2 is the result of the rise in temperature.
I wish I could remember the name of the scientist I heard on the radio explaining this, but when he was asked what was the one most important thing people needed to know about all the hysteria about man-made global warming, that was what he pointed out: the rise in temperature comes first, then the rise in CO2 as a result of that.
Thanks for the link to an outstanding lecture!
20 years ago my science teacher told our class the world would be fresh out of oil in 5-10 years...
Good! Now we can BLAME the nitwits...
IN a larger sense many of them are nitwits but in a specifically strategizing sense their leadership is infested with dangerous anti capitalists who want to blame every negative event, be it an iceberg melting or a ghetto kid commiting a crime, on the economic system that has created such wealth for the common man around the world.
Thanks for the link to “Aliens Cause Global Warming.” I printed the article and plan on sharing it with others I’ve been talking to about the false science used to prove global warming.
Crichton is simply the best at conveying scientific information in a manner that non-intellectuals can understand.
I'd go so far as to say it mostly starts at publication.
Review committees are there to keep the journals from embarasing themselves. They are not the complete process which is open to outsiders that can make a coherent case.
The 'Hockey Stick' is a perfect example, but don't ask the MSM about it.
‘It’s All Going to be a Joke in 5 Years’”
Yep and the joke will be “how could we have been so wrong.We’re going into another ice age,the earth is freezing, we’re all going to die,aasaaaaaiiiiiiiyyyyyiiiii
A quick google search for "CO2 historic rate of change" returns many hits. The first of which is at:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/09/05/co2_ice_cores/
Not a primary source. But it should get you started.
To Quote:
Until very recently, the fastest rate of change was an increase of 30 parts per million over a thousand years. We have seen the same increase, 30ppm, in the last 17 years.
Click on POGW graphic for full GW rundown
New!!: Dr. John Ray's
GREENIE WATCH
Ping me if you find one I've missed.
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.