Posted on 02/03/2013 5:03:35 PM PST by Jack Hydrazine
Climate change itself is already in the process of definitively rebutting climate alarmists who think human use of fossil fuels is causing ultimately catastrophic global warming. That is because natural climate cycles have already turned from warming to cooling, global temperatures have already been declining for more than 10 years, and global temperatures will continue to decline for another two decades or more.
(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...
They were right about the freeze. At any time we could start into the next ice age. If you look at my profile page you’ll see some graphs that indicate that.
Also, take a look at this article posted on IceAgeNow.
Sudden climate transitions during the Quaternary
http://iceagenow.info/2013/02/sudden-climate-transitions-quaternary/
Even if there is warming, so what? Why is it a bad thing anyway, the Earth has been changing since the beginning....we will adapt as always.
It so happens to be that I am both an engineer and a lawyer.
I wouldn’t think total extinction but one major reduction. For one small example of the difficulties. Imagine many of the great northern oil reserves under a two or three mile ice cap. That would make for some tough drilling.
Assuming the figures you are using are accurate (a big assumption) they also indicate that increased CO2 doesn’t cause an increase in temps.
Claim That Sea Level Is Rising Is a Total Fraud
Sea levels began to rise 18k years ago at the end of the last glacial period. They have risen about 135 meters since then which is an average of 7.5 millimeters per year. That is an average of 750 mm per century (29.5 inches) which is far more than the average over the last century.
From 1880 to 2000 sea level rose about 20 cm or just under 8 inches. Far far less than the nearly 30 inches per century average over the last 18,000 years.
“I sometimes wonder if the purpose of this, and all socialist ‘data,’ is to simply overload the populace with so much cognitive dissonance that we all just stop thinking about anything.”
The following link is to an old FR thread, about an even older conservative booklet called “The Revolution Was”, written in 1938 about FDR and the New Deal. ONE of the crisis that the left uses now is Global Warming.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2185147/posts
An Excerpt:
The design was European. Regarded from the point of view of revolutionary technic it made perfect sense. Its meaning was revolutionary and it had no other. For what it meant to do it was from the beginning consistent in principle, resourceful, intelligent, masterly in workmanship, and it made not one mistake......
Having passed this crisis, the New Deal went on from one problem to another, taking them in the proper order, according to revolutionary technic; and if the handling of one was inconsistent with the handling of another, even to the point of nullity, that was blunder in reverse.
The effect was to keep people excited about one thing at a time, and divided, while steadily through all the uproar of outrage and confusion a certain end, held constantly in view, was pursued by main intention.
The end held constantly in view was power.
It would be a lot easier to adapt to a warmer planet than a glaciated one. I don’t think we’re going to have a choice about it though.
They are sneaky malicious bastids. That sounds exactly like what 0bamugabe is doing now. One crisis to the next. All of them manufactured and hyped like Hollywood productions.
That is where science devolves into politics. Unfortunately, it may be “cry wolf” and we may not believe scientists when we need to.
For the natural contributions the estimates are more difficult. The ocean cycle is about 50 Gt per year in both directions, see www.opl.ucsb.edu/tommy/pubs/hawaii01/bishop.pdf (A petagram is the same a a gigatonne) Vegetation takes up 150-175 Gt of carbon per year mostly in the northern hemisphere spring. They release most of that in the fall. See http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/09/29/plants-gobbling-up-co2-45-more-than-thought/ The total ratio (ocean plus land vegetation) is about 30 to 1, but it's very rough.
Have you read junkscience?
http://junksciencearchive.com/Greenhouse/index.html
The author claims that CO2 contributes a small amount to “global warming.” And of that, humans contribute a small percentage of that. The largest contribution are water vapor and next clouds.
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.