global warning update.

[2bighorn]

Originally posted by Skuzzy
A study looking a CO2 increases, and nothing else, is rather useless.  One that adds water vapor is still useless.  There are just too many variables involved for any current study to make an absolute statement about what is going on and way it is happening.

The current theory is supported by known variables and data and it's the best (for now) science can come up with.
If I have to pick between science, politics, special interests groups or religion, I'll pick the science when it comes to global warming.

[Jackal1]

Originally posted by Angus
Jackal, you're hanging on a straw. It was for instance very cold here in --- may.
So, oranges and apples. To melt half of the N-Pole it takes more than some "little" curves. But you cling on little ones, or local stuff. If that isn't enough you get into curves that are hundreds of thousands, if not millions of years. But what we are talking is the half of the N-Polar cap melting away in the lifespan of a human. That is pretty fast. While not being the biggest chunk of ice on the globe, it makes a statement for what IS actually happening. No kid with crayons can change that.

"Is the globe warming or NOT?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


(requoted to follow a new fad )

Warmer in some places, colder in others. Just as it`s always been.

Ballocks mate,,,,,ballocks.

ROFLMAO

Angus I am beginning to beleive that you have a polar ice cap fetish. Sheesh.
I`m clinging to local ones? You are the one hung up on the friggin ice caps.
So the cap is melting. You expected it to stay the same for eternity or what?
Cycles,shifts, changes in patterns, heck, changes in the earth`s very  makeup
and configuration it`s very self. All very natural occurences in the scheme of things concerning the earth`s history.
It really doesn`t matter one way or the other. What lies in the future cannot be predicted. That is the only thing 100% certain.
If we ,or our future generations ,still exist.........well,.... we will exist. If not, there will be noone left to agonize or wring their hands over it.
I`d suggest maybe a good shot of Ole #7 over the rocks might ease your worried mind.
Might want to drink it in a walk-in cooling unit though. Otherwise...........the ice might melt.

[Holden McGroin]

Originally posted by 2bighorn
The current theory is supported by known variables and data and it's the best (for now) science can come up with.
If I have to pick between science, politics, special interests groups or religion, I'll pick the science when it comes to global warming.

Climate modeling and simulation do not form a science in the classical sense. We cannot formulate a hypothesis and then proceed to test it in the laboratory. We have a complicated system with only a finite history of empirical information about it – far from enough, in fact.

The range of uncertainty is not an easy thing to assess. It seems to be mainly derived from an intercomparison of the models produced by different scientific groups around the world. This is a very poor means of arriving at the real uncertainty, since the models are rather similar to one another and probably even more like each other than like nature.

Hence, one is forced to the familiar procedure of parameterization and the inevitable fudge factors. We simply cannot get around it.

--Dr. Gerald North, Professor of Meteorology and Oceanography at Texas A&M

[Curval]

Originally posted by Mini D
Maybe because you've written the longest diatribe on it? Spent the most time over evaluating a simple chart with a completely misguided assertion?

Or....you simply jumped on the usual suspects bandwagon and attacked me instead of the person who posted it.

That's a real convenient go-to card. Why are you participating in this thread at all? Does the subject strike a chord with you? Is it something you wish to be true? I mean... really... it's as if you felt you had to say something. Opinion? You observed a chart and completely misread it. That's like having an opinion that the color red tastes like a vacuum. I did not present any data, I just opened my eyes a bit and actually looked at numbers being represented and thought "that doesn't make any sense" and then went to the site and spent time reading it.

Good for you mini...I didn't go to the site.  I had an opinion early in the thread and presented it.  I didn't think googling a number of sites was worth my time or a pre-requiste for posting.  

For an issue that's so critical, I'm seeing alot of "I googled it...", "I saw a special on T.V....", "I couldn't be bothered to read the text next to the chart...." type stuff going on. You just happened to be the pinacle of it in this thread.

Really...I am the pinnacle huh?  LOL  I presented NONE of it Mini...NONE.  I responded to two of them..the one you are yammering on about and one from lazs.  You just wanted to show how clever you are, but instead of going after the person who posted it you came after me.  No biggie...I'm a big boy, but please try and read some of the fluff that so many others have presented and then reconsider who is at the pinnacle.

[2bighorn]

Originally posted by Skuzzy
The holes above the caps are many,  many times larger than they should be and are continuing to expand.  The North side of Earth now shows the ozone layer non-existent well into Canada.

Ozone layer shields from UV radiation which in itself doesn't heat anything.

Infrared radiation is responsible for heating up the earth. So called greenhouse gasses are filtering out part of it, at the same time they are trapping the heat.

It's an act of balance and if that gets broken (for what ever reason), the climate will change.

[2bighorn]

Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Climate modeling and simulation do not form a science in the classical sense. We cannot formulate a hypothesis and then proceed to test it in the laboratory. We have a complicated system with only a finite history of empirical information about it – far from enough, in fact.

The range of uncertainty is not an easy thing to assess. It seems to be mainly derived from an intercomparison of the models produced by different scientific groups around the world. This is a very poor means of arriving at the real uncertainty, since the models are rather similar to one another and probably even more like each other than like nature.

Hence, one is forced to the familiar procedure of parameterization and the inevitable fudge factors. We simply cannot get around it.

Thats for climate modeling, ie what happens if...

I'm talking about current state and rate of change, not "what will happen if we change this" hypothesis.

[Holden McGroin]

Originally posted by 2bighorn
Thats for climate modeling, ie what happens if...

I'm talking about current state and rate of change, not "what will happen if we change this" hypothesis.

If we do not know how it works then how are we supposed to control it?

[Angus]

The holes in the ozon layers have nothing to do with global warming.
They may have something to do with this debate, for 20 - 30 years ago, there was a big fight about whether there would be holes in the ozon layer because of human related pollution.
And guess what...didn't have to wait long.

And Jackal:
"Angus I am beginning to beleive that you have a polar ice cap fetish. Sheesh.
I`m clinging to local ones? You are the one hung up on the friggin ice caps.
So the cap is melting. You expected it to stay the same for eternity or what?"

So,,,,the capS are actually melting. It's because of the climate getting warmer, at least just up there....huh?
Local? Well, excuse me, but we are talking about very big areas here.
Eternity? 100 years is very small on the scale on millions. And my chart only showed some 25 years or so!
FYI, the polar Caps melting DEMONSTRATE a climate change that cannot be debated..there..

[2bighorn]

Originally posted by Holden McGroin
If we do not know how it works then how are we supposed to control it?

I've never said we have to control emissions in order to control climate.
I'm just convinced by science (and my own experience) that there is warming happening, that it's not part of regular cycle and that is at least partially caused by emissions.

How it'll end, or what to do I really don't care, nor I wanna change my lifestyle for something nobody knows if it'll work, or if it's even possible (yeah, I'm selfish).

[Jackal1]

Originally posted by Angus
The holes in the ozon layers have nothing to do with global warming.
They may have something to do with this debate, for 20 - 30 years ago, there was a big fight about whether there would be holes in the ozon layer because of human related pollution.
And guess what...didn't have to wait long.
 

Damn hairspray! I told em.
It has also been suggested that the depletion in the ozone layer was due to changes on the sun`s surface. Yes/No -You do/you don`t-Corky Romano.

So,,,,the capS are actually melting. It's because of the climate getting warmer, at least just up there....huh?

I`m not having much of a melting problem here Angus. I feel for your loss.

Local? Well, excuse me, but we are talking about very big areas here.

Make up your mind. Us local  cats just can`t go from watching bikinis to icecaps in a heartbeat yaknow.

Eternity? 100 years is very small on the scale on millions. And my chart only showed some 25 years or so!

Exactly! In the scheme of things concerning the changes in the earth`s conditions, trends and changes...well, everything, nothing can be based, proven or disproven on such a short term scale.
And, once again, there are too many unpredictables/unknowns for anyone or anything to accurately predict the future........of anything. It all can change drasticaly in a heartbeat.


 

FYI, the polar Caps melting DEMONSTRATE a climate change that cannot be debated..there..

What that DEMONSTRATES, Angus, is that some ice is melting. Ice has been know to melt before. You realize that, right?
The cause of the ice melting can be debated for as long as one wishs to debate it.
The important thing is...noone, group of people, nor any machine,computer, chart, graph or whatever can predict what is going to happen in the future.

[Mini D]

Or....you simply jumped on the usual suspects bandwagon and attacked me instead of the person who posted it.

I think you're greatly underestimating how funny your response to that was. I also think it's "persecution complex" day. I'm a bit curious as to exactly what bandwagon I jumped on there.

Good for you mini...I didn't go to the site.  I had an opinion early in the thread and presented it.  I didn't think googling a number of sites was worth my time or a pre-requiste for posting.

Where did I say anything about your oppinion "earlier" in the thread. Jeezus man.... WOULD YOU TAKE A SECOND TO ACTUALLY READ THINGS.

Really...I am the pinnacle huh?  LOL  I presented NONE of it Mini...NONE.  I responded to two of them..the one you are yammering on about and one from lazs.  You just wanted to show how clever you are, but instead of going after the person who posted it you came after me.  No biggie...I'm a big boy, but please try and read some of the fluff that so many others have presented and then reconsider who is at the pinnacle.

You contributed several paragraphs to a single chart that you knew absolutely nothing about. I'd still call that the "pinacle" in this thread. You can use several metrics to back it up, if you're ever willing to take a minute to think about something before typing.

[Curval]

"I think you're greatly underestimating how funny your response to that was. I also think it's "persecution complex" day. I'm a bit curious as to exactly what bandwagon I jumped on there."

It wasn't supposed to be funny.  The bandwagon being taking the opposite view of anything that Beet1e or I say.  It isn't an important point but I felt like making it.  We rarely agree in these types of threads Mini...if I see you responding to me I am generally sure it is a negative response.

Where did I say anything about your oppinion "earlier" in the thread. Jeezus man.... WOULD YOU TAKE A SECOND TO ACTUALLY READ THINGS

Nope, sorry, it is YOU who needs to read.  You said this:

"Opinion? You observed a chart and completely misread it."

The whole "opinion" thing had NOTHING to do with the chart.  I was simply responding to the chart (admittedly incorrectly viewed).  My OPINION was presented earlier.  Please don't twist my words.

You contributed several paragraphs to a single chart that you knew absolutely nothing about. I'd still call that the "pinacle" in this thread. You can use several metrics to back it up, if you're ever willing to take a minute to think about something before typing.

Several paragraphs eh?  Again, stop trying to frame it as if that one response was the be-all and end-all with respect to ignorant postings.  There is post after post of it going on here.  You singled out mine...even when lukster posted it and then the two of us conversed about it.  Obviously he misinterpreted it too...but no comment on that.  I'm not surprised though.  It quite normal.

[Mini D]

See Rule #4

[Curval]

See Rule #2

[Mini D]

See Rule #2