Global Warming SOLAR-made not MAN-made

[Angus]

Sabre, you're still stuck with that no warming is occuring?
Quaff a few and hike to Greenland, that might bring you around....

[Sabre]

Originally posted by Angus
Sabre, you're still stuck with that no warming is occuring?
Quaff a few and hike to Greenland, that might bring you around....

Actually, my last post says nothing of the sort, if you'll re-read it.  It is about the consensus (or lack thereof) that man is causing global warming.  It also notes that there is even less support that what warming there is will in any way be a global catastrophe.

Now, answer the question please.  Since the scientific consensus does not support man-made global warming (bold added so you don't miss it again), will you now change your support for that discredited hypothesis?

[wrag]

Originally posted by Angus
Sabre, you're still stuck with that no warming is occuring?
Quaff a few and hike to Greenland, that might bring you around....

Hmmm.....................

Could have sworn I read somewhere that at one time in the past wheat was being grown in Greenland or Iceland, BUT a sudden climate change resulted in a MINI-ICE-AGE which also created the perfect environment for the Black Plague that followed shortly after?

That suggest to me that at one time it was actually HOTTER then it is and has been for some time?

Hmmm............ the dinosaur bones found under the arctic ice suggest it was HOTTER on our world in the past?

[JB88]

look where it got the dinosaurs.

[lazs2]

where did man made global warming get the dino's?

lazs

[Angus]

The polar caps were not always in the same place.
As for the Dino's I'm sure it's Flintstones fault
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triassic-Jurassic_extinction_event
Hmmm, Jurassic:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jurassic

And the climate, - warm and arid.
http://www.scotese.com/climate.htm

And here:

http://www.gsajournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-abstract&doi=10.1130%2F0016-7606(1992)104%3C0543:PCDTEJ%3E2.3.CO%3B2&ct=1

Sound cosy:
"Three major features of the simulated Early Jurassic climate include the following. (1) A global warming, compared to the present, of 5 °C to 10 °C, with temperature increases at high latitudes five times this global average. Average summer temperatures exceed 35 °C in low-latitude regions of western Pangaea where eolian sandstones testify to the presence of vast deserts. (2) Simulated precipitation and evaporation patterns agree closely with the moisture distribution interpreted from evaporites, and coal deposits. High rainfall rates are associated primarily with monsoons that originate over the warm Tethys Ocean."

Now call me a nanny, but 35 °C as an AVERAGE summer temp is really nasty. Add vast deserts and MEGAMONSOONS. Nice, - oh brave new world.

[Ocean27]

It still cracks me up to see various US posters, on this and other boards, claiming that the programme of analysing global climate change is "all about money".

Note, the topic being discussed is global climate change. Not US climate change. Not Texas climate change. Which part of "global" don't these idiots understand?

As has been pointed out earlier, the IPCC consists of more than 200 countries, some of which are poor African states with a per capita GDP of less than $3000.

* Are the scientists receiving megabucks from their governments? Nope.
* Are they receiving megabucks from the US government? Nope.
* Given that some of these countries do not have any political parties, is it a "political issue" in these countries? Nope.

I rest my case.

[indy007]

Originally posted by Ocean27
As has been pointed out earlier, the IPCC consists of more than 200 countries, some of which are poor African states with a per capita GDP of less than $3000.

So we should trust their ultra-low budget research when massive super-computers can't even give us accurate models?

[lazs2]

"idiots"?   So any scientist who doesn't agree with catastrophic or even significant man made global warming is an idiot?

Did you read sabres post?   seems a great many scientists... the majority in fact do not buy into the hand wringing gloom and doom man made global warming scenario.

I can see how you would "rest your case" tho... I have watched more than a few here "rest their case"... usually...not long after they were asked to show us the math behind man made co2 causing global warming.

lazs

[Jackal1]

Originally posted by Ocean27
I rest my case.  

You have to have one first.

[Angus]

He did.
And as I have pointed out before, the "locally" melting polar caps contain much more mass than all atmosphere in the USA. Actually more mass than the whole earths atmosphere.
No way around that one I'm afraid.

[Jackal1]

The ice is melting! The ice is melting!
Once again..we get it.
Ice has been known to melt before and climate has been in a constant state of change since the beginning of recorded history.
I don`t expect it to stop changing anyways soon.

[Hortlund]

Originally posted by Jackal1
The ice is melting! The ice is melting!
 

Progress

[lazs2]

the ice in your area is melting.. in the south pole it is getting thicker... something has changed... something always does.. it has always been this way.

Man has nothing to do with it.

lazs

[C(Sea)Bass]

You have to remeber too that the scientists who say manmade global warming is a fact are alot of the same guys who said man was destroying the ozone layer 10 years ago. Turned out the ozone layer is Growing and yes there is a hole in it...over antartica, which has been there for millions of years.

I beleive that global climate change is natural, which is supported by ice later measurements, and will balance it self with a period of cooling in the future. This does not mean that I am all for pollution and not attempting to change our ways, as long as that doesnt mean destroying our economies by shutting down CO2 producing industries.  I highly doubt that these people calling for new energy sources would also like to pay the taxes required to build wind, solar, and other renewable energy facilities, because they are not cheap and some has to pay for them.