Naturally Occuring Global Warming

[Jackal1]

For the AlBore crowd....this just in.
The correct , PC, term is now "Global Climate Change" instead of the old, out of fashion, global warming thing.
I know you would want to stay hip and all.

[john9001]

with "global climate change" they are covered if the temps go up or down.

[Angus]

Well, to put some clarity to that, some local spots may actually get temporarily cooler, - reasons are changes of ocean currents, and windchanging causing other route for drift ice, etc.
(This includes my country, - possibly)
However, the big sum-up is warming.

[Curval]

Originally posted by Jackal1
For the AlBore crowd....this just in.
The correct , PC, term is now "Global Climate Change" instead of the old, out of fashion, global warming thing.
I know you would want to stay hip and all.

It has been that way for a while now Jackal:

From here

“The policy challenge is to act in a serious and sensible way, given the limits of our knowledge. While scientific uncertainties remain, we can begin now to address the factors that contribute to climate change.”

President George W. Bush
Discussion on Global Climate Change
June 11, 2001

and once again, here is the United States National Policy on climate change:

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/policy/index.html

Instead of nattering on about how it doesn't exist and making pithy remarks on a BBS maybe you should educate yourself.

[bozon]

They should stop wasting time and money on global warming and start worry about global pollution. CO2 is not pollution btw.

[Kuhn]

Its' finally warming up locally.  

[Angus]

Originally posted by bozon
They should stop wasting time and money on global warming and start worry about global pollution. CO2 is not pollution btw.

Enough of any material is...pollution.

However, the atmosphere can take a lot of co2 before it becomes lethal. Easier to get that level high enough inside a garage

Global pollution (You said GLOBAL) would be something that spreads nicely, so again, typically in the atmosphere.
BTW, some things released into the atmosphere in ample quantities before (sulphur, soot etc) had their weight on the scale for global dimming, which causes cooling, - while the material and/or particles are there.
While burning coal for instance, as well as wood, added CO2 gets countered by the effects of the soot and particles. But those fall out eventually, while leaving the CO2.
It has been discussed to use some sulphure combination (launched into the high atmosphere) to dim the solar effect just in case the CO2 is making to much of work in the opposite direction. Crazy stuff.

[Jackal1]

Originally posted by john9001
with "global climate change" they are covered if the temps go up or down.

Exactly.

In preparation for the next cooling trend.

[lazs2]

angus.. in the "swindle" documentary..  Al the scientists in it that were tops in their field who all said man made global warming was a hoax all said that they were not getting a penny from anyone to say that... they also accused the advocates of "man made global warming" of pandering in order to get lucarative grants.

Who are the liars?

lazs

[Angus]

Global warming = something being measured
Man made global warming = being debated.
Human link to global warming = being debated (my park)

Scientists of many countries from many fields as well as craftsmen who have come to the conclusion that the climate is gradually warming (ask any farmer, weatherman, carpenter, biologist, oceanologist, botanist  or Fisherman up here) are not being paid to cling onto that specific opinion.
Scientists are however being paid by the oil companies to hold forth that specific opinion.
The government sponsored scientists BTW, have no special interest in having that special conclusion,  - they can get their sponsors with any conclusion so to speak, - and they do indeed get discovered in both camps.
Capiche? Or too complicated.

(I sure aint getting paid, just wasting my time here. Maybe I should learn about philosophy, join the flat earth society, and apply for the counterjob at Exxon's HQ)

[Hazzer]

Until we are certain,we should take the worst case scenario and act accordingly,but pouring pollutants into the atmoshpere has other downsides beside any possible Global warming.I would like to know who was behind the documentry before I would believe a word of it.Sientists are human with predudices and political views like the rest of us,I would like to know what the consesus is of all interested specialist around the world,befrore I pass judgement.Act now,if we are wrong,well we won't be the worse for it,Don't act,and we are right,God help us.

[Holden McGroin]

Scientists are however being paid by the oil companies to hold forth that specific opinion.

So called scientists who go in with a preconceived outcome have a much better chance of writing a successful grant than those who perform true open minded science.  Whether the grant comes from Greenpeace or Exxon.

It is easier to get a grant to study "The Effects of Man Made Greenhouse Gasses on our Imminent Demise" than it would be to get a grant for a study to "Quantify the Anthropogenic Contribution to Global Climate Change"

[Angus]

Where's my grant then? After all, not all that come to a certain conclusion get a grant, and say no more if too many have the same thesis.....
So, I think your argument is flawed.
However, Exxon pays for ONE specific goal in this debate.

[Red Tail 444]

Originally posted by lazs2
anyone notice that global warming started happening right around grant time for all these "scientists" and...  the loss of the election by algore and his being out of the spotlight?

lazs

As early as 1991 there was growing concern about the Ozone layer and how that would lead to global climate change. At the time, the ozone hole over the South pole was only about as big as the United States and fluctuated throughout the year.

With all the target practice you presumably perform, one would think you would grow tired of people constantly shooting holes through your weak arguments and conspiracy theories, or maybe you have a short-term memory.

[Holden McGroin]

Originally posted by Angus
Where's my grant then? After all, not all that come to a certain conclusion get a grant, and say no more if too many have the same thesis.....

So only those on one side of the debate are influencing science through their purse strings?  Or maybe scientists who apply for grants from Greenpeace of the Sierra Club are impervious to corruption?

You have never written a grant proposal have you?