Author Topic: General Climate Discussion  (Read 82736 times)

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1440 on: March 09, 2008, 10:07:20 AM »
"Climate researcher Dr. Tad Murty, former Senior Research Scientist for Fisheries and Oceans in Canada, also reversed himself from believer in man-made climate change to a skeptic.  “I stated with a firm belief about global warming, until I started working on it myself,” Murty explained on August 17, 2006.  “I switched to the other side in the early 1990's when Fisheries and Oceans Canada asked me to prepare a position paper and I started to look into the problem seriously,” Murty explained. Murty was one of the 60 scientists who wrote an April 6, 2006 letter urging withdrawal of Kyoto to Canadian prime minister Stephen Harper which stated in part, "If, back in the mid-1990s, we knew what we know today about climate, Kyoto would almost certainly not exist, because we would have concluded it was not necessary.” 

Botanist Dr. David Bellamy, a famed UK environmental campaigner, former lecturer at Durham University and host of a popular UK TV series on wildlife, recently converted into a skeptic after reviewing the science and now calls global warming fears "poppycock." According to a May 15, 2005 article in the UK Sunday Times, Bellamy said “global warming is largely a natural phenomenon.  The world is wasting stupendous amounts of money on trying to fix something that can’t be fixed.” “The climate-change people have no proof for their claims. They have computer models which do not prove anything,” Bellamy added. Bellamy’s conversion on global warming did not come without a sacrifice as several environmental groups have ended their association with him because of his views on climate change. The severing of relations came despite Bellamy’s long activism for green campaigns. The UK Times reported Bellamy “won respect from hardline environmentalists with his campaigns to save Britain’s peat bogs and other endangered habitats. In Tasmania he was arrested when he tried to prevent loggers cutting down a rainforest.”
 
Climate scientist Dr. Chris de Freitas of The University of Auckland, N.Z., also converted from a believer in man-made global warming to a skeptic. “At first I accepted that increases in human caused additions of carbon dioxide and methane in the atmosphere would trigger changes in water vapor etc. and lead to dangerous ‘global warming,’ But with time and with the results of research, I formed the view that, although it makes for a good story, it is unlikely that the man-made changes are drivers of significant climate variation.” de Freitas wrote on August 17, 2006. “I accept there may be small changes. But I see the risk of anything serious to be minute,” he added. “One could reasonably argue that lack of evidence is not a good reason for complacency. But I believe the billions of dollars committed to GW research and lobbying for GW and for Kyoto treaties etc could be better spent on uncontroversial and very real environmental problems (such as air pollution, poor sanitation, provision of clean water and improved health services) that we know affect tens of millions of people,” de Freitas concluded. de Freitas was one of the 60 scientists who wrote an April 6, 2006 letter urging withdrawal of Kyoto to Canadian prime minister Stephen Harper which stated in part, “Significant [scientific] advances have been made since the [Kyoto] protocol was created, many of which are taking us away from a concern about increasing greenhouse gases.”

Meteorologist Dr. Reid Bryson, the founding chairman of the Department of Meteorology at University of Wisconsin (now the Department of Oceanic and Atmospheric Sciences, was pivotal in promoting the coming ice age scare of the 1970’s ( See Time Magazine’s 1974 article “Another Ice Age” citing Bryson: & see Newsweek’s 1975 article “The Cooling World” citing Bryson) has now converted into a leading global warming skeptic. In February 8, 2007 Bryson dismissed what he terms "sky is falling" man-made global warming fears. Bryson, was on the United Nations Global 500 Roll of Honor and was identified by the British Institute of Geographers as the most frequently cited climatologist in the world. “Before there were enough people to make any difference at all, two million years ago, nobody was changing the climate, yet the climate was changing, okay?” Bryson told the May 2007 issue of Energy Cooperative News. “All this argument is the temperature going up or not, it’s absurd. Of course it’s going up. It has gone up since the early 1800s, before the Industrial Revolution, because we’re coming out of the Little Ice Age, not because we’re putting more carbon dioxide into the air,” Bryson said. “You can go outside and spit and have the same effect as doubling carbon dioxide,” he added. “We cannot say what part of that warming was due to mankind's addition of ‘greenhouse gases’ until we consider the other possible factors, such as aerosols. The aerosol content of the atmosphere was measured during the past century, but to my knowledge this data was never used. We can say that the question of anthropogenic modification of the climate is an important question -- too important to ignore. However, it has now become a media free-for-all and a political issue more than a scientific problem,” Bryson explained in 2005. "

and many many more.. the site shows 400 of the top people in their fields who are skeptics. 

More every day..  that is the main thing.. it is not that more scientists are coming on board with the whole man made global warming hoax.. it is that more are becoming skeptics or.. more accurately.. more are finding the courage to speak out.

lazs

Offline MORAY37

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2318
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1441 on: March 10, 2008, 12:27:36 PM »
Interesting Lazs.

I start searching these people... and come up with things like this...

Quote
Dr. Tad Murty, former senior research scientist, Dept. of Fisheries and Oceans, former director of Australia's National Tidal Facility and professor of earth sciences, Flinders University, Adelaide; currently adjunct professor, Departments of Civil Engineering and Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa

Currently an adjunct professor?  For someone who is so incredibly qualified...he's just an adjunct professor now?

Then you quote BOTANIST Dr. David Bellamy. 

Third... you quote a guy whom you refer to as a whack job for promoting the "ice age" of the 1970's.

Quote
Meteorologist Dr. Reid Bryson, the founding chairman of the Department of Meteorology at University of Wisconsin (now the Department of Oceanic and Atmospheric Sciences, was pivotal in promoting the coming ice age scare of the 1970’s ( See Time Magazine’s 1974 article “Another Ice Age” citing Bryson: & see Newsweek’s 1975 article “The Cooling World” citing Bryson)

Cmon bro.  Get real.  You can't have it both ways.

You surely realize your source is defunct from the beginning....oh, wait... you don't... otherwise you wouldn't have pasted 3 pages of it.
"Ocean: A body of water occupying 2/3 of a world made for man...who has no gills."
-Ambrose Bierce

Offline AWMac

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9251
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1442 on: March 10, 2008, 12:32:00 PM »
Al Gore invented the Ice Age to promote his Global Warming theory.

I'm beginning to see how this all works.

Mac

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1443 on: March 10, 2008, 02:54:28 PM »
gee moray.. that is kinda the point.. he believed one thing and now he believes something else.    I was talking about ones that have changed their minds about man made global warming.

lazs

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1444 on: March 11, 2008, 09:52:06 AM »
gee moray.. that is kinda the point.. he believed one thing and now he believes something else.    I was talking about ones that have changed their minds about man made global warming.

lazs

Well, you seem to pick nicely, for you have not discussed little of those stupid scientists promoting that 70's or 80's iceage.
I was always curious on that, for I missed it alltogether. I recall GW being predicted in some little time to come.
BTW, I mentioned that our winter was cool. Numbers have come through now, and it wasn't. Just colder than the last one, but not below average.
People...and their short memories....
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline Dowding

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6867
      • http://www.psys07629.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/272/index.html
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1445 on: April 03, 2008, 04:35:08 AM »
As much as it pains me to admit it, it would appear the case for sun based global warming is looking less likely with another piece of research that can't corroborate the theory.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7327393.stm
War! Never been so much fun. War! Never been so much fun! Go to your brother, Kill him with your gun, Leave him lying in his uniform, Dying in the sun.

Offline SD67

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3218
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1446 on: April 03, 2008, 04:44:22 AM »
BUT... since you live in England, a place that sees probably 3 sunny days a year, you'd be used to warming without it though wouldn't you? :devil
9GIAP VVS RKKA
You're under arrest for violation of the Government knows best act!
Fabricati diem, punc
Absinthe makes the Tart grow fonder

Offline MrCoffee

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 934
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1447 on: April 03, 2008, 04:55:57 AM »
sure its a legitimate theory alright. Its obvious the sun is getting hotter but does it corrolate? does anyone have real concrete data to support the theory. Its obvious the sun is getting hotter as it ages, deviance aside what is the gradual increase in relation to earths warming? personally I dont think about this much myself. great you brought it up to give the forum heads something to consider. personally i find it interesting myself.
« Last Edit: April 03, 2008, 05:24:38 AM by MrCoffee »

Offline C(Sea)Bass

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1644
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1448 on: April 03, 2008, 04:59:47 AM »
The article is about the cosmic ray thoery, which is just one of a number of theories on how the sun affects climate.

Sun spots have been proven to change climate, and they have nothing to do with cosmic rays. So no matter what the article is trying to say, the sun definetly does have an effect.

Offline Jackal1

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9092
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1449 on: April 03, 2008, 05:04:45 AM »
That`s about as in-depth as Oprah reporting on bon bons.
Democracy is two wolves deciding on what to eat. Freedom is a well armed sheep protesting the vote.
------------------------------------------------------------------

Offline MrCoffee

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 934
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1450 on: April 03, 2008, 05:07:35 AM »
yeah I can see it now, dowding sparks interest in astrology by global warming and gets half the forum green heads on there telescopes watching the night sky for signs of impending end. See that, that was a solar flare!

Offline moot

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 16330
      • http://www.dasmuppets.com
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1451 on: April 03, 2008, 05:20:55 AM »
The article is about the cosmic ray thoery, which is just one of a number of theories on how the sun affects climate.

Sun spots have been proven to change climate, and they have nothing to do with cosmic rays. So no matter what the article is trying to say, the sun definetly does have an effect.
Do you even read?
Quote
Cosmic rays are deflected away from Earth by our planet's magnetic field, and by the solar wind - streams of electrically charged particles coming from the Sun.

The Svensmark hypothesis is that when the solar wind is weak, more cosmic rays penetrate to Earth.

That creates more charged particles in the atmosphere, which in turn induces more clouds to form, cooling the climate.
http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/hotshots/2003_11_04/
http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/hotshots/2003_11_04/c2.mpg
http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/hotshots/2003_11_04/c3.mpg
Hello ant
running very fast
I squish you

Offline C(Sea)Bass

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1644
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1452 on: April 03, 2008, 05:23:51 AM »
Do you even read?http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/hotshots/2003_11_04/
http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/hotshots/2003_11_04/c2.mpg
http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/hotshots/2003_11_04/c3.mpg

Like I said, sunspots are totally unrelated to what the article talks about

Offline Excel1

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 614
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1453 on: April 03, 2008, 05:24:57 AM »
it's a good job the earth is only 2 sunspot cycles old or you could accuse those scientists of plucking conclusions out of their arse

Offline moot

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 16330
      • http://www.dasmuppets.com
Re: General Climate Discussion
« Reply #1454 on: April 03, 2008, 05:34:08 AM »
You:
"Sun spots have been proven to change climate, and they have nothing to do with cosmic rays. "
The article:
"Cosmic rays are deflected away from Earth by our planet's magnetic field, and by the solar wind "

The article refutes a study that supposed solar wind's deflection of extra-solar cosmic rays was corelated to cloud density over the earth, with some effect on earth's climate.  The first part is true, solar wind effectively reduces external cosmic rays, so they do have something to do with cosmic rays.  In fact if the article and your post weren't so imprecise, it could be said that the two were the same, solar and external cosmic rays.
« Last Edit: April 03, 2008, 05:36:42 AM by moot »
Hello ant
running very fast
I squish you