Whistle blowing on Global Warming

[Have]

realclimate.org is basically a mouthpiece for the CRU (check the emails).

For the otherside of the coin try http://camirror.wordpress.com/

Well the data sources are available in there: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/data-sources/
Both raw and processed data is freely available. Same thing goes for the climate models, you can get the source code for them and really check out if the models are somehow rigged for false results.

Also if you believe those who say that the CO2 has no effect and actually is good for plants, I suggest that you check out these six simple steps just why the CO2 poses a problem: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/08/the-co2-problem-in-6-easy-steps/

If you don't like to read too much then I can suggest to watch this video lecture series: http://geoflop.uchicago.edu/forecast/docs/lectures.html
It is a class for non-science majors in the University of Chicago and ran by Professor David Archer. You can also find his email address there if you got some questions or think that he got some facts wrong.

[Have]

Yes...but he doesn't address my basic, seemingly EASY to answer question: HOW DOES 3/4 OF ONE DEGREE CENTIGRADE OVER 100 YEARS MAKE THE ICE CAPS MELT?

Here's an article which in some way answers to that: http://science.howstuffworks.com/global-warming.htm/printable

Pay attention especially to this part:

t's also important to understand that even small changes in climate can have major effects. When scientists talk about "the Ice Age," you probably envision the world frozen, covered with snow and suffering from frigid temperatures. In fact, during the last ice age (ice ages recur roughly every 50,000 to 100,000 years), the earth's average temperature was only 5 Celsius degrees cooler than modern temperature averages [Source: NASA].

Ice age and only five degrees of difference. It surely does not sound much, but the effects are huge. If you wonder how much ice there exactly was, the wikipedia has an article about ice ages and also illustrations of the ice coverages.
There are also some diagrams of temperature variations and from those you can see that the variations are not very big. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_age

[Angus]

Your whole argument is based on that human civilization has caused this warming when all data from the past (and not just a 100years) show that CO2 levels have and will always fluctuate, its a very cheap trick to take 120years and go look it goes up because of us, while ignoring the huge spikes that happened over the last billion years.

Humans account for 0,0019% of all the CO2 today in other words 99.9981% is out of our control. Climate changes as it did for billion of years and it will continue to change till the Sun ends it all in a few billion years when it consumes earth before dieing.

And besides if politicians and their lobbist friends really wanted to make a difference they would immediately stop all deforestation and other things that really mess up our environment but that wouldnt fill their pockets.
I can't wait for the next big profit scheme were they will probably tell us that we have to stop the tectonic plates from shifting or some other BS.

(Image removed from quote.)

(Image removed from quote.)

(Image removed from quote.)

You missed my point. My point is that we have been so fortunate to live and develop in very gentle atmosphere in the last 10.000 years or so, compared to millions of years before. And now in the last 100 years or so, we've been making a mess of things. Not all co2, the whole co2 screaming actually blurs our some really serious things.
As for the co2 being plantfood, you are not telling me any news. It is after all used for instance in greenhouse growing. An old classmate of mine is a greenhouse farmer, and told me that when we get a good breeze from the mainland of Europe, he can turn off the co2 flow....

[CAP1]

What is the deal with the recent media blitz that is pro global warming?

I just sat through a segment on CNN that was full of so many blatant lies that it couldn't even be considered journalism.

Is there some vote coming up?

Whos agenda is getting shoved down the craw of the masses?

BBC America's world news tonight is doing the same crap.

[CAP1]

Yes...but he doesn't address my basic, seemingly EASY to answer question: HOW DOES 3/4 OF ONE DEGREE CENTIGRADE OVER 100 YEARS MAKE THE ICE CAPS MELT?

it doesn't/

[Have]

You missed my point. My point is that we have been so fortunate to live and develop in very gentle atmosphere in the last 10.000 years or so, compared to millions of years before. And now in the last 100 years or so, we've been making a mess of things. Not all co2, the whole co2 screaming actually blurs our some really serious things.

Quite true unfortunately. Again I post more videos Here is an excellent and very beautifully made documentary movie called HOME - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jqxENMKaeCU
It is not that much related to global warming or to CO2, but to the environment in general and does a great job illustrating how dependant we really are of a low cost, easy to get energy source called oil. I can recommend this video just for its really nice nature scenes.

[CAP1]

co2 is heavier than air. it does not rise. there are much much more deadly gases than co2.

nox
co

[Angus]

Quite true unfortunately. Again I post more videos Here is an excellent and very beautifully made documentary movie called HOME - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jqxENMKaeCU
It is not that much related to global warming or to CO2, but to the environment in general and does a great job illustrating how dependant we really are of a low cost, easy to get energy source called oil. I can recommend this video just for its really nice nature scenes.

  for that

[Sonicblu]

LOL millions of years 

Heres one for ya. IF the sun is unsing energy, therfore it is getting smaller and losing heat, getting cooler. That means

that the sun uses to be bigger and put off more heat and energy. If you go back millions of years you get a sun that is so hot that it would have fried the whole experiment. LOL YOU even say it only has to be 5 degrees to make a difference.

How hot would it be if you went back hundreds of millions of years.

[Have]

 

Sonicblu, I think it would do you good to do basic some reading about the sun and stars in general. You can start from here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun

Pay special attention to the chapter "Life Cycle".

[Have]

How can free floating North Polar ice melting rise sea levels? (Try dropping an ice cube into a glass of water, see what happens.)
South Polar ice is melting on the West side, increasing on the East side.
The GW fingerprint (heating in lower/mid atmosphere) is missing according to latest satellite data.

This is one point which I'd like to comment. The north polar ice cap is indeed mostly a freely floating and if it melts it does not add to the sea level directly (just stops reflecting the heat coming from the sun). But what you missed is the ice in Greenland, which is mostly over ground. To see what is going on there, all you need to do is to give keywords "greenland ice" to Google and check out the links.

Here are some of them:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/sep/01/sermilik-fjord-greenland-global-warming

The wall of ice that rises behind Sermilik fjord stretches for 1,500 miles (2,400km) from north to south and smothers 80% of this country. It has been frozen for 3m years. Now it is melting, far faster than the climate models predicted and far more decisively than any political action to combat our changing climate. If the Greenland ice sheet disappeared sea levels around the world would rise by seven metres, as 10% of the world's fresh water is currently frozen here.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8357537.stm

The Greenland ice sheet is losing its mass faster than in previous years and making an increasing contribution to sea level rise, a study has confirmed.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20427354.100-greenland-ice-loss-behind-a-sixth-of-sealevel-rise.html

GREENLAND lost 1500 cubic kilometres of ice between 2000 and 2008, making it responsible for one-sixth of global sea-level rise. Even worse, there are signs that the rate of ice loss is increasing.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/06/090612092741.htm

The Greenland ice sheet is melting faster than expected, according to a new study led by a University of Alaska Fairbanks researcher and published in the journal Hydrological Processes.

http://climateprogress.org/2009/06/14/sea-level-rise-greenland-ice-sheet-melting/

The eastern United States must plan on the very real possibility that total sea level rise by 2100 will exceed 6 feet on our current emissions path. Sadly, the Washington Post got the only story half right.

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=3606

What might at first be mistaken for a series of images showing the approach of summer on the edge of the Greenland ice sheet in fact shows an increase in melting over the past several years. The three images above show the melting in June of 2001, 2002, and 2003.

These are simple facts observed in Greenland. The is melting there and if it continues, it will be a real problem. I believe it would be far cheaper to try to prevent this than try to cope with it. Especially if the worst case scenarios of 7 meter sea level rise just from the Greenland ice ever come true.

Here is an tool which you use to visualize the effects of sea level rise with different parameters: http://flood.firetree.net/

Even a rise of "just" couple of meters will have dramatic effects into most of the most heavily populated areas of the globe.

[Viperius]

Funny enough do you know why Greenland is called "Green"land? 

Interpretation of ice core data suggests that between 800 and 1300 AD the regions around the fjords of southern Greenland experienced a mild climate, with trees and herbaceous plants growing and livestock being farmed. What is verifiable is that the ice cores indicate Greenland has experienced dramatic temperature shifts many times over the past 100,000 years — which makes it possible to say that areas of Greenland may have been much warmer during the medieval period than they are now and that the ice sheet contracted significantly.

Face it the only thing that is certain is that the climate has always and will always change, trying to stop it is futile.

[Angus]

Being a neighbour of Greenland, as well as probably the only one on this thread to have actually been there, I will give to you the most commonly accepted explanation of the name.
The discovery of Greenland took place in the 10th century, and the explorer was Eric the Red, - a Norseman who had (due to trouble) settled in Iceland, then again, (trouble) explored westwards and came across some nice valleys to farm, - on the west coast. He crossed the cape and went further, - I have only been ineastern Greenland.
Anyway, his son then went on to exploer some odd part of the USA/Canada. (Leif the lucky, or Leifur Eiríksson)
Back then, there was this lovely spark of GW,not MMGW. So Greenland back there, as well as Iceland, were even friendlier than today.
The name is belived to be the first big ad-hoax in world's history, since it was after all, a big continent being mostly a mountanious glacial area, and NOT big green grazing grounds. However, Due to the green hillsides in contrast with blue sea and white icebergs, the landscape really gives you a green image....in certain /sailing) times of the year.
BTW the Greenland glacier is very much older.....than civilization.

[SirFrancis]

Hi,

I watched this video on youtube a several times, but I still don´t get the point. As for my understanding this kid compares temperatures in urban and rural places. But what is the conclusion? 

Regards
SF

-> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F_G_-SdAN04&feature=player_embedded

[Sonicblu]

Sonicblu, I think it would do you good to do basic some reading about the sun and stars in general. You can start from here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun

Pay special attention to the chapter "Life Cycle".

How do they know 99% of that is speculation.
I perfer to go with what we know for sure. What is observable.

But lets use your info according to that article and that "belief" about what happened,what was it 4 billion years ago.  The Sun was coolder so just reverse the hot for cold accourding to the article it would have been to cold to start the experiment. The only way they can get around the problems they have is giving it more time. hundreds of millions are now billions of years. Its not science because they cant prove it. Its just a Guess.

My point is it doesnt have to be a lot hotter or colder is just has to be a little bit to cause serious problems.

Happy to chat more later