Originally posted by Wotan
The whole global warming in and of it self is conjecture and "anecdotal postulation". Still Gruen's question was clear. If you didnt think it worth answering then why enter the thread?
The question of "who, what" was in his 1st post
I guess you missed that as well?
It's well accepted by scientists that greenhouse gases trap heat in the Earth's atmosphere and tend to warm the planet. By increasing the levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, human activities are strengthening Earth's natural greenhouse effect. The key greenhouse gases emitted by human activities remain in the atmosphere for periods ranging from decades to centuries.thats from EPA.gov
IPCC projects further global warming of 2.2-10°F (1.4-5.8°C) by the year 2100Thats also from epa.gov or is it? After all the epa site is fairly exstensive...I could be making it all up.
possibly from the same site:
But projecting what the exact impacts will be over the 21st century remains very difficult. This is especially true when one asks how a local region will be affected.Perhaps that is the answer to: Greenland is experiencing a warm spell unseen since the 1930s.
Hmmm an exact reference might be better you think, so we could assertain the context?
OF course I could just go to:
the actual CNN story and find the 3rd and 4th paragraph BEFORE
Greenland is experiencing a warm spell unseen since the 1930s. which states:
Natural variability may be behind the changes, but human activity might also be to blame, scientists said.
A new five-year research plan presented this week by scientists and government officials meeting in Washington, D.C., asserts that people clearly are agents of environmental change, though it is still unclear how much human activity contributes. or the 2 paragraphs after:
Since 1979, the melt area has grown by 16 percent and is affecting higher and higher elevations.
Across the Arctic Ocean, the floating mantle of ice that covers it throughout much of the year shrank to record levels this summer, said Mark Serreze, also of the University of Colorado. In September, sea ice extent was 4 percent lower that that seen in any previous September since monitoring began in 1978. Those paragraphs in the same article floating around CNN.com might also be the answer to the original question:
doesnt this go against the argument they are making that these temperatures are unnnatural and due to recent modern human pollution if they were seen so long ago before the vast majority of human polluting activity?Possibly - but
people clearly are agents of environmental change and considering the amount of pollutants emitted into the atmosphere since the industrial revolution clearly predates the 1930's. Coupled with the fact that most proper records of climate change (ie. ice melt) seem to have been recorded from the late 20th century then it is entirely possible that early pollution and temps are linked.
Tronsky
