Weather Today and Yesterday

[Zimme83]

I would say the real elephant in the room is how natural recources are distributed and used on a global scale. For ex oil. If all people on earth used same amount of oil as the average American we would need to increase production by almost 10 times by 2050. (incl growth in population). Its obvious that it will be almost impossible to do that. So we can either choose to relocate recources from rich countries to poor or maintaining a system were a few uses a lot. (today the riches 10% use 50% of the oil on a global scale)
I'm pretty sure that we will see a lot of conflicts (even some very large) within the next decades over natural recources. The biggest threath to the western way of living is that 6 billion (soon 10) other people want to live in the same way. And it will be hard to get the cookie big enough for everyone.

[DREDIOCK]

There is global warming, Earl, you can't release all the carbon that took millions of years to be absorbed into the earth, trees, oil, natural gas etc in the course of a few hundred years and not expect it to have an effect. Remember, they laughed at Galileo and Copernicus for saying that the earth circled the sun.

You do realise the one of the largest contributor to greenhouse emissions world wide are animals.

Methane (CH4) is the second most prevalent greenhouse gas emitted in the United States from human activities.

Domestic livestock such as cattle, buffalo, sheep, goats, and camels produce large amounts of CH4 as part of their normal digestive process. Also, when animals' manure is stored or managed in lagoons or holding tanks, CH4 is produced. Because humans raise these animals for food, the emissions are considered human-related. Globally, the Agriculture sector is the primary source of CH4 emissions.

http://epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/gases/ch4.html

Planing on going vegan any time soon?

Oh wait. that wont work either, the manure is used to fertilize the plants.

Maybe we should just stop eating alltogether

[Chris79]

This can effect climate.



This can effect climate.



I am not to sure what the above can do.



Although we ought to be more concerned with the above, it would be far more destructive then global warming. Unlike ACW there is plenty of evidence that the above existed, and will inevitably return.

[earl1937]

You do realise the one of the largest contributor to greenhouse emissions world wide are animals.

Methane (CH4) is the second most prevalent greenhouse gas emitted in the United States from human activities.

Domestic livestock such as cattle, buffalo, sheep, goats, and camels produce large amounts of CH4 as part of their normal digestive process. Also, when animals' manure is stored or managed in lagoons or holding tanks, CH4 is produced. Because humans raise these animals for food, the emissions are considered human-related. Globally, the Agriculture sector is the primary source of CH4 emissions.

http://epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/gases/ch4.html

Planing on going vegan any time soon?

Oh wait. that wont work either, the manure is used to fertilize the plants.

Maybe we should just stop eating alltogether

You are correct sir, but the biggest contributor to the atmosphere are TREEs! Yes, trees, look it up, they produce more carbon into the atmosphere than do cars and trucks!

[Zimme83]

Even if they do it doesnt matter, they have got that carbon from somewere (the air) so they are not adding any new carbon to the system. Unlike fossile fuel that bring up new carbon.

[DREDIOCK]

Ummmm


Global Warming Progressing Slower Than We Thought

http://www.natureworldnews.com/articles/14243/20150422/global-warming-progressing-slower-than-we-thought.htm

[DREDIOCK]

Even if they do it doesnt matter, they have got that carbon from somewere (the air) so they are not adding any new carbon to the system. Unlike fossile fuel that bring up new carbon.

Thee is no such thing as "new carbon" Its always been there. Its a matter of where its placed

[icepac]

In the early 1970s, weather in miami was insane.

Weather was also insane around 2001 in orlando where every window looked like it had a strobe light outside it with the huge cracks of thunder such that it was one continuous explosion.

Come outside and it looks like they dropped a million marbles on the ground.

That year, I saw lightning strike a tree over my car twice in 20 seconds. (the second strike instantly started it burning fiercely) with my car parked under it.

[ghi]

 large plasma filament was ejected from Sun this afternoon ; we are done cooked ,game over



More photos here,,looks cool;

http://sohodata.nascom.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/data_query_search_url?Session=web&Resolution=2&Display=Images&NumImg=30&Types=instrument=LASCO:detector=C2

http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/data/realtime-images.html#

[kvuo75]

Thee is no such thing as "new carbon" Its always been there. Its a matter of where its placed

yes.  either buried deep in the ground, or in the atmosphere.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_cycle

we have been taking it out of the ground for 150 years, and putting it into the atmosphere.

however slightly, it changes the way the atmosphere works. this changes climate, and will change how we (humans) live. it's gonna mess alot of people (especially 3rd worlders) up.

this is all measurable and quite non-controversial science..  until people's political ideology conflicts with it, apparently.

[PR3D4TOR]

And and all photosynthesis based lifeforms take the carbon out of the atmosphere and uses it to grow themselves. Net result is a larger, faster growing biosphere.

Few people are talking about the positive effects of increased CO2 in the atmosphere.

[Slash27]

I would say the real elephant in the room is how natural recources are distributed and used on a global scale. For ex oil. If all people on earth used same amount of oil as the average American we would need to increase production by almost 10 times by 2050. (incl growth in population). Its obvious that it will be almost impossible to do that. So we can either choose to relocate recources from rich countries to poor or maintaining a system were a few uses a lot. (today the riches 10% use 50% of the oil on a global scale)
I'm pretty sure that we will see a lot of conflicts (even some very large) within the next decades over natural recources. The biggest threath to the western way of living is that 6 billion (soon 10) other people want to live in the same way. And it will be hard to get the cookie big enough for everyone.

Do you ride an elephant to work?

[Zimme83]

Not at the moment. The elephant flew to India to visit his mother so im riding the Ostrich until he is back.

[Chris79]

Here is an Acid test.

1. Is the Earth's climate warming. Unknown, 120 years of data collected compared to the current climatological epic is insignificant.

2. If the earth is warming is it caused by man. Well, assuming the earth is warming, there are much more powerful forces effecting climate then man.

3. If the Earth is warming and caused by man is it necessarily bad? Historical speaking civilizations have flourished during warming trends and declined during cooling trends. Although there is no way to quantify with hard numbers, using historical texts we have learned that the Romans grew gapes near Hadrians wall (250ad) and the Norse grew oats and barely in Greenland circa ~1000ad. Neither of which could be replicated today. So It could be determined with a fair degree of certainty that the earth has been both warmer and colder during the distant past.

In conclusion. In order for mankind to be concerned with ACW, the earth must be warming due to man made causes and in turn is detrimental to the planet. Maybe one day in the distant future a rational conclusion can me made, but doubtfuly in my lifetime.

[earl1937]

Here is an Acid test.

1. Is the Earth's climate warming. Unknown, 120 years of data collected compared to the current climatological epic is insignificant.

2. If the earth is warming is it caused by man. Well, assuming the earth is warming, there are much more powerful forces effecting climate then man.

3. If the Earth is warming and caused by man is it necessarily bad? Historical speaking civilizations have flourished during warming trends and declined during cooling trends. Although there is no way to quantify with hard numbers, using historical texts we have learned that the Romans grew gapes near Hadrians wall (250ad) and the Norse grew oats and barely in Greenland circa ~1000ad. Neither of which could be replicated today. So It could be determined with a fair degree of certainty that the earth has been both warmer and colder during the distant past.

In conclusion. In order for mankind to be concerned with ACW, the earth must be warming due to man made causes and in turn is detrimental to the planet. Maybe one day in the distant future a rational conclusion can me made, but doubtfuly in my lifetime.

well said sir! I would only add that there is more ice cap at the poles, North and South, than anytime in history! I would think if the earth is warming, we would have less ice at the poles. Al Gore has made billions off of this fantasy!!