Global Warming huh...On pace to be coldest July EVER

[StayTrue]

I think Conservative christian and Staytrue need to have a debate. Are we cooling or warming?

In my own city, this July has been record-setting cold. How can there be a debate on that?

Also, the main point is that despite whether it's warming or cooling, man doesn't cause either.

 

[Conservative Christian]

Southern Hemisphere is COOLING

"UN scientist Dr. Madhav L. Khandekar, a retired Environment Canada scientist and an expert IPCC reviewer in 2007, explained on August 6, 2007 that the Southern Hemisphere is cooling. “In the Southern Hemisphere, the land-area mean temperature has slowly but surely declined in the last few years. The city of Buenos Aires in Argentina received several centimeters of snowfall in early July, and the last time it snowed in Buenos Aires was in 1918!

Most of Australia experienced one of its coldest months of June this year. Several other locations in the Southern Hemisphere have experienced lower temperatures in the last few years. Further, the sea surface temperatures over world oceans are slowly declining since mid-1998, according to a recent world-wide analysis of ocean surface temperatures," Dr. Khandekar explained."

http://www.thehilltimes.ca/html/cover_index.php?display=story&full_path=/2007/august/13/letter4/&c=1

.

 

[StayTrue]

Question for Ben:

Why does Al Gore always insist there is an absolute climate consensus on his school of thought regarding Global Warming, when clearly, as this thread shows, there is not?

Why won't he hear any debate from the other side without talking about "people also didn't believe we landed on the moon".

It is this side of the arguement that needs to debate.

 

[Conservative Christian]

Climate models made by unlicensed 'software engineers'

"But the credibility of these computer model predictions took a significant hit in June 2007 when Dr. Jim Renwick, a top UN IPCC scientist, admitted that climate models do not account for half the variability in nature and thus are not reliable. "Half of the variability in the climate system is not predictable, so we don’t expect to do terrifically well," Renwick conceded."

http://nzclimatescience.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=23&Itemid=32

.

 

[pcosmar]

I think Conservative christian and Staytrue need to have a debate. Are we cooling or warming?

Presently cooling.
We had a couple years of slight warming, but have been cooling for the last couple. That is why the global warming crowd changed the rhetoric to "Climate Change".

 

[Conservative Christian]

"Another high-profile UN IPCC lead author, Dr. Kevin Trenberth, recently echoed Renwick’s sentiments about climate models by referring to them as “story lines.”

"In fact there are no predictions by IPCC at all. And there never have been. The IPCC instead proffers ‘what if’ projections of future climate that correspond to certain emissions scenarios," Trenberth wrote in journal Nature’s blog on June 4, 2007.

He also admitted that the climate models have major shortcomings because "they do not consider many things like the recovery of the ozone layer, for instance, or observed trends in forcing agents. There is no estimate, even probabilistically, as to the likelihood of any emissions scenario and no best guess.""

http://blogs.nature.com/climatefeedback/2007/06/predictions_of_climate.html

.

 

[BenIsForRon]

Presently cooling.
We had a couple years of slight warming, but have been cooling for the last couple. That is why the global warming crowd changed the rhetoric to "Climate Change".

No, it was changed to climate change because its more complicated than global warming. The poles are getting much hotter, whereas a few spots are getting cooler, mostly warming overall though.

"Another high-profile UN IPCC lead author, Dr. Kevin Trenberth, recently echoed Renwick’s sentiments about climate models by referring to them as “story lines.”

"In fact there are no predictions by IPCC at all. And there never have been. The IPCC instead proffers ‘what if’ projections of future climate that correspond to certain emissions scenarios," Trenberth wrote in journal Nature’s blog on June 4, 2007.

He also admitted that the climate models have major shortcomings because "they do not consider many things like the recovery of the ozone layer, for instance, or observed trends in forcing agents. There is no estimate, even probabilistically, as to the likelihood of any emissions scenario and no best guess.""

http://blogs.nature.com/climatefeedback/2007/06/predictions_of_climate.html

.

IPCC is just going on trends, and they gave a range of temperature increase. They can't account for everything, but that's hardly a reason to say "there's nothing to worry about".

And did you just admit that Ozone restoration could have an effect? You know the ozone is rebuilding itself because the US government outlawed CFC's right?

 

[Conservative Christian]

Presently cooling.
We had a couple years of slight warming, but have been cooling for the last couple. That is why the global warming crowd changed the rhetoric to "Climate Change".

Actually, it has been cooling for at least the last decade, even though mankind continues to emit a substantial amount of CO2 into the atmosphere every year.

The "science" of the global warming alarmists is tragically flawed, and based primarily on unreliable computer model "guesstimates".

.

 

[pcosmar]

And did you just admit that Ozone restoration could have an effect? You know the ozone is rebuilding itself because the US government outlawed CFC's right?

More bullshit. Are you learning this crap in school? (of course you are)

The Ozone layer was fluctuating before, and still is.
CFC's were never outlawed. They still exist. and in every cooling system.
I work in the Automotive industry. It was over old patents running out and the new pattents being enforced by law. (government interference in the market.)
The old freon is still widely used. the "new" freon is only a minor change of formulation.

It is more hype and bullshit.

 

[Conservative Christian]

"2) Belgian weather institute’s (RMI) August 2007 study dismisses decisive role of CO2 in warming: Excerpt: "Brussels: CO2 is not the big bogeyman of climate change and global warming. This is the conclusion of a comprehensive scientific study done by the Royal Meteorological Institute, which will be published this summer. The study does not state that CO2 plays no role in warming the earth. "But it can never play the decisive role that is currently attributed to it", climate scientist Luc Debontridder said.

"Not CO2, but water vapor is the most important greenhouse gas. It is responsible for at least 75% of the greenhouse effect. This is a simple scientific fact, but Al Gore's movie has hyped CO2 so much that nobody seems to take note of it." said Debontridder. "Every change in weather conditions is blamed on CO2. But the warm winters of the last few years (in Belgium) are simply due to the 'North-Atlantic Oscillation'. And this has absolutely nothing to do with CO2," he added."

http://nzclimatescience.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=102&Itemid=38

.

 

[BenIsForRon]

New article, I hope it's wrong, but you guys have been posting lots of news articles, so I figure I'll post one. It would probably be better to keep it to peer-reviewed stuff. Anyway, it says we've been on the downside of a solar cycle, so things should get even hotter... shit.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/jul/27/world-warming-faster-study

 

[Conservative Christian]

"3) New peer-reviewed study counters global warming theory, finds carbon dioxide did not end the last Ice Age. Excerpt: Deep-sea temperatures rose 1,300 years before atmospheric CO2, ruling out the greenhouse gas as driver of meltdown, says study in Science. Carbon dioxide did not cause the end of the last ice age, a new study in Science suggests, contrary to past inferences from ice core records. “There has been this continual reference to the correspondence between CO2 and climate change as reflected in ice core records as justification for the role of CO2 in climate change,” said USC geologist Lowell Stott, lead author of the study, slated for advance online publication Sept. 27 in Science Express.

“You can no longer argue that CO2 alone caused the end of the ice ages.” Deep-sea temperatures warmed about 1,300 years before the tropical surface ocean and well before the rise in atmospheric CO2, the study found. The finding suggests the rise in greenhouse gas was likely a result of warming and may have accelerated the meltdown – but was not its main cause. < > “The climate dynamic is much more complex than simply saying that CO2 rises and the temperature warms,” Stott said. The complexities “have to be understood in order to appreciate how the climate system has changed in the past and how it will change in the future.”"

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-09/uosc-cdd092507.php

.

 

[BenIsForRon]

The scientist in the article refers CO2 as a green house gas. I thought you didn't agree with that.

 

[Conservative Christian]

"4) New peer-reviewed study finds clouds may greatly reduce global warming: Excerpt: This study published on August 9, 2007 in the Geophysical Research Letters finds that climate models fail test against real clouds. "To give an idea of how strong this enhanced cooling mechanism is, if it was operating on global warming, it would reduce estimates of future warming by over 75 percent," Dr. Roy Spencer said. "At least 80 percent of the Earth's natural greenhouse effect is due to water vapor and clouds, and those are largely under the control of precipitation systems.

Until we understand how precipitation systems change with warming, I don't believe we can know how much of our current warming is manmade. Without that knowledge, we can't predict future climate change with any degree of certainty," Spencer added. The paper was co-authored by University of Alabama Huntsville's Dr. John R. Christy and Dr. W. Danny Braswell, and Dr. Justin Hnilo of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA."

http://www.uah.edu/News/newsread.php?newsID=875

.

 

[BenIsForRon]

"At least 80 percent of the Earth's natural greenhouse effect is due to water vapor and clouds, and those are largely under the control of precipitation systems.

.

Hmmmm. Wonder what makes up that other 20%. CO2 couldn't be part of that greenhouse cocktail... could it?

Keep posting articles CC. You're helping my basic argument.

 

[Wildlander]

What an idiot.

You know, only a very short-sighted person would conclude no global warming based on the weather in his one little part of the world.

You should read this post... posted on these forums. Texas is cooking and they are water rationing because of the drought.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=201514


Go out to the arbor day website. These are the folks who make the maps on the garden seed packets... the growing zones. They have retained their maps from the past. In Washington state (as is the case for the entire west coast states), we have increased two zones in some areas. The entire state has increased at least one zone. Twenty degrees in the last 15 years. The info is right there in front of us and some still turn a blind eye to it. ARe you going to say that the Arbor Day Foundation planned for Obama 15 years agoand some wacko conspiracy theory? Give me a break. I am 51 years old and remember the days in college at WSU when we would go ice fishing in 20 below weather. Year after year. We have not seen 20 below in over 10 years. It never even drops to zero anymore. We rarely get the chance to go ice fishing anymore. Prior to the 1940, the Spokane, Ellensburg, Pullman, Omak, Okanogan region dropped to 30 below zero regularly. Look up the NOAA airport data or Arbor Day maps for yourself before you reply to me with uneducated opinions.

Wildlander

 

[Wildlander]

One of the one percent of quakes and you are right there to take it as fact and consensus?

"3) New peer-reviewed study counters global warming theory, finds carbon dioxide did not end the last Ice Age. Excerpt: Deep-sea temperatures rose 1,300 years before atmospheric CO2, ruling out the greenhouse gas as driver of meltdown, says study in Science. Carbon dioxide did not cause the end of the last ice age, a new study in Science suggests, contrary to past inferences from ice core records. “There has been this continual reference to the correspondence between CO2 and climate change as reflected in ice core records as justification for the role of CO2 in climate change,” said USC geologist Lowell Stott, lead author of the study, slated for advance online publication Sept. 27 in Science Express.

“You can no longer argue that CO2 alone caused the end of the ice ages.” Deep-sea temperatures warmed about 1,300 years before the tropical surface ocean and well before the rise in atmospheric CO2, the study found. The finding suggests the rise in greenhouse gas was likely a result of warming and may have accelerated the meltdown – but was not its main cause. < > “The climate dynamic is much more complex than simply saying that CO2 rises and the temperature warms,” Stott said. The complexities “have to be understood in order to appreciate how the climate system has changed in the past and how it will change in the future.”"

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-09/uosc-cdd092507.php

.

 

[Dr.3D]

One of the one percent of quakes and you are right there ready to suck up his dribble. What an idiot.

You won't last long on these forums if you continue to insult people.

 

[Wildlander]

One other thing, warming in the past occured over tens of thousands of years. What we have today is warming over ten or twenty years. We have more warming in 20 years than ANY natural warming event in the past. All of you are refusing to acknowledge that. And there is only one cause for that quickening. Humans - their technology and their burning of fossile fuels, logging of massive forests to replaced with grass or tiny saplings far below what is considered replacement or sustainable.

I am all for Ron Paul on most of his issues. But I guarantee you, when he has the time to look deeply into the matter, he will find that global warming is for real and that there is clear evidence it is human caused.

Wildlander

 

[BenIsForRon]

I am all for Ron Paul on most of his issues. But I guarantee you, when he has the time to look deeply into the matter, he will find that global warming is for real and that there is clear evidence it is human caused.

Wildlander

Agreed, his answers related to environmental issues, and global warming in particular, are usually pretty vague.