Flamey McGassy
Your guide to global warming by Flamey McGassy. Another great animation from Mark Fiore
posted by _H_ at 12:58 am
Friday, February 03, 2006
Email Terrorism News
Comment rules
A Logical Voice
Left of Centre
Cultureblog
Poetic Justice
Baghdad Burning
Today in Iraq
Blah3
Life's Journey
So much trouble in the world
Writers Against Terrorism
moonlitetwine
Things Which Must Be Disseminated
WhiteHouseHypocrisy
Permaculture Reflections
In the middle of America
liberals vs Conservatives
Links
Information clearing houseA Logical Voice
Left of Centre
Cultureblog
Poetic Justice
Baghdad Burning
Today in Iraq
Blah3
Life's Journey
So much trouble in the world
Writers Against Terrorism
moonlitetwine
Things Which Must Be Disseminated
WhiteHouseHypocrisy
Permaculture Reflections
In the middle of America
liberals vs Conservatives
7 Comments:
Just about says it all really... a great piece of work as usual!
There is so much missinformation and/or confusion on this issue I am not sure what to think. For sure there is way too much politicing goin on.
Yes, it is obvious the temps are going up, still rather slowly, but going up.
Why? The earth has some pretty big cycles it goes through. We are coming out of the last ice age - warmer! The earth will head back into another one, if history is any measure.
What I find interesting is the statement that of the 700 or so scientists that sign on to the global warming alarm, with Gore, only about 3 are truly weather scientists. The VAST majority of the weather scientists say that the system is far too complex, there are too many interacting factors - and we do not really KNOW what it all means yet - especially in terms of man's part.
Now - I will say that when the new generation of weather satilites go up (soon) we will have much better data to go by. As for now the data is being averaged and modeled in ways that may not be accurate.
Just recently they discovered that green vagetation emits methane - most most potent greenhouse gas. That's a big piece to the puzzle - and they just found it!
What most people dont know, aren't told, is that too a great extent green house effect is VITAL to our existence on this planet. The weather people say as much as 98% of it is vital. If not for the greenhouse effect of our atmosphere we would freeze out at night, and boil out in the daytime. Think Mars! It has no greenhouse atomsphere.
It is hard to trust information - it is used by some and twisted by others. The earth is pretty old, and we only have a speck of information about it (data) the rest of our information is summised from observation. Dont get me wrong - that helps.
The way I see it - yes we need to stop some/most of our polluting - why - because we like to breath, eat clean food and drink clean water - no matter what the daliy temperatures are!
They say the Pres is not listening to the scientists - well maybe he IS listening to the "other" scientists!?
Time will tell, yet I am in favor of stacking the odds.
Look at the money trail, both sides of this issue are making a lot of it, thanks to politics as usual.
Gary
How many people remember that in the 70s it was global cooling, the coming ice age, that was the scare of the decade? Were they wrong about there data????
Gary
Gary, the capacity for global warming was known since 1896 with the work of Svante Arrhenius. However, there have, as with many sciences, been changes in understanding over the history of the discipline. There isn't the space to go into it here, but if you are really interested, I suggest reading The Discovery of Global Warming by Spencer R. Weart.
I have a lot more to say, but not on a day in which I much prepare for work. For now I'll just say the Mars has next to no atmosphere at all, so greenhouse gases don't help it much.
That's my suggestion, as well as others, Mars has none, we do "cause we need it!
There are some things that are just plain obvious, some are not.
Yes the temps seem to be going up - no doubt - still much to learn.
This guy makes a good case, is he lying? I dont know - but someone is being missled.:
http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/reg15n2g.html
Gary
OK, it is the OZONE Layer that keeps us from freezing at night and boiling during the day, the greenhouse gases are eroding that protection! We don't NEED greenhouse gases at all!
Global Warming is acutally far worse than we thought, and to be frank it is already too late. It has been projected that it will take 100 years to get everyone to lower their emissions to a safe level, by then the damage would be irrepairable.
Still, I'll be dead by then anyway.
"Mars' atmosphere is thin: the air pressure on the surface is only 750 pascals, about 0.75% of the average on Earth."
Lindzen? He is the one guy that any global warming denier is going to cling to. I read his very unconvincing piece in Time a number of years back.
Is he lying? He may well be. He knows what side his bread is buttered on: "he receives his funding from the fossil fuel industry." (Also see Weart, Spencer R., The Discovery of Global Warming, p. 177, which says, "his credibility was not helped when he accepted money as a consultant for fossil fuel groups".)
It should be quite obvious that there are very, very powerful interests that will benefit from muddying the waters with respect to global warming and those interests will pay quite a lot to spread the message they want to hear. If not for that fact, the chances of you ever having heard of Lindzen would be next to nil. Despite what he would like to believe, he is in the minority.
Finally on Lindzen, if I may be forgiven these well poisoning fallacy (hey, at least I told you I'm doing it): First "Richard Lindzen was the first I noted who forecast here that over the next 20 years, the climate is as likely to cool as warm, and said he would be prepared to bet on it. However, when challenged to a bet, it turns out that he expects odds of 50:1 in his favour, ie he will only bet on the chances of cooling being at the 2% level or higher, far short of his 50% claim. My quick and dirty estimate above based on the IPCC TAR suggests that they would put the probability at more like 10%, so his offer actually appears to affirm the IPCC position."
And second: "Dick Lindzen of MIT, also believes that no scientific study has yet demonstrated a conclusive link between smoking and lung cancer." Frankly, after hearing that, I do call in to question anything the man says.
Now, on the global cooling, without quoting chapters from Weart's book, I'll turn to a blog run by climate scientists: "The "panic" about cooling in the 1970's is an urban myth. In particular, the Science article from 1976 is totally misrepresented by Will. That article qualified its predictions by "in the absence of human perturbation of the climate system" as did many papers at the time. It is also telling that Richard Lindzen, a well known critic of other climate scientists, happens to agree with us on this. Writing for the Cato Institute, he says: "But the scientific community never took the issue [global cooling] to heart...""
On methane from plants, it is a part of nature. That is to say, unless plants have suddenly changed, the methane released by plants is part of a natural source of methane that, in the absense of human interference, would be in a steady state and not affect a change on climate.
On greenhouse gases being vital, yes, within a range of concentrations. Water is vital to human life, but it has killed those foolish enough to drink too much of it (though loss of electrolytes).
I can agree whole-heartedly on your closing statements. We do need clean air, clean water and clean food. If you can't get a lungful without inhaling manmade pollution and/or can't go down to your local lake of river and drink straight from it, you live in a degraded, polluted environment.
Anonymous, the ozonelayer is not what holds in heat. Don't take my word for it, look it up.
Post a Comment
<< Home