Buckaroo
Graduate Poster
Last edited:
Global Warming Scam
- Thread starter Floyd
- Start date
I frequently encounter claims like this. Unfortunately the claimants are never willing to back it up. It should be easy enough to devise a test. I'll propose a test format if you are willing. How about it?Ceritus said:
Letter to Canadian PM
An open letter to Prime Minister Stephen Harper:
Dear Prime Minister:
As accredited experts in climate and related scientific disciplines, we are writing to propose that balanced, comprehensive public-consultation sessions be held so as to examine the scientific foundation of the federal government's climate-change plans. This would be entirely consistent with your recent commitment to conduct a review of the Kyoto Protocol. Although many of us made the same suggestion to then-prime ministers Martin and Chretien, neither responded, and, to date, no formal, independent climate-science review has been conducted in Canada. Much of the billions of dollars earmarked for implementation of the protocol in Canada will be squandered without a proper assessment of recent developments in climate science.
Observational evidence does not support today's computer climate models, so there is little reason to trust model predictions of the future. Yet this is precisely what the United Nations did in creating and promoting Kyoto and still does in the alarmist forecasts on which Canada's climate policies are based. Even if the climate models were realistic, the environmental impact of Canada delaying implementation of Kyoto or other greenhouse-gas reduction schemes, pending completion of consultations, would be insignificant. Directing your government to convene balanced, open hearings as soon as possible would be a most prudent and responsible course of action.
While the confident pronouncements of scientifically unqualified environmental groups may provide for sensational
headlines, they are no basis for mature policy
formulation. The study of global climate change is, as you have said, an "emerging science," one that is perhaps the most complex ever tackled. It may be many years yet before we properly understand the Earth's climate system. Nevertheless, significant advances have been made since the protocol was created, many of which are taking us away from a concern about increasing greenhouse gases. If, back in the mid-1990s, we knew what we know today about climate, Kyoto would almost certainly not exist, because we would have concluded it was not necessary.
We appreciate the difficulty any government has formulating sensible science-based policy when the loudest voices always seem to be pushing in the opposite direction. However, by convening open, unbiased consultations, Canadians will be permitted to hear from experts on both sides of the debate in the climate-science community. When the public comes to understand that there is no "consensus" among climate scientists about the relative importance of the various causes of global climate change, the government will be in a far better position to develop plans that reflect reality and so benefit both the environment and the economy.
"Climate change is real" is a meaningless phrase used repeatedly by activists to convince the public that a climate catastrophe is looming and humanity is the cause. Neither of these fears is justified. Global climate changes all the time due to natural causes and the human impact still remains impossible to distinguish from this natural "noise." The new Canadian government's commitment to reducing air, land and water pollution is commendable, but allocating funds to "stopping climate change" would be irrational. We need to continue intensive research into the real causes of climate change and help our most vulnerable citizens adapt to whatever nature throws at us next.
We believe the Canadian public and government decision-makers need and deserve to hear the whole story concerning this very complex issue. It was only 30 years ago that many of today's global-warming alarmists were telling us that the world was in the midst of a global-cooling catastrophe. But the science continued to evolve, and still does, even though so many choose to ignore it when it does not fit with predetermined political agendas.
We hope that you will examine our proposal carefully and we stand willing and able to furnish you with more information on this crucially important topic.
CC: The Honourable Rona Ambrose, Minister of the Environment, and the Honourable Gary Lunn, Minister of Natural Resources
- - -
Sincerely,
Dr. Ian D. Clark, professor, isotope hydrogeology and paleoclimatology, Dept. of Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa
Dr. Tad Murty, former senior research scientist, Dept. of Fisheries and Oceans, former director of Australia's National Tidal Facility and professor of earth sciences, Flinders University, Adelaide; currently adjunct professor, Departments of Civil Engineering and Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa
Dr. R. Timothy Patterson, professor, Dept. of Earth Sciences (paleoclimatology), Carleton University, Ottawa
Dr. Fred Michel, director, Institute of Environmental Science and associate professor, Dept. of Earth Sciences, Carleton University, Ottawa
Dr. Madhav Khandekar, former research scientist, Environment Canada. Member of editorial board of Climate Research and Natural Hazards
Dr. Paul Copper, FRSC, professor emeritus, Dept. of Earth Sciences, Laurentian University, Sudbury, Ont.
Dr. Ross McKitrick, associate professor, Dept. of Economics, University of Guelph, Ont.
Dr. Tim Ball, former professor of climatology, University of Winnipeg; environmental consultant
Dr. Andreas Prokoph, adjunct professor of earth sciences, University of Ottawa; consultant in statistics and geology
Mr. David Nowell, M.Sc. (Meteorology), fellow of the Royal Meteorological Society, Canadian member and past chairman of the NATO Meteorological Group, Ottawa
Dr. Christopher Essex, professor of applied mathematics and associate director of the Program in Theoretical Physics, University of Western Ontario, London, Ont.
Dr. Gordon E. Swaters, professor of applied mathematics, Dept. of Mathematical Sciences, and member, Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Research Group, University of Alberta
Dr. L. Graham Smith, associate professor, Dept. of Geography, University of Western Ontario, London, Ont.
Dr. G. Cornelis van Kooten, professor and Canada Research Chair in environmental studies and climate change, Dept. of Economics, University of Victoria
Dr. Petr Chylek, adjunct professor, Dept. of Physics and Atmospheric Science, Dalhousie University, Halifax
Dr./Cdr. M. R. Morgan, FRMS, climate consultant, former meteorology advisor to the World Meteorological Organization. Previously research scientist in climatology at University of Exeter, U.K.
Dr. Keith D. Hage, climate consultant and professor emeritus of Meteorology, University of Alberta
Dr. David E. Wojick, P.Eng., energy consultant, Star Tannery, Va., and Sioux Lookout, Ont.
Rob Scagel, M.Sc., forest microclimate specialist, principal consultant, Pacific Phytometric Consultants, Surrey, B.C.
Dr. Douglas Leahey, meteorologist and air-quality consultant, Calgary
Paavo Siitam, M.Sc., agronomist, chemist, Cobourg, Ont.
Dr. Chris de Freitas, climate scientist, associate professor, The University of Auckland, N.Z.
Dr. Richard S. Lindzen, Alfred P. Sloan professor of meteorology, Dept. of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Dr. Freeman J. Dyson, emeritus professor of physics, Institute for Advanced Studies, Princeton, N.J.
Mr. George Taylor, Dept. of Meteorology, Oregon State University; Oregon State climatologist; past president, American Association of State Climatologists
Dr. Ian Plimer, professor of geology, School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Adelaide; emeritus professor of earth sciences, University of Melbourne, Australia
Dr. R.M. Carter, professor, Marine Geophysical Laboratory, James Cook University, Townsville, Australia
Mr. William Kininmonth, Australasian Climate Research, former Head National Climate Centre, Australian Bureau of Meteorology; former Australian delegate to World Meteorological Organization Commission for Climatology, Scientific and Technical Review
Dr. Hendrik Tennekes, former director of research, Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute
Dr. Gerrit J. van der Lingen, geologist/paleoclimatologist, Climate Change Consultant, Geoscience Research and Investigations, New Zealand
Dr. Patrick J. Michaels, professor of environmental sciences, University of Virginia
Dr. Nils-Axel Morner, emeritus professor of paleogeophysics & geodynamics, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden
Dr. Gary D. Sharp, Center for Climate/Ocean Resources Study, Salinas, Calif.
Dr. Roy W. Spencer, principal research scientist, Earth System Science Center, The University of Alabama, Huntsville
Dr. Al Pekarek, associate professor of geology, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences Dept., St. Cloud State University, St. Cloud, Minn.
Dr. Marcel Leroux, professor emeritus of climatology, University of Lyon, France; former director of Laboratory of Climatology, Risks and Environment, CNRS
Dr. Paul Reiter, professor, Institut Pasteur, Unit of Insects and Infectious Diseases, Paris, France. Expert reviewer, IPCC Working group II, chapter 8 (human health)
Dr. Zbigniew Jaworowski, physicist and chairman, Scientific Council of Central Laboratory for Radiological Protection, Warsaw, Poland
Dr. Sonja Boehmer-Christiansen, reader, Dept. of Geography, University of Hull, U.K.; editor, Energy & Environment
Dr. Hans H.J. Labohm, former advisor to the executive board, Clingendael Institute (The Netherlands Institute of International Relations) and an economist who has focused on climate change
Dr. Lee C. Gerhard, senior scientist emeritus, University of Kansas, past director and state geologist, Kansas Geological Survey
Dr. Asmunn Moene, past head of the Forecasting Centre, Meteorological Institute, Norway
Dr. August H. Auer, past professor of atmospheric science, University of Wyoming; previously chief meteorologist, Meteorological Service (MetService) of New Zealand
Dr. Vincent Gray, expert reviewer for the IPCC and author of The Greenhouse Delusion: A Critique of 'Climate Change 2001,' Wellington, N.Z.
Dr. Howard Hayden, emeritus professor of physics, University of Connecticut
Dr Benny Peiser, professor of social anthropology, Faculty of Science, Liverpool John Moores University, U.K.
Dr. Jack Barrett, chemist and spectroscopist, formerly with Imperial College London, U.K.
Dr. William J.R. Alexander, professor emeritus, Dept. of Civil and Biosystems Engineering, University of Pretoria, South Africa. Member, United Nations Scientific and Technical Committee on Natural Disasters, 1994-2000
Dr. S. Fred Singer, professor emeritus of environmental sciences, University of Virginia; former director, U.S. Weather Satellite Service
Dr. Harry N.A. Priem, emeritus professor of planetary geology and isotope geophysics, Utrecht University; former director of the Netherlands Institute for Isotope Geosciences; past president of the Royal Netherlands Geological & Mining Society
Dr. Robert H. Essenhigh, E.G. Bailey professor of energy conversion, Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, The Ohio State University
Dr. Sallie Baliunas, astrophysicist and climate researcher, Boston, Mass.
Douglas Hoyt, senior scientist at Raytheon (retired) and co-author of the book The Role of the Sun in Climate Change; previously with NCAR, NOAA, and the World Radiation Center, Davos, Switzerland
Dipl.-Ing. Peter Dietze, independent energy advisor and scientific climate and carbon modeller, official IPCC reviewer, Bavaria, Germany
Dr. Boris Winterhalter, senior marine researcher (retired), Geological Survey of Finland, former professor in marine geology, University of Helsinki, Finland
Dr. Wibjorn Karlen, emeritus professor, Dept. of Physical Geography and Quaternary Geology, Stockholm University, Sweden
Dr. Hugh W. Ellsaesser, physicist/meteorologist, previously with the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Calif.; atmospheric consultant.
Dr. Art Robinson, founder, Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, Cave Junction, Ore.
Dr. Arthur Rorsch, emeritus professor of molecular genetics, Leiden University, The Netherlands; past board member, Netherlands organization for applied research (TNO) in environmental, food and public health
Dr. Alister McFarquhar, Downing College, Cambridge, U.K.; international economist
Dr. Richard S. Courtney, climate and atmospheric science consultant, IPCC expert reviewer, U.K.
An open letter to Prime Minister Stephen Harper:
Dear Prime Minister:
As accredited experts in climate and related scientific disciplines, we are writing to propose that balanced, comprehensive public-consultation sessions be held so as to examine the scientific foundation of the federal government's climate-change plans. This would be entirely consistent with your recent commitment to conduct a review of the Kyoto Protocol. Although many of us made the same suggestion to then-prime ministers Martin and Chretien, neither responded, and, to date, no formal, independent climate-science review has been conducted in Canada. Much of the billions of dollars earmarked for implementation of the protocol in Canada will be squandered without a proper assessment of recent developments in climate science.
Observational evidence does not support today's computer climate models, so there is little reason to trust model predictions of the future. Yet this is precisely what the United Nations did in creating and promoting Kyoto and still does in the alarmist forecasts on which Canada's climate policies are based. Even if the climate models were realistic, the environmental impact of Canada delaying implementation of Kyoto or other greenhouse-gas reduction schemes, pending completion of consultations, would be insignificant. Directing your government to convene balanced, open hearings as soon as possible would be a most prudent and responsible course of action.
While the confident pronouncements of scientifically unqualified environmental groups may provide for sensational
headlines, they are no basis for mature policy
formulation. The study of global climate change is, as you have said, an "emerging science," one that is perhaps the most complex ever tackled. It may be many years yet before we properly understand the Earth's climate system. Nevertheless, significant advances have been made since the protocol was created, many of which are taking us away from a concern about increasing greenhouse gases. If, back in the mid-1990s, we knew what we know today about climate, Kyoto would almost certainly not exist, because we would have concluded it was not necessary.
We appreciate the difficulty any government has formulating sensible science-based policy when the loudest voices always seem to be pushing in the opposite direction. However, by convening open, unbiased consultations, Canadians will be permitted to hear from experts on both sides of the debate in the climate-science community. When the public comes to understand that there is no "consensus" among climate scientists about the relative importance of the various causes of global climate change, the government will be in a far better position to develop plans that reflect reality and so benefit both the environment and the economy.
"Climate change is real" is a meaningless phrase used repeatedly by activists to convince the public that a climate catastrophe is looming and humanity is the cause. Neither of these fears is justified. Global climate changes all the time due to natural causes and the human impact still remains impossible to distinguish from this natural "noise." The new Canadian government's commitment to reducing air, land and water pollution is commendable, but allocating funds to "stopping climate change" would be irrational. We need to continue intensive research into the real causes of climate change and help our most vulnerable citizens adapt to whatever nature throws at us next.
We believe the Canadian public and government decision-makers need and deserve to hear the whole story concerning this very complex issue. It was only 30 years ago that many of today's global-warming alarmists were telling us that the world was in the midst of a global-cooling catastrophe. But the science continued to evolve, and still does, even though so many choose to ignore it when it does not fit with predetermined political agendas.
We hope that you will examine our proposal carefully and we stand willing and able to furnish you with more information on this crucially important topic.
CC: The Honourable Rona Ambrose, Minister of the Environment, and the Honourable Gary Lunn, Minister of Natural Resources
- - -
Sincerely,
Dr. Ian D. Clark, professor, isotope hydrogeology and paleoclimatology, Dept. of Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa
Dr. Tad Murty, former senior research scientist, Dept. of Fisheries and Oceans, former director of Australia's National Tidal Facility and professor of earth sciences, Flinders University, Adelaide; currently adjunct professor, Departments of Civil Engineering and Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa
Dr. R. Timothy Patterson, professor, Dept. of Earth Sciences (paleoclimatology), Carleton University, Ottawa
Dr. Fred Michel, director, Institute of Environmental Science and associate professor, Dept. of Earth Sciences, Carleton University, Ottawa
Dr. Madhav Khandekar, former research scientist, Environment Canada. Member of editorial board of Climate Research and Natural Hazards
Dr. Paul Copper, FRSC, professor emeritus, Dept. of Earth Sciences, Laurentian University, Sudbury, Ont.
Dr. Ross McKitrick, associate professor, Dept. of Economics, University of Guelph, Ont.
Dr. Tim Ball, former professor of climatology, University of Winnipeg; environmental consultant
Dr. Andreas Prokoph, adjunct professor of earth sciences, University of Ottawa; consultant in statistics and geology
Mr. David Nowell, M.Sc. (Meteorology), fellow of the Royal Meteorological Society, Canadian member and past chairman of the NATO Meteorological Group, Ottawa
Dr. Christopher Essex, professor of applied mathematics and associate director of the Program in Theoretical Physics, University of Western Ontario, London, Ont.
Dr. Gordon E. Swaters, professor of applied mathematics, Dept. of Mathematical Sciences, and member, Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Research Group, University of Alberta
Dr. L. Graham Smith, associate professor, Dept. of Geography, University of Western Ontario, London, Ont.
Dr. G. Cornelis van Kooten, professor and Canada Research Chair in environmental studies and climate change, Dept. of Economics, University of Victoria
Dr. Petr Chylek, adjunct professor, Dept. of Physics and Atmospheric Science, Dalhousie University, Halifax
Dr./Cdr. M. R. Morgan, FRMS, climate consultant, former meteorology advisor to the World Meteorological Organization. Previously research scientist in climatology at University of Exeter, U.K.
Dr. Keith D. Hage, climate consultant and professor emeritus of Meteorology, University of Alberta
Dr. David E. Wojick, P.Eng., energy consultant, Star Tannery, Va., and Sioux Lookout, Ont.
Rob Scagel, M.Sc., forest microclimate specialist, principal consultant, Pacific Phytometric Consultants, Surrey, B.C.
Dr. Douglas Leahey, meteorologist and air-quality consultant, Calgary
Paavo Siitam, M.Sc., agronomist, chemist, Cobourg, Ont.
Dr. Chris de Freitas, climate scientist, associate professor, The University of Auckland, N.Z.
Dr. Richard S. Lindzen, Alfred P. Sloan professor of meteorology, Dept. of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Dr. Freeman J. Dyson, emeritus professor of physics, Institute for Advanced Studies, Princeton, N.J.
Mr. George Taylor, Dept. of Meteorology, Oregon State University; Oregon State climatologist; past president, American Association of State Climatologists
Dr. Ian Plimer, professor of geology, School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Adelaide; emeritus professor of earth sciences, University of Melbourne, Australia
Dr. R.M. Carter, professor, Marine Geophysical Laboratory, James Cook University, Townsville, Australia
Mr. William Kininmonth, Australasian Climate Research, former Head National Climate Centre, Australian Bureau of Meteorology; former Australian delegate to World Meteorological Organization Commission for Climatology, Scientific and Technical Review
Dr. Hendrik Tennekes, former director of research, Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute
Dr. Gerrit J. van der Lingen, geologist/paleoclimatologist, Climate Change Consultant, Geoscience Research and Investigations, New Zealand
Dr. Patrick J. Michaels, professor of environmental sciences, University of Virginia
Dr. Nils-Axel Morner, emeritus professor of paleogeophysics & geodynamics, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden
Dr. Gary D. Sharp, Center for Climate/Ocean Resources Study, Salinas, Calif.
Dr. Roy W. Spencer, principal research scientist, Earth System Science Center, The University of Alabama, Huntsville
Dr. Al Pekarek, associate professor of geology, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences Dept., St. Cloud State University, St. Cloud, Minn.
Dr. Marcel Leroux, professor emeritus of climatology, University of Lyon, France; former director of Laboratory of Climatology, Risks and Environment, CNRS
Dr. Paul Reiter, professor, Institut Pasteur, Unit of Insects and Infectious Diseases, Paris, France. Expert reviewer, IPCC Working group II, chapter 8 (human health)
Dr. Zbigniew Jaworowski, physicist and chairman, Scientific Council of Central Laboratory for Radiological Protection, Warsaw, Poland
Dr. Sonja Boehmer-Christiansen, reader, Dept. of Geography, University of Hull, U.K.; editor, Energy & Environment
Dr. Hans H.J. Labohm, former advisor to the executive board, Clingendael Institute (The Netherlands Institute of International Relations) and an economist who has focused on climate change
Dr. Lee C. Gerhard, senior scientist emeritus, University of Kansas, past director and state geologist, Kansas Geological Survey
Dr. Asmunn Moene, past head of the Forecasting Centre, Meteorological Institute, Norway
Dr. August H. Auer, past professor of atmospheric science, University of Wyoming; previously chief meteorologist, Meteorological Service (MetService) of New Zealand
Dr. Vincent Gray, expert reviewer for the IPCC and author of The Greenhouse Delusion: A Critique of 'Climate Change 2001,' Wellington, N.Z.
Dr. Howard Hayden, emeritus professor of physics, University of Connecticut
Dr Benny Peiser, professor of social anthropology, Faculty of Science, Liverpool John Moores University, U.K.
Dr. Jack Barrett, chemist and spectroscopist, formerly with Imperial College London, U.K.
Dr. William J.R. Alexander, professor emeritus, Dept. of Civil and Biosystems Engineering, University of Pretoria, South Africa. Member, United Nations Scientific and Technical Committee on Natural Disasters, 1994-2000
Dr. S. Fred Singer, professor emeritus of environmental sciences, University of Virginia; former director, U.S. Weather Satellite Service
Dr. Harry N.A. Priem, emeritus professor of planetary geology and isotope geophysics, Utrecht University; former director of the Netherlands Institute for Isotope Geosciences; past president of the Royal Netherlands Geological & Mining Society
Dr. Robert H. Essenhigh, E.G. Bailey professor of energy conversion, Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, The Ohio State University
Dr. Sallie Baliunas, astrophysicist and climate researcher, Boston, Mass.
Douglas Hoyt, senior scientist at Raytheon (retired) and co-author of the book The Role of the Sun in Climate Change; previously with NCAR, NOAA, and the World Radiation Center, Davos, Switzerland
Dipl.-Ing. Peter Dietze, independent energy advisor and scientific climate and carbon modeller, official IPCC reviewer, Bavaria, Germany
Dr. Boris Winterhalter, senior marine researcher (retired), Geological Survey of Finland, former professor in marine geology, University of Helsinki, Finland
Dr. Wibjorn Karlen, emeritus professor, Dept. of Physical Geography and Quaternary Geology, Stockholm University, Sweden
Dr. Hugh W. Ellsaesser, physicist/meteorologist, previously with the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Calif.; atmospheric consultant.
Dr. Art Robinson, founder, Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, Cave Junction, Ore.
Dr. Arthur Rorsch, emeritus professor of molecular genetics, Leiden University, The Netherlands; past board member, Netherlands organization for applied research (TNO) in environmental, food and public health
Dr. Alister McFarquhar, Downing College, Cambridge, U.K.; international economist
Dr. Richard S. Courtney, climate and atmospheric science consultant, IPCC expert reviewer, U.K.
Article in Nature
Climate Change Keeps . . . uh . . . Changing
Academy affirms hockey-stick graph
— Headline, news article in Nature, June 29, 2006 Well, not quite. This article reports on the conclusions of a National Academy of Sciences committee asked to evaluate the Michael Mann hockey-stick graph, which appears to show that the twentieth century is the warmest in the last 1000 years and which was relied upon in the last IPCC climate report. As noted in paragraph four of the article, “‘[W]e roughly agree with the substance of their [Michael Mann and coworkers] findings,’ says Gerald North, the committee’s chair and a climate scientist at Texas A&M University in College Station.
http://www.life-enhancement.com/article_template.asp?ID=1741
Climate Change Keeps . . . uh . . . Changing
Academy affirms hockey-stick graph
— Headline, news article in Nature, June 29, 2006 Well, not quite. This article reports on the conclusions of a National Academy of Sciences committee asked to evaluate the Michael Mann hockey-stick graph, which appears to show that the twentieth century is the warmest in the last 1000 years and which was relied upon in the last IPCC climate report. As noted in paragraph four of the article, “‘[W]e roughly agree with the substance of their [Michael Mann and coworkers] findings,’ says Gerald North, the committee’s chair and a climate scientist at Texas A&M University in College Station.
http://www.life-enhancement.com/article_template.asp?ID=1741
Last edited by a moderator:
Buckaroo
Graduate Poster
My letter's bigger than your letter. *Nyer.*
http://www.desmogblog.com/90-canadian-climate-scientists-plead-for-political-leadership
DeviousB
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2006
- Messages
- 374
casebro
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2005
- Messages
- 19,788
Getting done to the basic facts, modern science can show a trend of 1 degree in the last 100 years. That's in a system with a normal fluctuation of 100 degrees.
Do you really think that all of the quoted archeological weather studies can possibly show a trend as small as 1 degree? I.E., the claims that it is warmer now than it has been in xxx, based on tree rings? What is the accuity of tree rings? Or the accuity of sedimentary layers? Or the claim that the CO2 is higher than in xxx,xxx years? Are we talking an accuity of 1 degree in ice cores 1000 feet deep? This concept of doubtful history is not mine, it was released this year in a study by Scripps Institue of Oceanography. So, Mann's graph depends on faulty historical data. The Scripps report says not to trust any data over 400 years old, a wink in climatological age spans.
We do know that it has been warmer than this, or did you think the Wooly Mammoth found enought to eat in the frozen tundra? We do know it has been colder than this, as seen in glacial deposits. Climate varies, get over it.
Do you really think that all of the quoted archeological weather studies can possibly show a trend as small as 1 degree? I.E., the claims that it is warmer now than it has been in xxx, based on tree rings? What is the accuity of tree rings? Or the accuity of sedimentary layers? Or the claim that the CO2 is higher than in xxx,xxx years? Are we talking an accuity of 1 degree in ice cores 1000 feet deep? This concept of doubtful history is not mine, it was released this year in a study by Scripps Institue of Oceanography. So, Mann's graph depends on faulty historical data. The Scripps report says not to trust any data over 400 years old, a wink in climatological age spans.
We do know that it has been warmer than this, or did you think the Wooly Mammoth found enought to eat in the frozen tundra? We do know it has been colder than this, as seen in glacial deposits. Climate varies, get over it.
Belz...
Fiend God
Everyone has his woo.
Buckaroo
Graduate Poster
Then it's an awfully good thing that, as DeviousB has already pointed out, the proxy record has been independently verified. Argument from incredulity is not a strong position.
Can't really comment on the Scripps study unless you post the reference.
Sigh, I'll admit when I am wrong but I am not sure if I am wrong yet. Or right for that matter. I thought I was right but apparently you are right, I was basing the belief that I was right on not enough evidence. I just hope I am not wrong.
DeviousB
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2006
- Messages
- 374
That has 'sig' written all over it!
Unfortunately, after reading that wonderful paragraph
[*] through three times, I've completely forgotten what I was going to post and will now have to do it tomorrow.
[* That wasn't sarcasm BTW.]
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
The thing is, the earth will change it's temperature, but always for a reason. It's not one of those things that just happens chaotically, like if it will rain today, or which direction the wind will be coming from. The overall climate can even be modelled as a zero dimensional object, just mix in the chemicals, add the forcings, and see what the temperature is.
exarch
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2003
- Messages
- 7,184
I still say that, global warming or not, being cause by humans or not, the Kyoto agreement is not a bad thing.
Maybe the United Nations are reacting before all the data is in, but what's the alternative? Getting lambasted for waiting too long when most of the data was already clearly showing what was happening, and which actions needed to be taken? Then we can blame the UN for not stopping global warming
And I ask again, what's the worst that could happen if Kyoto norms are adhered to everywhere?
Maybe the United Nations are reacting before all the data is in, but what's the alternative? Getting lambasted for waiting too long when most of the data was already clearly showing what was happening, and which actions needed to be taken? Then we can blame the UN for not stopping global warming
And I ask again, what's the worst that could happen if Kyoto norms are adhered to everywhere?
Belz...
Fiend God
Oh, don't mind me. I have virtually no knowledge on that subject. I was simply commenting on someone else's post. I think that, no matter how smart or critical someone is, there's always something counter-factual he'll be willing to believe in. I'm no exception.
delphi_ote
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2005
- Messages
- 5,994
The counter-factual thing I believe in is that I don't believe in anything counter-factual.
That has 'sig' written all over it!
Unfortunately, after reading that wonderful paragraph
[*] through three times, I've completely forgotten what I was going to post and will now have to do it tomorrow.
[* That wasn't sarcasm BTW.]
I'm sorry
Global climate models predict increase in snowfall in Antarctica due to warming: but snowfall hasn’t changed in 50 years
“Future scenarios from global climate models (GCMs) suggest that Antarctic snowfall should increase in a warming climate, mainly due to the greater moisture-holding capacity of warmer air, partially offsetting enhanced loss at the ice sheet peripheries.”1
A new paper reports on a 50-year time series of snowfall accumulation over Antarctica by combining model simulations and observations primarily from ice cores.1 They find that “[t]here has been no statistically significant change in snowfall since the 1950s. … If anything, our 50-year perspective suggests that Antarctic snowfall has slightly decreased during the past decade, while global mean temperatures have been warmer than at any time during the modern instrumental record.” They conclude, “Our results indicate that there is not a statistically significant global warming signal of increasing precipitation over Antarctica since the IGY [International Geophysical Year, 1957–58], inferring that GSL [global sea level] rise has not been mitigated by recently increased Antarctic snowfall as expected. It may be necessary to revisit GCM [global climate models] assessments that show increased precipitation over Antarctica by the end of this century in conjunction with projected warming.” [Emphasis added] A hypothesized increase in precipitation had been put forth heretofore to “explain” why the ice sheets in most of Antarctica are thickening, while in other areas (particularly the western ice sheet), ice is thinning.
As we have noted before, global climate is very far from understood and very far from wrapped up by a scientific “consensus.” We object, not to facts developed by scientific investigation, but to an alleged foregone conclusion (to which everybody except a few “skeptics” supposedly agrees) that a disaster of human* design is in the making and that governments are capable of “fixing” it. There is no scientific consensus, nor is there even an attempt to find a “consensus” among economists that governments can regulate the use of the atmosphere so that benefits outweigh costs.
References
“Future scenarios from global climate models (GCMs) suggest that Antarctic snowfall should increase in a warming climate, mainly due to the greater moisture-holding capacity of warmer air, partially offsetting enhanced loss at the ice sheet peripheries.”1
A new paper reports on a 50-year time series of snowfall accumulation over Antarctica by combining model simulations and observations primarily from ice cores.1 They find that “[t]here has been no statistically significant change in snowfall since the 1950s. … If anything, our 50-year perspective suggests that Antarctic snowfall has slightly decreased during the past decade, while global mean temperatures have been warmer than at any time during the modern instrumental record.” They conclude, “Our results indicate that there is not a statistically significant global warming signal of increasing precipitation over Antarctica since the IGY [International Geophysical Year, 1957–58], inferring that GSL [global sea level] rise has not been mitigated by recently increased Antarctic snowfall as expected. It may be necessary to revisit GCM [global climate models] assessments that show increased precipitation over Antarctica by the end of this century in conjunction with projected warming.” [Emphasis added] A hypothesized increase in precipitation had been put forth heretofore to “explain” why the ice sheets in most of Antarctica are thickening, while in other areas (particularly the western ice sheet), ice is thinning.
As we have noted before, global climate is very far from understood and very far from wrapped up by a scientific “consensus.” We object, not to facts developed by scientific investigation, but to an alleged foregone conclusion (to which everybody except a few “skeptics” supposedly agrees) that a disaster of human* design is in the making and that governments are capable of “fixing” it. There is no scientific consensus, nor is there even an attempt to find a “consensus” among economists that governments can regulate the use of the atmosphere so that benefits outweigh costs.
References
- Monaghan et al. Insignificant change in Antarctic snowfall since the International Geophysical Year. Science 313:827-31 (2006).
Buckaroo
Graduate Poster
As usual, the real story is more complicated than the Deniers would want you to believe:
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/08/antarctica-snowfall/
casebro
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2005
- Messages
- 19,788
I believe it!