• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged AGW without HADCRUT3

:thumbsup: don't lurk...that was excellent...and accurate.

The only small negative forcing is the Ozone hole we created in Antarctica keeping Eastern Antarctica from the full brunt of GW.
 
Everybody should just sit back and relax, i think. The consensus stands. But nothing really helpfull will be done to counter the warming anyway, so deniers shouldnt worry either. Soon enough, dealing with the consequenses will be the only game in town. The passing of blame might be a sideshow. And then, finally, the deniers might be dragged out from irrelevance and given a major role, like blaming the village idiot when in fact everybody - myself included - knew and still did nothing. Yes, my brain is gloomy and doomy today. It's monday morning.

ETA: http://fora.tv/2009/08/18/A_REALLY_Inconvenient_Truth_Dan_Miller
 
Last edited:
What I find amusing is that HadCRU was the deniers bastion for knocking GISS ( because HadCRU did not cover the Arctic ) - now it's a cesspool according to them..how fickle :rolleyes:

The other ironic aspect is that the real argument is going on about best method of dealing with the issue globally ( hadly resolved in any form ) and by painting themselves into the denier corner they lose respect and a voice in the solutions.
As bad or worse than the luddites and tree huggers - just plain loonie.:boggled:

You are correct - all their howling is not going to change one thing at Copenhagen.....the denier AGW denier has failed but some cling. :garfield:
 
Ivor the Engineer said:
That's why I find the deniers position so baffling.

Even if you were to believe (as many GW deniers seem to) that the temperature of the earth is totally driven by the activity of the sun, extra CO2 in the atmosphere is still not a good idea, just as having a thick duvet on your bed in the summer is not a good idea.

Or do GW deniers think we're heading into an ice age in the next 100 years and need as much heat retention as possible to lessen the impact?
Click to expand...


Spoken like a true engineer.

Yes I have made that point before, too.

and as to whether there is warming:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retreat_of_glaciers_since_1850
A view down the Whitechuck Glacier in Glacier Peak Wilderness in 1973
320px-Whitechuck_glacier_1973.jpg


and in 2006

320px-Whitechuck_glacier_2006.jpg


Yes that is a single snapshot, but there is still plenty of other evidence too.
 
The facts show the Earth is getting warmer

Its simply a fact folks. The ice core samples are painstakingly clear:

Here is the data from Antarctic ice cores over the last 450,000 years. See that funny little trend taking place all the way to the right? That's now.

16145_1205661075704_1653977305_506053_861779_n.jpg


Here is the ice core data from the last 18,000 years. Notice the levels of CO2 skyrocket in the far right..which is now.

16145_1205661275709_1653977305_506054_6904644_n.jpg


Here is the data from the last 200 years. See anything funny going on since 1959? Hmm..what could that be?

16145_1205661435713_1653977305_506055_7757985_n.jpg



And here is the data from the last 50 years. Holy smokes..what is going on? Look at that cyclical but steady temperature increase!!! Looks like the Earth is indeed warming up huh?

16145_1205661595717_1653977305_506056_6638666_n.jpg



Game....set...match. Global warming is real. Ice cores don't lie.

Case closed.
 
Much duplicated - likely to be merged - orbital drivers come into play pre industrial age - your data while interesting is not very relevant....

The relevant global drift was it was getting COOLER since the last ice age until the last 6 decades when it reversed the orbital induced cooling our own forcing took front and centre stage.

Remember this graph is present time to the left

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Holocene_Temperature_Variations.png

Your graphs have no bearing on AGW other than the last two.

C02 is a driver when released in fossil form, a feedback when another driver is present.
 
Last edited:
macdoc said:
The relevant global drift was it was getting COOLER since the last ice age until the last 6 decades when it reversed the orbital induced cooling our own forcing took front and centre stage.
Click to expand...

well, I only posted this to remind people that regardless of this stupid "climategate" crap, the evidence is still there..and is quite overwhelming.
 
Yeah but your first two graphs have no relevance.

GW and AGW are two very different things.

The drift was to cooler temperatures due to orbital/inclination.

Then fossil C02 took over - reversed that in an incredibly short time.

Not much to persuade anyone in that let alone declare game set match.:garfield:
 
macdoc said:
Yeah but your first two graphs have no relevance.
Click to expand...

they were shown to provide context.

the fact remains, that temperature was much less variable 40 years ago, then it is today. and now the swings are much more dramatic.

this will likely continue and get worse....as the graph's trend seems to suggest.
 
parky76 said:
well, I only posted this to remind people that regardless of this stupid "climategate" crap, the evidence is still there..and is quite overwhelming.
Click to expand...

It certainly is. Especially if your last graph is extended to the present for temperatures, rather than ending two years ago. In a few years it'll look even more convincing. Even next year might be a revelation, what with an El Nino instead of a La Nina.

2007 is soooooo not even last year. Last year was global cooling and Arctic sea-ice recovery. This year is ... well, Climategate really. Who can tell what next year's fashion item will be?

It won't be global surface temperature, that's for sure.
 
CapelDodger said:
It certainly is. Especially if your last graph is extended to the present for temperatures, rather than ending two years ago. .
Click to expand...

so you believe the clear trend that exists in these graphs will have reversed..if the graphs went to the present day?


proof?

how do you explain the sudden incredible variability of Earth's avg. yearly temp, that began about 43 years ago? hmmmm?
 
Last edited:
parky76 said:
they were shown to provide context.

the fact remains, that temperature was much less variable 40 years ago, then it is today. and now the swings are much more dramatic.

this will likely continue and get worse....as the graph's trend seems to suggest.
Click to expand...

I think volatility is going to be an increasing feature in our lives, and not just in direct climate terms. Food and energy prices are already showing it for a variety of inter-connected reasons, and picking direct climate influences out of the mix is going to be highly problematic.

When it comes to arguing with deniers about how much influence can be assigned to gummint and the Climate Conspiracy, realists have the advantage that Peak Oil is denied by pretty much the same people. Whereas, of course, Peak Oil is the more important influence in the near-term, before the collapse of oceans as a protein-source kicks in. Which won't be long now.
 
GW Deniers also tend to be NWO conspiracy theorists.

dude...I wish global warming was NOT taking place. but it appears that it is indeed happening.

what will it cause? who the hell knows. but it cant be good. Mother Earth does not do well with sudden change.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom