Home | Community | Message Board


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   North Spore Cultivation Supplies   Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds   Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale   MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order

Jump to first unread post Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Next >  [ show all ]
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
Re: Global Warming. (moved) [Re: Minstrel]
    #8541342 - 06/19/08 04:27 PM (15 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

To all you CO2 fear-mongers out there, have you bothered to look at the spectral absorption of CO2 compared to H2O?  Water, specifically it's vapor-liquid equilibrium, forms the primary basis for our atmospheric conditions.  There is roughly 8x10^22 moles of water on earth.  There is roughly 6.8x10^16 moles of carbon dioxide.  That's a difference of 6 orders of magnitude . 




1) water falls out of the atmosphere as rain so it doesn't matter

2) CO2 stays in the atmosphere for a long time so it does matter


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineScavengerType
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/24/08
Posts: 5,784
Loc: The North
Last seen: 10 years, 6 months
Re: Global Warming. (moved) [Re: Minstrel]
    #8541676 - 06/19/08 05:57 PM (15 years, 10 months ago)

alright I'm sick of this fucking tired water vapor argument. First off water vapor exists as clouds that though acting as a greenhouse gas by scattering infrared radiation in all directions also reflect the majority of the suns rays. Second off Water vapor only stays in the atmosphere for 7 to 9 days on average. Carbon stays in the atmosphere on an average of 5 years, this makes carbon 260 to 202 times longer lasting a greenhouse gas compared to water. Additionally this carbon is then pumped into the world's carbon cycle where it can be released for residual periods of time. Third of all water is responsible for warming, without any greenhouse gasses in our atmosphere like water the earth would be about -16 degrees (Celsius) on average instead of 16 degrees that it is now. It is merely an imbalance in the amount of these warming gasses in the atmosphere leading to an inordinate amount of warming.

For those of you who think the temperature causes the carbon Look at those carbon and temperature graphs again. You'll note that the heating period is relatively brief and quick where as the cooling period is long and drawn out. The reason for this is the greenhouse gasses effects on the atmosphere. As the temperature rises from ice ages it allows more carbon to rise into the atmosphere and water to remain in the atmosphere for longer periods of time. This makes the sharp increases you see in long therm climate graphs. The trigger for these events is universally accepted in the scientific community to be the larger Milankovich cycles that dictate the ellipticity of the earths orbit.

Frankly you people are saying that the system is more complicated than we make it out to be and there aere numbers of forces at work. How come the two main people who are defending the reality of anthropogenic climate change here are offering real explanations and understanding of those systems and those in disbelief of it are citing American conservative news or even worse prison planet. Frankly if you think the world system is so fucking complicated explain to me a reality that defies the theory of anthropogenic climate change. Is there anything to disprove the logic that human beings have caused warming by increasing the amount of greenhouse gasses and that the amounts of these gasses is unprecedented in the earths history with many of them being generated in the last few decades.


--------------------
"Have you ever seen what happens when a grenade goes off in a school? Do you really know what you’re doing when you order shock and awe? Are you prepared to kneel beside a dying soldier and tell him why he went to Iraq, or why he went to any war?"
"The things that are done in the name of the shareholder are, to me, as terrifying as the things that are done—dare I say it—in the name of God. Montesquieu said, "There have never been so many civil wars as in the Kingdom of God." And I begin to feel that’s true. The shareholder is the excuse for everything."
- Author and former M6/M5 agent John le Carré on Democracy Now.
Conquer's Club

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleLuddite
I watch Fox News
 User Gallery

Registered: 03/23/06
Posts: 2,946
Re: Global Warming. (moved) [Re: ScavengerType]
    #8541829 - 06/19/08 06:48 PM (15 years, 10 months ago)

You can see that the pro-global warming bullshitters ignore a lot of things. 


Consensus Shattered As Major Scientific Study Says Global Warming Is Natural
Attempts to reduce CO2 emissions "pointless" as sun is cited as climate change culprit Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
   

The so-called scientific consensus that global warming is man-made has been shattered with the release of a major new study backed by three universities which concludes that climate change over the past thirty years is explained by natural factors and that attempts to reduce carbon dioxide emissions are irrelevant.

Climate scientists at the University of Rochester, the University of Alabama, and the University of Virginia report that temperature fluctuations over the past three decades are not consistent with greenhouse model predictions and more closely correlate with solar activity.

The report dismisses attempts to reverse global warming by reducing carbon emissions as ineffective and pointless. Authored by Prof. David H. Douglass (Univ. of Rochester), Prof. John R. Christy (Univ. of Alabama), Benjamin D. Pearson (graduate student), and Prof. S. Fred Singer (Univ. of Virginia), the study appears in this month's International Journal of Climatology of the Royal Meteorological Society.

“The observed pattern of warming, comparing surface and atmospheric temperature trends, does not show the characteristic fingerprint associated with greenhouse warming. The inescapable conclusion is that the human contribution is not significant and that observed increases in carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases make only a negligible contribution to climate warming," said lead author David H. Douglass.

Co-author John Christy said: “Satellite data and independent balloon data agree that atmospheric warming trends do not exceed those of the surface. Greenhouse models, on the other hand, demand that atmospheric trend values be 2-3 times greater. We have good reason, therefore, to believe that current climate models greatly overestimate the effects of greenhouse gases. Satellite observations suggest that GH models ignore negative feedbacks, produced by clouds and by water vapor, that diminish the warming effects of carbon dioxide.”

Co-author S. Fred Singer said: “The current warming trend is simply part of a natural cycle of climate warming and cooling that has been seen in ice cores, deep-sea sediments, stalagmites, etc., and published in hundreds of papers in peer-reviewed journals. The mechanism for producing such cyclical climate changes is still under discussion; but they are most likely caused by variations in the solar wind and associated magnetic fields that affect the flux of cosmic rays incident on the earth’s atmosphere. In turn, such cosmic rays are believed to influence cloudiness and thereby control the amount of sunlight reaching the earth’s surface and thus the climate. Our research demonstrates that the ongoing rise of atmospheric CO2 has only a minor influence on climate change. We must conclude, therefore, that attempts to control CO2 emissions are ineffective and pointless – but very costly."

The findings of the report help to explain why we are witnessing climate change in almost every corner of our solar system, from Mars to Pluto, to Jupiter and to the moons of Neptune - and clearly identify the sun as the main culprit and not CO2 emissions - which are being used as a pretext for control freaks to completely dominate every aspect of our lives.

Man-made global warming advocates have often made their case by claiming that the scientific consensus is fully behind CO2 emissions as the main driver of climate change, when in fact the UN's own IPCC report was disputed by the very scientists that the UN claimed were behind it.

In reality, a significant number of prominent experts dispute the global warming mantra, but many have been intimidated into silence and had their careers threatened simply for stating an opposing view.

HAT TIP: Canadian Free Press



http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/december2007/121107_global_warming.htm

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMinstrel
Man of Science
Male User Gallery

Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 1,974
Loc: Hogtown
Re: Global Warming. (moved) [Re: Minstrel]
    #8541836 - 06/19/08 06:50 PM (15 years, 10 months ago)

The arguements I presented are completely independent of time.  They are the cold hard facts of absorption.  It doesn't matter how long one mole might linger, it is still in equilibrium.  The turn-over rate of moles means NOTHING.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMinstrel
Man of Science
Male User Gallery

Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 1,974
Loc: Hogtown
Re: Global Warming. (moved) [Re: ScavengerType]
    #8541874 - 06/19/08 06:59 PM (15 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

ScavengerType said:
Frankly you people are saying that the system is more complicated than we make it out to be and there aere numbers of forces at work. How come the two main people who are defending the reality of anthropogenic climate change here are offering real explanations and understanding of those systems and those in disbelief of it are citing American conservative news or even worse prison planet. Frankly if you think the world system is so fucking complicated explain to me a reality that defies the theory of anthropogenic climate change. Is there anything to disprove the logic that human beings have caused warming by increasing the amount of greenhouse gasses and that the amounts of these gasses is unprecedented in the earths history with many of them being generated in the last few decades.




This is why YOU are not to be taken seriously.  The system IS massive and incredibly complex, and CO2 is completely negligible. You are sick of the water vapor arguement because the dogma you've been fed is inadequate to rationalize around it.  You've not only had the scientific propaganda imprinted into your mind, but with it, the idea that anyone who opposes you is in some way irrational.  Your trust in the mainstream media is also frightening.


--------------------

Edited by Minstrel (06/19/08 07:02 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleLuddite
I watch Fox News
 User Gallery

Registered: 03/23/06
Posts: 2,946
Re: Global Warming. (moved) [Re: Minstrel]
    #8541888 - 06/19/08 07:01 PM (15 years, 10 months ago)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleMinstrel
Man of Science
Male User Gallery

Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 1,974
Loc: Hogtown
Re: Global Warming. (moved) [Re: Luddite]
    #8541910 - 06/19/08 07:07 PM (15 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

Luddite said:





1.  Problem:  High prices give the mistaken conception that supply is low (oil doesn't work that way)
2.  Reaction :  Public is outraged and demands a quick fix, putting aside environmental/economic concerns
3.  Solution:  Use public money to drill more oil in places once thought taboo.

Phony energy shortages have been around since the 60's.  I wonder whats different this time?



--------------------

Edited by Minstrel (06/19/08 07:10 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAnonymousRabbit
Comrade
 User Gallery

Registered: 01/10/08
Posts: 8,993
Last seen: 1 year, 8 months
. [Re: Minstrel]
    #8543182 - 06/20/08 01:14 AM (15 years, 10 months ago)

.


--------------------
.

Edited by AnonymousRabbit (05/18/22 11:18 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
Re: Global Warming. (moved) [Re: AnonymousRabbit]
    #8543368 - 06/20/08 04:08 AM (15 years, 10 months ago)

> If water vapor is to blame for heating, then water vapor must be increasing.

If the world is heating, regardless of the cause, then water vapor must be increasing as warm air holds more water vapor than cool air.


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAnnoA
Experimenter
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 06/17/99
Posts: 24,166
Loc: my room
Last seen: 7 days, 2 hours
Re: Global Warming. (moved) [Re: Seuss]
    #8543389 - 06/20/08 04:26 AM (15 years, 10 months ago)

Just wanted to mention that warm air doesn't "hold" water vapor. Air is not a sponge. Air and water vapor simply coexist in the atmosphere.

You are right though that at a higher temperature the partial pressure of water is higher.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineScavengerType
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/24/08
Posts: 5,784
Loc: The North
Last seen: 10 years, 6 months
Re: Global Warming. (moved) [Re: Anno]
    #8543456 - 06/20/08 05:39 AM (15 years, 10 months ago)

I just flipping told you above that higher temperatures increase the duration and quantity of water vapor as well as CO2

Anyway Ludite, when I Read your prison planet article I was impressed to see you cite such an intelligent and honest publication. here is the real paper in PDF file and you will note that it does not mention solar activity once but rather discusses the unreliability of climatic models. I hope you will consider this when I say that Prison planet is a bunch of dumb bullshitters. I fell for their crap for a bit but once I found that facts that they cite are hard to validate I never read them seriously again. Frankly anyway I don't know why you would cite prison planet anyway, I read news from infoshop.org but I would have to be real hard up to use them as a Cite because I prefer to back up my arguments with academic sources. Like how a journalist talking about an article of scientific importance is not the same perhaps reading that article since the writer applies their perspective to the data. Anyway solar flares (the main indicator of solar activity) have decreased in the last 30 years. I watched this in a Critique of the BBC program "The great global warming swindle" that accused the program of intentionally stopping the solar flare data at 1970 and fudging data in the early twenties however after 10 mins of searching I've given up on finding this data.

To Minstrel: I used citations and scientific facts as well as theory to bolster my opinions. You on the other hand failed to explain how anything works in this "massive system" and furthermore you failed to actually attack any of my arguments with data at all. But after all your right with all your "knowledge" on the subject. I must be the one who is indoctrinated.


--------------------
"Have you ever seen what happens when a grenade goes off in a school? Do you really know what you’re doing when you order shock and awe? Are you prepared to kneel beside a dying soldier and tell him why he went to Iraq, or why he went to any war?"
"The things that are done in the name of the shareholder are, to me, as terrifying as the things that are done—dare I say it—in the name of God. Montesquieu said, "There have never been so many civil wars as in the Kingdom of God." And I begin to feel that’s true. The shareholder is the excuse for everything."
- Author and former M6/M5 agent John le Carré on Democracy Now.
Conquer's Club

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineAnnom
※※※※※※
 User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 12/22/02
Posts: 6,367
Loc: Europe
Last seen: 1 year, 3 days
Re: Global Warming. (moved) [Re: Seuss]
    #8543473 - 06/20/08 06:16 AM (15 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

Seuss said:
If the world is heating, regardless of the cause, then water vapor must be increasing as warm air holds more water vapor than cool air.



True (most likely :smirk:), this once again shows the complexity of (global) climate and possible models.

If this is true, a runaway reaction occurs; more water vapor->higher temp->more water vapour->..... (nuclear meltdown :ooo:).

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
Re: Global Warming. (moved) [Re: Annom]
    #8543534 - 06/20/08 07:17 AM (15 years, 10 months ago)

> Just wanted to mention that warm air doesn't "hold" water vapor. Air is not a sponge.
> this once again shows the complexity of (global) climate and possible models.

You guys are killing all of my fun!  :grin:  j/k


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineVisionary Tools
Male User Gallery


Registered: 06/23/07
Posts: 7,953
Last seen: 1 year, 11 months
Re: Global Warming. (moved) [Re: Seuss]
    #8543734 - 06/20/08 09:24 AM (15 years, 10 months ago)

Water vapour is static? Doubtful, cloud formation and humidity levels are dictated by solar radiation.

When the sun heats up the oceans, CO2 is released, as well as more water vapour. When the sun doesn't heat up the oceans as much, the CO2 is drawn back into it.

Now, let's assume we're able to eliminate the CO2 we produce from breathing, fires, travel, and construction. There's still the vast majority of CO2 that's produced from natural scources*.

What then? Cap volcanoes, and make sure the oceans never heat up?

This CO2 witchhunt is a fools errand, even more crazy than the war on drugs. All that will come of it is poverty and a technocratic stomping on rights which people have continiously fought and died for so the tyrants of their day wouldn't be able to take them away.

*This is something that my research keeps getting mixed results on. Again it's not easy to factor due to the volatile nature of atmospheric composition worldwide based on temperature and evaporation rates.

this suggests 5% CO2 is manmade
This suggests 0.28%, or 5.53% including water vapour output
This says that human CO2 production is 150X that from volcanic emissions. A good thing, otherwise we'd be like venus

http://www.theclimatescam.com/tag/co2-emissions/ Might as well have an article on the gulf stream and El Nino and how it affects global weather and climate.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinezembla
Stranger
Registered: 09/21/07
Posts: 51
Last seen: 15 years, 10 months
Re: Global Warming. [Re: Phred]
    #8543810 - 06/20/08 09:45 AM (15 years, 10 months ago)

im convinced it's a myth

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineScavengerType
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/24/08
Posts: 5,784
Loc: The North
Last seen: 10 years, 6 months
Re: Global Warming. [Re: zembla]
    #8544565 - 06/20/08 01:53 PM (15 years, 10 months ago)

did anyone read my post about water vapor


--------------------
"Have you ever seen what happens when a grenade goes off in a school? Do you really know what you’re doing when you order shock and awe? Are you prepared to kneel beside a dying soldier and tell him why he went to Iraq, or why he went to any war?"
"The things that are done in the name of the shareholder are, to me, as terrifying as the things that are done—dare I say it—in the name of God. Montesquieu said, "There have never been so many civil wars as in the Kingdom of God." And I begin to feel that’s true. The shareholder is the excuse for everything."
- Author and former M6/M5 agent John le Carré on Democracy Now.
Conquer's Club

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleLuddite
I watch Fox News
 User Gallery

Registered: 03/23/06
Posts: 2,946
Re: Global Warming. [Re: ScavengerType]
    #8544778 - 06/20/08 02:47 PM (15 years, 10 months ago)

Check out Senator Inhofe's web blog.

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=d5c3c93f-802a-23ad-4f29-fe59494b48a6&Issue_id=

It looks like some of those prisonplanet articles were copied from it or came from the same source as Inhofe's web blog.

Looks like the UN has some scheme for ripping off rich nations using a carbon tax.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleLuddite
I watch Fox News
 User Gallery

Registered: 03/23/06
Posts: 2,946
Re: Global Warming. [Re: Luddite]
    #8544811 - 06/20/08 02:55 PM (15 years, 10 months ago)

Posted by Marc Morano – Marc_Morano@EPW.Senate.Gov  - 9:14 PM ET

Climate Momentum Shifting: Prominent Scientists Reverse Belief in Man-made Global Warming - Now Skeptics

Growing Number of Scientists Convert to Skeptics After Reviewing New Research

Following the U.S. Senate's vote today on a global warming measure (see today's AP article: Senate Defeats Climate Change Measure,) it is an opportune time to examine the recent and quite remarkable momentum shift taking place in climate science. Many former believers in catastrophic man-made global warming have recently reversed themselves and are now climate skeptics.  The names included below are just a sampling of the prominent scientists who have spoken out recently to oppose former Vice President Al Gore, the United Nations, and the media driven “consensus” on man-made global warming. 

The list below is just the tip of the iceberg.  A more detailed and comprehensive sampling of scientists who have only recently spoken out against climate hysteria will be forthcoming in a soon to be released U.S. Senate report. Please stay tuned to this website, as this new government report is set to redefine the current climate debate.

In the meantime, please review the list of scientists below and ask yourself why the media is missing one of the biggest stories in climate of 2007.  Feel free to distribute the partial list of scientists who recently converted to skeptics to your local schools and universities. The voices of rank and file scientists opposing climate doomsayers can serve as a counter to the alarmism that children are being exposed to on a daily basis. (See Washington Post April 16, 2007 article about kids fearing of a “climactic Armageddon” )

The media's climate fear factor seemingly grows louder even as the latest science grows less and less alarming by the day. (See Der Spiegel May 7, 2007 article: Not the End of the World as We Know It ) It is also worth noting that the proponents of climate fears are increasingly attempting to suppress dissent by skeptics. (See UPI May 10, 2007 article: U.N. official says it's 'completely immoral' to doubt global warming fears )

Once Believers, Now Skeptics ( Link to pdf version ) 

Geophysicist Dr. Claude Allegre, a top geophysicist and French Socialist who has authored more than 100 scientific articles and written 11 books and received numerous scientific awards including the Goldschmidt Medal from the Geochemical Society of the United States, converted from climate alarmist to skeptic in 2006. Allegre, who was one of the first scientists to sound global warming fears 20 years ago, now says the cause of climate change is "unknown" and accused the “prophets of doom of global warming” of being motivated by money, noting that "the ecology of helpless protesting has become a very lucrative business for some people!" “Glaciers’ chronicles or historical archives point to the fact that climate is a capricious phenomena. This fact is confirmed by mathematical meteorological theories. So, let us be cautious,” Allegre explained in a September 21, 2006 article in the French newspaper L'EXPRESS. The National Post in Canada also profiled Allegre on March 2, 2007, noting “Allegre has the highest environmental credentials. The author of early environmental books, he fought successful battles to protect the ozone layer from CFCs and public health from lead pollution.” Allegre now calls fears of a climate disaster "simplistic and obscuring the true dangers” mocks "the greenhouse-gas fanatics whose proclamations consist in denouncing man's role on the climate without doing anything about it except organizing conferences and preparing protocols that become dead letters." Allegre, a member of both the French and U.S. Academy of Sciences, had previously expressed concern about manmade global warming. "By burning fossil fuels, man enhanced the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere which has raised the global mean temperature by half a degree in the last century," Allegre wrote 20 years ago. In addition, Allegre was one of 1500 scientists who signed a November 18, 1992 letter titled “World Scientists' Warning to Humanity” in which the scientists warned that global warming’s “potential risks are very great.”

Geologist Bruno Wiskel of the University of Alberta recently reversed his view of man-made climate change and instead became a global warming skeptic. Wiskel was once such a big believer in man-made global warming that he set out to build a “Kyoto house” in honor of the UN sanctioned Kyoto Protocol which was signed in 1997.  Wiskel wanted to prove that the Kyoto Protocol’s goals were achievable by people making small changes in their lives. But after further examining the science behind Kyoto, Wiskel reversed his scientific views completely and became such a strong skeptic, that he recently wrote a book titled “The Emperor's New Climate: Debunking the Myth of Global Warming.”  A November 15, 2006 Edmonton Sun article explains Wiskel’s conversion while building his “Kyoto house”: “Instead, he said he realized global warming theory was full of holes and ‘red flags,’ and became convinced that humans are not responsible for rising temperatures.” Wiskel now says “the truth has to start somewhere.”  Noting that the Earth has been warming for 18,000 years, Wiskel told the Canadian newspaper, “If this happened once and we were the cause of it, that would be cause for concern. But glaciers have been coming and going for billions of years."  Wiskel also said that global warming has gone "from a science to a religion” and noted that research money is being funneled into promoting climate alarmism instead of funding areas he considers more worthy. "If you funnel money into things that can't be changed, the money is not going into the places that it is needed,” he said.

Astrophysicist Dr. Nir Shaviv, one of Israel's top young award winning scientists, recanted his belief that manmade emissions were driving climate change. ""Like many others, I was personally sure that CO2 is the bad culprit in the story of global warming. But after carefully digging into the evidence, I realized that things are far more complicated than the story sold to us by many climate scientists or the stories regurgitated by the media. In fact, there is much more than meets the eye,” Shaviv said in February 2, 2007 Canadian National Post article. According to Shaviv, the C02 temperature link is only “incriminating circumstantial evidence.” "Solar activity can explain a large part of the 20th-century global warming" and "it is unlikely that [the solar climate link] does not exist,” Shaviv noted pointing to the impact cosmic- rays have on the atmosphere. According to the National Post, Shaviv believes that even a doubling of CO2 in the atmosphere by 2100 "will not dramatically increase the global temperature." “Even if we halved the CO2 output, and the CO2 increase by 2100 would be, say, a 50% increase relative to today instead of a doubled amount, the expected reduction in the rise of global temperature would be less than 0.5C. This is not significant,” Shaviv explained. Shaviv also wrote on August 18, 2006 that a colleague of his believed that “CO2 should have a large effect on climate” so “he set out to reconstruct the phanerozoic temperature. He wanted to find the CO2 signature in the data, but since there was none, he slowly had to change his views.”  Shaviv believes there will be more scientists converting to man-made global warming skepticism as they discover the dearth of evidence. “I think this is common to many of the scientists who think like us (that is, that CO2 is a secondary climate driver). Each one of us was working in his or her own niche. While working there, each one of us realized that things just don't add up to support the AGW (Anthropogenic Global Warming) picture. So many had to change their views,” he wrote.

Mathematician & engineer Dr. David Evans, who did carbon accounting for the Australian Government, recently detailed his conversion to a skeptic. “I devoted six years to carbon accounting, building models for the Australian government to estimate carbon emissions from land use change and forestry. When I started that job in 1999 the evidence that carbon emissions caused global warming seemed pretty conclusive, but since then new evidence has weakened the case that carbon emissions are the main cause. I am now skeptical,” Evans wrote in an April 30, 2007 blog. “But after 2000 the evidence for carbon emissions gradually got weaker -- better temperature data for the last century, more detailed ice core data, then laboratory evidence that cosmic rays precipitate low clouds,” Evans wrote.  “As Lord Keynes famously said, ‘When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?’” he added. Evans noted how he benefited from climate fears as a scientist. “And the political realm in turn fed money back into the scientific community. By the late 1990's, lots of jobs depended on the idea that carbon emissions caused global warming. Many of them were bureaucratic, but there were a lot of science jobs created too. I was on that gravy train, making a high wage in a science job that would not have existed if we didn't believe carbon emissions caused global warming. And so were lots of people around me; and there were international conferences full of such people. And we had political support, the ear of government, big budgets, and we felt fairly important and useful (well, I did anyway). It was great. We were working to save the planet!  But starting in about 2000, the last three of the four pieces of evidence outlined above fell away or reversed,” Evans wrote. “The pre-2000 ice core data was the central evidence for believing that atmospheric carbon caused temperature increases. The new ice core data shows that past warmings were *not* initially caused by rises in atmospheric carbon, and says nothing about the strength of any amplification. This piece of evidence casts reasonable doubt that atmospheric carbon had any role in past warmings, while still allowing the possibility that it had a supporting role,” he added. “Unfortunately politics and science have become even more entangled. The science of global warming has become a partisan political issue, so positions become more entrenched. Politicians and the public prefer simple and less-nuanced messages. At the moment the political climate strongly supports carbon emissions as the cause of global warming, to the point of sometimes rubbishing or silencing critics,” he concluded. (Evans bio link ) 

Climate researcher Dr. Tad Murty, former Senior Research Scientist for Fisheries and Oceans in Canada, also reversed himself from believer in man-made climate change to a skeptic.  “I stated with a firm belief about global warming, until I started working on it myself,” Murty explained on August 17, 2006.  “I switched to the other side in the early 1990's when Fisheries and Oceans Canada asked me to prepare a position paper and I started to look into the problem seriously,” Murty explained. Murty was one of the 60 scientists who wrote an April 6, 2006 letter urging withdrawal of Kyoto to Canadian prime minister Stephen Harper which stated in part, "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.” 

Botanist Dr. David Bellamy, a famed UK environmental campaigner, former lecturer at Durham University and host of a popular UK TV series on wildlife, recently converted into a skeptic after reviewing the science and now calls global warming fears "poppycock." According to a May 15, 2005 article in the UK Sunday Times, Bellamy said “global warming is largely a natural phenomenon.  The world is wasting stupendous amounts of money on trying to fix something that can’t be fixed.” “The climate-change people have no proof for their claims. They have computer models which do not prove anything,” Bellamy added. Bellamy’s conversion on global warming did not come without a sacrifice as several environmental groups have ended their association with him because of his views on climate change. The severing of relations came despite Bellamy’s long activism for green campaigns. The UK Times reported Bellamy “won respect from hardline environmentalists with his campaigns to save Britain’s peat bogs and other endangered habitats. In Tasmania he was arrested when he tried to prevent loggers cutting down a rainforest.”

Climate scientist Dr. Chris de Freitas of The University of Auckland, N.Z., also converted from a believer in man-made global warming to a skeptic. “At first I accepted that increases in human caused additions of carbon dioxide and methane in the atmosphere would trigger changes in water vapor etc. and lead to dangerous ‘global warming,’ But with time and with the results of research, I formed the view that, although it makes for a good story, it is unlikely that the man-made changes are drivers of significant climate variation.” de Freitas wrote on August 17, 2006. “I accept there may be small changes. But I see the risk of anything serious to be minute,” he added. “One could reasonably argue that lack of evidence is not a good reason for complacency. But I believe the billions of dollars committed to GW research and lobbying for GW and for Kyoto treaties etc could be better spent on uncontroversial and very real environmental problems (such as air pollution, poor sanitation, provision of clean water and improved health services) that we know affect tens of millions of people,” de Freitas concluded. de Freitas was one of the 60 scientists who wrote an April 6, 2006 letter urging withdrawal of Kyoto to Canadian prime minister Stephen Harper which stated in part, “Significant [scientific] advances have been made since the [Kyoto] protocol was created, many of which are taking us away from a concern about increasing greenhouse gases.”

Meteorologist Dr. Reid Bryson, the founding chairman of the Department of Meteorology at University of Wisconsin (now the Department of Oceanic and Atmospheric Sciences, was pivotal in promoting the coming ice age scare of the 1970’s ( See Time Magazine’s 1974 article “Another Ice Age” citing Bryson: & see Newsweek’s 1975 article “The Cooling World” citing Bryson) has now converted into a leading global warming skeptic. In February 8, 2007 Bryson dismissed what he terms "sky is falling" man-made global warming fears. Bryson, was on the United Nations Global 500 Roll of Honor and was identified by the British Institute of Geographers as the most frequently cited climatologist in the world. “Before there were enough people to make any difference at all, two million years ago, nobody was changing the climate, yet the climate was changing, okay?” Bryson told the May 2007 issue of Energy Cooperative News. “All this argument is the temperature going up or not, it’s absurd. Of course it’s going up. It has gone up since the early 1800s, before the Industrial Revolution, because we’re coming out of the Little Ice Age, not because we’re putting more carbon dioxide into the air,” Bryson said. “You can go outside and spit and have the same effect as doubling carbon dioxide,” he added. “We cannot say what part of that warming was due to mankind's addition of ‘greenhouse gases’ until we consider the other possible factors, such as aerosols. The aerosol content of the atmosphere was measured during the past century, but to my knowledge this data was never used. We can say that the question of anthropogenic modification of the climate is an important question -- too important to ignore. However, it has now become a media free-for-all and a political issue more than a scientific problem,” Bryson explained in 2005.

Global warming author and economist Hans H.J. Labohm started out as a man-made global warming believer but he later switched his view after conducting climate research.  Labohm wrote on August 19, 2006, “I started as a anthropogenic global warming believer, then I read the [UN’s IPCC] Summary for Policymakers and the research of prominent skeptics.”  “After that, I changed my mind,” Labohn explained. Labohn co-authored the 2004 book “Man-Made Global Warming: Unraveling a Dogma,” with chemical engineer Dick Thoenes who was the former chairman of the Royal Netherlands Chemical Society. Labohm was one of the 60 scientists who wrote an April 6, 2006 letter urging withdrawal of Kyoto to Canadian prime minister Stephen Harper which stated in part, “’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.’”


Paleoclimatologist Tim Patterson, of Carlton University in Ottawa converted from believer in C02 driving the climate change to a skeptic. “I taught my students that CO2 was the prime driver of climate change,” Patterson  wrote on April 30, 2007. Patterson said his “conversion” happened following his research on “the nature of paleo-commercial fish populations in the NE Pacific.” “[My conversion from believer to climate skeptic] came about approximately 5-6 years ago when results began to come in from a major NSERC (Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada) Strategic Project Grant where I was PI (principle investigator),” Patterson explained. “Over the course of about a year, I switched allegiances,” he wrote. “As the proxy results began to come in, we were astounded to find that paleoclimatic and paleoproductivity records were full of cycles that corresponded to various sun-spot cycles.  About that time, [geochemist] Jan Veizer and others began to publish reasonable hypotheses as to how solar signals could be amplified and control climate,” Patterson noted. Patterson says his conversion “probably cost me a lot of grant money. However, as a scientist I go where the science takes me and not were activists want me to go.” Patterson now asserts that more and more scientists are converting to climate skeptics.  "When I go to a scientific meeting, there's lots of opinion out there, there's lots of discussion (about climate change). I was at the Geological Society of America meeting in Philadelphia in the fall and I would say that people with my opinion were probably in the majority,” Patterson told the Winnipeg Sun on February 13, 2007. Patterson, who believes the sun is responsible for the recent warm up of the Earth, ridiculed the environmentalists and the media for not reporting the truth. "But if you listen to [Canadian environmental activist David] Suzuki and the media, it's like a tiger chasing its tail. They try to outdo each other and all the while proclaiming that the debate is over but it isn't -- come out to a scientific meeting sometime,” Patterson said. In a separate interview on April 26, 2007 with a Canadian newspaper, Patterson explained that the scientific proof favors skeptics. “I think the proof in the pudding, based on what (media and governments) are saying, (is) we're about three quarters of the way (to disaster) with the doubling of CO2 in the atmosphere," he said. “The world should be heating up like crazy by now, and it's not. The temperatures match very closely with the solar cycles." ................

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=927B9303-802A-23AD-494B-DCCB00B51A12

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineSeussA
Error: divide byzero


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
Re: Global Warming. [Re: zembla]
    #8544938 - 06/20/08 03:40 PM (15 years, 10 months ago)

> im convinced it's a myth

I'm not convinced that it is a myth, but then, I am not an expert in the field.  What I am convinced of is that a lot of people that are not experts in the field think they know what is happening as if they were an expert climatologist... and these people are making a lot of money (Al Gore, etc) preaching their ignorance... and these people make it nearly impossible for somebody that isn't an expert in the field to filter the BS from the real science.

I'm still pissed at the great Deity Gore, inventor of everything good, for telling me how to reduce my carbon footprint... it takes me nearly five years to produce as much CO2 as Al produces in a single month... yet I am the bad guy and he is the good guy.  :rolleyes:


--------------------
Just another spore in the wind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineScavengerType
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/24/08
Posts: 5,784
Loc: The North
Last seen: 10 years, 6 months
Re: Global Warming. [Re: Seuss]
    #8547737 - 06/21/08 02:46 PM (15 years, 10 months ago)

Look I'm not an all gore fan I've read books on climate change and more on the future of energy policy. I don't pretend to be an expert I am just telling you what I have read other experts say in the field. Humans have increased the CO2 in the atmosphere by on the order of half. According to wikipedia carbon dioxide is responsible for 9-25% of the greenhouse effect. Since the greenhouse effect is responsible for 36 degrees Celsius of warming we can take it that it means a anthropogenic shift from carbon added by man from the preindustrial to present of 1.44 degrees to 4 degrees.


--------------------
"Have you ever seen what happens when a grenade goes off in a school? Do you really know what you’re doing when you order shock and awe? Are you prepared to kneel beside a dying soldier and tell him why he went to Iraq, or why he went to any war?"
"The things that are done in the name of the shareholder are, to me, as terrifying as the things that are done—dare I say it—in the name of God. Montesquieu said, "There have never been so many civil wars as in the Kingdom of God." And I begin to feel that’s true. The shareholder is the excuse for everything."
- Author and former M6/M5 agent John le Carré on Democracy Now.
Conquer's Club

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Next >  [ show all ]

Shop: PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   North Spore Cultivation Supplies   Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds   Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale   MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Scientist publishes "escape route" from global warming Silversoul 1,908 14 08/03/06 11:51 AM
by Viveka
* Global Warming???
( 1 2 all )
crazyman 3,237 24 02/01/05 09:35 PM
by crazyman
* More global warming rhetoric SeussA 3,535 16 10/31/08 11:33 PM
by lIllIIIllIlIIlIlIIllIllIIl
* combatting global warming through extracting Co2 from the atmosphere ZippoZM 2,910 17 01/05/07 08:44 AM
by makaveli8x8
* Global Warming here in the north east.. i8an8th 1,254 15 01/08/07 08:17 AM
by Vvellum
* Global Warming May Have Caused Extinction Worf 490 0 01/20/05 06:13 PM
by Worf
* Global Warming Video DoctorJ 700 11 05/02/06 11:14 AM
by Viveka
* Plants May Contribute Up to 1/3 of a Greenhouse Gas, Globally Catalysis 948 7 01/13/06 09:45 AM
by Notell

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: trendal, automan, Northerner
6,295 topic views. 0 members, 0 guests and 1 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.025 seconds spending 0.005 seconds on 13 queries.