[ ]   [ ]   [ ]                        [ ]      [ ]   [ ]

Radio Paradise Comments - sunybuny - Jul 22, 2019 - 5:39am
 
Bug Reports & Feature Requests - miamizsun - Jul 22, 2019 - 5:11am
 
Bob Dylan - sirdroseph - Jul 22, 2019 - 4:19am
 
FLAC Streaming - gtufano - Jul 21, 2019 - 11:55pm
 
Baseball, anyone? - ScottFromWyoming - Jul 21, 2019 - 5:17pm
 
Photography Forum - Your Own Photos - Alchemist - Jul 21, 2019 - 5:11pm
 
Thank You Canada - haresfur - Jul 21, 2019 - 3:59pm
 
Things You Thought Today - haresfur - Jul 21, 2019 - 3:50pm
 
Trump - R_P - Jul 21, 2019 - 1:27pm
 
(Big) Media Watch - R_P - Jul 21, 2019 - 11:57am
 
Earthquake in So. Cal - SeriousLee - Jul 21, 2019 - 10:21am
 
What are you listening to now? - SeriousLee - Jul 21, 2019 - 6:01am
 
Canada - R_P - Jul 20, 2019 - 9:39pm
 
Star Trek - R_P - Jul 20, 2019 - 9:22pm
 
Climate Change - R_P - Jul 20, 2019 - 8:10pm
 
What Are You Eating Right Now That's Making You Want To S... - Steely_D - Jul 20, 2019 - 7:32pm
 
Questions. - r_sauve - Jul 20, 2019 - 5:54pm
 
Electronic Music - R_P - Jul 20, 2019 - 4:23pm
 
More reggae, less Marley please - R_P - Jul 20, 2019 - 2:11pm
 
Trump Lies - R_P - Jul 20, 2019 - 1:28pm
 
Fix My Car - SeriousLee - Jul 20, 2019 - 12:38pm
 
Evolution! - R_P - Jul 20, 2019 - 12:37pm
 
Coffee - SeriousLee - Jul 20, 2019 - 12:30pm
 
Was The Apollo Moon Landing Fake? - SeriousLee - Jul 20, 2019 - 12:15pm
 
Our friends the Saudis - R_P - Jul 20, 2019 - 11:40am
 
YouTube: Music-Videos - Copenhagen_Cat - Jul 20, 2019 - 11:19am
 
Unresearched Conspiracy Theories - R_P - Jul 20, 2019 - 11:16am
 
Vinyl Only Spin List - SeriousLee - Jul 20, 2019 - 10:14am
 
What are you doing RIGHT NOW? - SeriousLee - Jul 20, 2019 - 10:13am
 
Today in History - Red_Dragon - Jul 20, 2019 - 6:46am
 
Interesting Art - Steely_D - Jul 19, 2019 - 8:32pm
 
What Makes You Sad? - SeriousLee - Jul 19, 2019 - 2:40pm
 
• • • BRING OUT YOUR DEAD • • •  - SeriousLee - Jul 19, 2019 - 2:36pm
 
What Browser do you use & why? - westslope - Jul 19, 2019 - 9:58am
 
If you had a time machine - what concert would you see? - oldviolin - Jul 19, 2019 - 9:00am
 
Republican Wingnut Freak of the Day - Red_Dragon - Jul 18, 2019 - 7:48pm
 
What's that song - alkemyst - Jul 18, 2019 - 7:24pm
 
Crazy conspiracy theories - black321 - Jul 18, 2019 - 7:14pm
 
RP App for Android - jarro - Jul 18, 2019 - 5:44pm
 
Little known information...maybe even facts - oldviolin - Jul 18, 2019 - 5:38pm
 
Annoying stuff. not things that piss you off, just annoyi... - ziggytrix - Jul 18, 2019 - 5:22pm
 
Outstanding Covers - Copenhagen_Cat - Jul 18, 2019 - 11:02am
 
Immigration - R_P - Jul 18, 2019 - 9:26am
 
Slide Show Sync - wirefixer - Jul 18, 2019 - 8:16am
 
Republican Party - sirdroseph - Jul 18, 2019 - 4:30am
 
Flower Pictures - yuel - Jul 18, 2019 - 12:52am
 
Counting with Pictures - yuel - Jul 18, 2019 - 12:19am
 
Favorite Computer Utilities - Mac - kcar - Jul 17, 2019 - 3:04pm
 
Tech & Science - miamizsun - Jul 17, 2019 - 1:15pm
 
Travel Tips. - black321 - Jul 17, 2019 - 11:19am
 
Name My Band - oldviolin - Jul 17, 2019 - 8:55am
 
The Masked... - oldviolin - Jul 17, 2019 - 8:47am
 
260,000 Posts in one thread? - oldviolin - Jul 17, 2019 - 8:33am
 
The Obituary Page - Steely_D - Jul 17, 2019 - 7:45am
 
MusicBee -- music client - gvajda - Jul 17, 2019 - 1:08am
 
New Music - R_P - Jul 16, 2019 - 11:05am
 
TED Talks - Proclivities - Jul 16, 2019 - 9:58am
 
Best guitarists - oldviolin - Jul 16, 2019 - 9:25am
 
Lyrics That Remind You of Someone - oldviolin - Jul 16, 2019 - 9:08am
 
What Makes You Laugh? - Egctheow - Jul 16, 2019 - 5:57am
 
Books - sirdroseph - Jul 16, 2019 - 5:34am
 
Posting pictures - haresfur - Jul 15, 2019 - 4:18pm
 
Plugin RP for Volumio - dpozzi - Jul 15, 2019 - 1:14pm
 
The Dog House - westslope - Jul 15, 2019 - 10:10am
 
Vinyl for old timer - Copenhagen_Cat - Jul 15, 2019 - 9:11am
 
UK stream - ScottFromWyoming - Jul 15, 2019 - 7:21am
 
Mixtape Culture Club - ColdMiser - Jul 15, 2019 - 4:04am
 
Democratic Party - westslope - Jul 14, 2019 - 9:24am
 
• • • Clownstock • • •  - SeriousLee - Jul 14, 2019 - 6:27am
 
Strips, cartoons, illustrations - R_P - Jul 13, 2019 - 10:33pm
 
Pence - R_P - Jul 13, 2019 - 5:56pm
 
• • •  What's For Dinner ? • • •  - oldviolin - Jul 13, 2019 - 4:42pm
 
Nuclear power - saviour or scourge? - miamizsun - Jul 13, 2019 - 2:52pm
 
You might be getting old if...... - Egctheow - Jul 13, 2019 - 2:01pm
 
Protest Songs - rhahl - Jul 13, 2019 - 12:02pm
 
Index » Radio Paradise/General » General Discussion » Climate Change Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 85, 86, 87, 88  Next
Post to this Topic
HazzeSwede

HazzeSwede Avatar

Location: Hammerdal
Gender: Male


Posted: Dec 1, 2009 - 4:33am

Rising temperatures could be devastating for glaciers surrounding the Himalayas. ITN's James Mates reports


MrsHobieJoe

MrsHobieJoe Avatar

Location: somewhere in Europe
Gender: Female


Posted: Dec 1, 2009 - 1:33am

 fuh2 wrote:

More Right wing Corporate fear mongering from the Carbon Industry. I get all my electricity from wind farms and I pay only 10% more for it. In Germany they offer Solar Power panels for customers subsidized by the govermnment and the EXCESS YOU CAN SELL BACK to the utility.   


 
as far as I was aware this is not rocket science- many countries operate a system whereby you can sell power back to the grid.

My concern about this thread is how everyone talks about the science not being proven and tries to bring their own scientific theories to play.  There's nothing wrong with exploring and understanding the evidence of course but there seems to be a constant theme of "I won't believe the science until I personally have done my own independent research".

Now, of course some of the climate scientists are tainted by the UEA email scandal but why do we seem to need an amatuer scientist to prove every point now?  This strikes me as a little like some of the comments about the swine flu vaccination.  The science is there and it's good science- you can opt out if you personally wish but let the rest of the world and especially the governments get on with tackling this problem and stop putting up road blocks.


fuh2

fuh2 Avatar

Location: Mexican beach paradise
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 9:38pm

 miamizsun wrote:

M, how can you say that this obvious corruption means nothing? I must respectfully disagree.

There is more here.

You do realize how much money this carbon tax will generate right?

In Japan estimates are running $1400 & $8600 per household annually.

I don't deny that there is a major problem with pollution and climate change, I'm just questioning the legitimacy of the data, how much is due to man, and why they're going to tax the pants off of us.

Listen, any time corrupt government(s) get involved and wants to help us take care of an issue by taxing us, I get worried. Their track record speaks for itself.

If climate change is such a big deal, why don't they stop the wars, stop the bailouts for their "too big" to fail buddies and focus on taking care of a real issue?

Isn't it obvious government's priority is taxing, borrowing and spending?

I'm just asking....

I have a feeling we're about to take it in the a$$, and somehow the government/corporatists are about to ca$h in again.

Peace
 
More Right wing Corporate fear mongering from the Carbon Industry. I get all my electricity from wind farms and I pay only 10% more for it. In Germany they offer Solar Power panels for customers subsidized by the govermnment and the EXCESS YOU CAN SELL BACK to the utility.   

dionysius

dionysius Avatar

Location: The People's Republic of Austin
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 9:33pm

 miamizsun wrote:

M, how can you say that this obvious corruption means nothing? I must respectfully disagree.

There is more here.

You do realize how much money this carbon tax will generate right?

In Japan estimates are running $1400 & $8600 per household annually.

I don't deny that there is a major problem with pollution and climate change, I'm just questioning the legitimacy of the data, how much is due to man, and why they're going to tax the pants off of us.

Listen, any time corrupt government(s) get involved and wants to help us take care of an issue by taxing us, I get worried. Their track record speaks for itself.

If climate change is such a big deal, why don't they stop the wars, stop the bailouts for their "too big" to fail buddies and focus on taking care of a real issue?

Isn't it obvious government's priority is taxing, borrowing and spending?

I'm just asking....

I have a feeling we're about to take it in the a$$, and somehow the government/corporatists are about to ca$h in again.

Peace
 

There is justified cynicism, and then also woefully misplaced cynicism.
miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3261.3 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 9:30pm

 dionysius wrote:


Sorry, I don't know Portuguese.

And the email "scandal"—proves nothing. Zilch. Does nothing to invalidate science being done all over the world, not just in one small organization. There is no smoking gun, not one than can clean up all the smoking chimneys. This is a venial sin next to the mortal one of climate change denial. Look past this well-intentioned error to the much bigger error beyond it.

The hard choices do have to be made. That's why there is a denial movement, to delay (because it cannot be prevented, ultimately) the hard political and economic decisions. Denial is in the short-term interests of a few who are heavily invested in the present carbon economy. The carbon tax and cap-and-trade will benefit us all, in the long run. We have to see that short-term inconvenience is necessary for long-term welfare and, well, survival. For the natural world as well as us.

 
M, how can you say that this obvious corruption means nothing? I must respectfully disagree.

There is more here.

You do realize how much money this carbon tax will generate right?

In Japan estimates are running $1400 & $8600 per household annually.

I don't deny that there is a major problem with pollution and climate change, I'm just questioning the legitimacy of the data, how much is due to man, and why they're going to tax the pants off of us.

Listen, any time corrupt government(s) get involved and wants to help us take care of an issue by taxing us, I get worried. Their track record speaks for itself.

If climate change is such a big deal, why don't they stop the wars, stop the bailouts for their "too big" to fail buddies and focus on taking care of a real issue?

Isn't it obvious government's priority is taxing, borrowing and spending?

I'm just asking....

I have a feeling we're about to take it in the a$$, and somehow the government/corporatists are about to ca$h in again.

Peace

dionysius

dionysius Avatar

Location: The People's Republic of Austin
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 9:19pm

 jadewahoo wrote:

Whoa. You say those names like you have actually read them.
?
 

When I was young and stupid. Now that I am old and stupid, I recognize their fatuity.
Manbird

Manbird Avatar

Location: Oroville, Ca
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 9:19pm

 dionysius wrote:


You don't have to respond to every crazy pet conspiracy theory out there. You're already right. You don't have to give Immanuel Velikovsky, Madame Blavatsky and Erich von Däniken the time of day. Let crank scholarship eat itself.
 
Is that chariots of the gods bloke? Jeez I haven't thought about him since I read that book when I was 15. 
fuh2

fuh2 Avatar

Location: Mexican beach paradise
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 9:17pm

 miamizsun wrote:

M, I was referring to the hapless screw ups/CRU you speak of, here is a list with some of their emails with some parts bolded. I just can't look past this type of thing, especially when there is so much riding on it.(a worldwide tax of mythic proportion)

I'm very concerned they're going to use something like this (obviously manipulated data/evidence) to ram this "carbon tax" through and "f" us royally.

Regards

What do you prefer, a carbon tax that could be used to create millions of green industry jobs (like putting solar on every roof in America), or runaway global warming?   Now THAT is when we will be truly royally f'ed. 

————————————————————————————- 

Runaway Global Warming-
A Climate Catastrophe in the Making

What is runaway global warming, or "runaway heating"?

Runaway global warming is the accelerating (and soon to be unstoppable) chain reaction caused by release of the Arctic's vast stores of the very potent greenhouse gas (GHG), methane. The Arctic methane is released as the result of global warming heating the Arctic. That is called a positive carbon feedback.

This is as close as we've come to a literal End of the World Doomsday scenario. It is the single most catastrophically dangerous effect of global warming to all life on Earth.

The Arctic is already warming twice as fast as the rest of the planet. Regions in Siberia (where most of the carbon is) are warming even faster.

 
jadewahoo

jadewahoo Avatar

Location: Puerto Viejo, Costa Rica
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 9:16pm

 dionysius wrote:


You don't have to respond to every crazy pet conspiracy theory out there. You're already right. You don't have to give Immanuel Velikovsky, Madame Blavatsky and Erich von Däniken the time of day. Let crank scholarship eat itself.

 
Whoa. You say those names like you have actually read them.
?

dionysius

dionysius Avatar

Location: The People's Republic of Austin
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 9:02pm

 miamizsun wrote:

M, I was referring to the hapless screw ups/CRU you speak of, here is a list with some of their emails with some parts bolded. I just can't look past this type of thing, especially when there is so much riding on it.(a worldwide tax of mythic proportion)

I'm very concerned they're going to use something like this (obviously manipulated data/evidence) to ram this "carbon tax" through and "f" us royally.

Regards
 

Sorry, I don't know Portuguese.

And the email "scandal"—proves nothing. Zilch. Does nothing to invalidate science being done all over the world, not just in one small organization. There is no smoking gun, not one than can clean up all the smoking chimneys. This is a venial sin next to the mortal one of climate change denial. Look past this well-intentioned error to the much bigger error beyond it.

The hard choices do have to be made. That's why there is a denial movement, to delay (because it cannot be prevented, ultimately) the hard political and economic decisions. Denial is in the short-term interests of a few who are heavily invested in the present carbon economy. The carbon tax and cap-and-trade will benefit us all, in the long run. We have to see that short-term inconvenience is necessary for long-term welfare and, well, survival. For the natural world as well as us.
miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3261.3 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 8:48pm

 dionysius wrote:

How "obviously"? If you have "evidence of collusion" (with whom?), then give us a link to it, or something. Who is the more credible and acknowledged source?

(edit:) Anyone seriously interested can go to: http://www.ipcc-data.org/ There are many, many folks working on this besides the hapless screwups in East Anglia.

 
M, I was referring to the hapless screw ups/CRU you speak of, here is a list with some of their emails with some parts bolded. I just can't look past this type of thing, especially when there is so much riding on it.(a worldwide tax of mythic proportion)

I'm very concerned they're going to use something like this (obviously manipulated data/evidence) to ram this "carbon tax" through and "f" us royally.

Regards

dionysius

dionysius Avatar

Location: The People's Republic of Austin
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 7:56pm

 fuh2 wrote:


From what I understand, in 1998 there was an unusual global temperature spike that has not been matched until 2007.
The Carbon Industry PR machine has used that spike to try to show temperatures are now declining. The last 14 years are the hottest on record and the Himalaya glaciers are now 300-400 vertical feet lower than they were in 1920's.

The world pumps 28 BILLION TONS of CO2 into the air every year which is why atmospheric CO2  is increasing 2% a year.  CO2 is a proven greenhouse gas.

Before the industrial revolution began the atmosphere was at 275 Parts Per Million CO2. It is now 390 PPM and many climatologists agree that we have to get it back down to 350 PPM to keep climate change from spiralling out of control.

 

You don't have to respond to every crazy pet conspiracy theory out there. You're already right. You don't have to give Immanuel Velikovsky, Madame Blavatsky and Erich von Däniken the time of day. Let crank scholarship eat itself.
Lazy8

Lazy8 Avatar

Location: The Gallatin Valley of Montana
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 7:53pm

Beaker wrote:
Check around - throwing out original source data just isn't done.

Sure it is. Try archiving an ice core for twenty years.

I'm looking forward to what a whole bunch of sunlight will bring to the facts and claims as laid out by the warmists.

Sure, but be prepared to be right back where we started. Being a sloppy codesmith or a belligerent partisan or even a dishonest scientist doesn't make your conclusions wrong.

fuh2

fuh2 Avatar

Location: Mexican beach paradise
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 7:51pm

 Beaker wrote:
 
 
I'm looking forward to what a whole bunch of sunlight will bring to the facts and claims as laid out by the warmists.
 

From what I understand, in 1998 there was an unusual global temperature spike that has not been matched until 2007.
The Carbon Industry PR machine has used that spike to try to show temperatures are now declining. The last 14 years are the hottest on record and the Himalaya glaciers are now 300-400 vertical feet lower than they were in 1920's.

The world pumps 28 BILLION TONS of CO2 into the air every year which is why atmospheric CO2  is increasing 2% a year.  CO2 is a proven greenhouse gas.

Before the industrial revolution began the atmosphere was at 275 Parts Per Million CO2. It is now 390 PPM and many climatologists agree that we have to get it back down to 350 PPM to keep climate change from spiralling out of control.
BasmntMadman

BasmntMadman Avatar

Location: Off-White Gardens


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 7:01pm

 Beaker wrote:

Pardon me, but perhaps you've missed the news that the research "data" much of the IPCC conclusions are based upon is a bunch of hooey.

Oh, and the 'peer-reviewed' scientists over at the UEA's CRU aren't able to offer up their data for independent analysis.  It seems they deliberately deleted it. 

Climate change data dumped

So much for scientific repeatability to assure us their calcs are accurate.

Everything output by the CRU and New Zealand's NWA is suspect.  It all needs to be re-done, by a fresh set of eyes..  All of it.  And open-sourcing the data wouldn't hurt either.
 

The original, raw data were thrown out to save room in a move to new quarters in the eighties, long before global warming was such a charged issue.  It's also before the current director of the CRU was in charge. Says so right in the linked article.  

The raw data may be lost, but the methods of processing it must be known, and the people who did it may well still be around, so I doubt that the trail to the original data is completely obscured. 

And when it's re-done and shows the same thing, then there will be some other noisy denunciation of it, because of...anything.  There's never going to be perfection in research. 

Open sourcing will have to be applied equally to the opponents of AWG as well as proponents.  If one side's confidential correspondence is revealed, then so should the other's.  That will be interesting.  The sword cuts both ways.



dionysius

dionysius Avatar

Location: The People's Republic of Austin
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 4:23pm

 miamizsun wrote:

I'm curious about the IPCCs credibility, I don't doubt that there is good data and good science involved, but obviously there is some evidence of collusion.
 
How "obviously"? If you have "evidence of collusion" (with whom?), then give us a link to it, or something. Who is the more credible and acknowledged source?

(edit:) Anyone seriously interested can go to: http://www.ipcc-data.org/ There are many, many folks working on this besides the hapless screwups in East Anglia.


miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3261.3 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 4:17pm

 dionysius wrote:

Hi Jeff!

No, not all all difficult to say. No one doubts that cycles in solar radiation occur, and that they have affected terrestrial climate in the past. But it takes many thousands of years for such variations in solar radiation or orbital attitude to achieve significant change. The relative speed of the warming points towards human causality. It's happening too quickly to be natural.

Read the Scientific American article, and its debunking of the solar radiation hypothesis:

"Astronomical phenomena are obvious natural factors to consider when trying to understand climate, particularly the brightness of the sun and details of the earth's orbit, because those seem to have been major drivers of the ice ages and other climate changes before the rise of industrial civilization. Climatologists, therefore, do take them into account in their models. But in defiance of the naysayers who want to chalk the recent warming up to natural cycles, there is insufficient evidence that enough extra solar energy is reaching our planet to account for the observed rise in global temperatures.

"The IPCC notes that between 1750 and 2005, the radiative forcing from the sun increased by 0.12 watts/square-meter-less than a tenth of the net forcings from human activities (1.6 W/m2). The largest uncertainty in that comparison comes from the estimated effects of aerosols in the atmosphere, which can variously shade the earth or warm it. Even granting the maximum uncertainties to these estimates, however, the increase in human influence on climate exceeds that of any solar variation."



 
I'm curious about the IPCCs credibility, I don't doubt that there is good data and good science involved, but obviously there is some evidence of collusion.

dionysius

dionysius Avatar

Location: The People's Republic of Austin
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 4:01pm

 miamizsun wrote:
First, I'd like to see this "de-politicized", most politicians are people we pay to lie to us. Politicians(both parties) should be out of this altogether. Opposing something because of another party's take on it makes zero sense.

I like others here want to see the evidence, all of it, and put it through the rigors. I'm also more concerned with pollution than climate change, we can deal with water better/easier than poison.

I'm wondering what caused the planet to go through its cycles before we were here(short of a cataclysmic event). We see glacial striations all over the place, glaciers receding and forming thousands of years ago, yet we weren't using fossil fuels to any extent then.

I tend to think that it is mostly caused by the sun(in all of its flux) and man plays a minor part, much less than hyped. Lots of articles like this which suggest warming coinciding between mars and earth for example, are solar induced phenomena.(this is an older article, but I think that this type of data may gaining traction)

"Man-made greenhouse warming has made a small contribution to the warming seen on Earth in recent years, but it cannot compete with the increase in solar irradiance," Abdussamatov said.

It is difficult to say.

Regards

 
Hi Jeff!

No, not all all difficult to say. No one doubts that cycles in solar radiation occur, and that they have affected terrestrial climate in the past. But it takes many thousands of years for such variations in solar radiation or orbital attitude to achieve significant change. The relative speed of the warming points towards human causality. It's happening too quickly to be natural.

Read the Scientific American article, and its debunking of the solar radiation hypothesis:

"Astronomical phenomena are obvious natural factors to consider when trying to understand climate, particularly the brightness of the sun and details of the earth's orbit, because those seem to have been major drivers of the ice ages and other climate changes before the rise of industrial civilization. Climatologists, therefore, do take them into account in their models. But in defiance of the naysayers who want to chalk the recent warming up to natural cycles, there is insufficient evidence that enough extra solar energy is reaching our planet to account for the observed rise in global temperatures.

"The IPCC notes that between 1750 and 2005, the radiative forcing from the sun increased by 0.12 watts/square-meter-less than a tenth of the net forcings from human activities (1.6 W/m2). The largest uncertainty in that comparison comes from the estimated effects of aerosols in the atmosphere, which can variously shade the earth or warm it. Even granting the maximum uncertainties to these estimates, however, the increase in human influence on climate exceeds that of any solar variation."




miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3261.3 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 3:50pm

First, I'd like to see this "de-politicized", most politicians are people we pay to lie to us. Politicians(both parties) should be out of this altogether. Opposing something because of another party's take on it makes zero sense.

I like others here want to see the evidence, all of it, and put it through the rigors. I'm also more concerned with pollution than climate change, we can deal with water better/easier than poison.

I'm wondering what caused the planet to go through its cycles before we were here(short of a cataclysmic event). We see glacial striations all over the place, glaciers receding and forming thousands of years ago, yet we weren't using fossil fuels to any extent then.

I tend to think that it is mostly caused by the sun(in all of its flux) and man plays a minor part, much less than hyped. Lots of articles like this which suggest warming coinciding between mars and earth for example, are solar induced phenomena.(this is an older article, but I think that this type of data may gaining traction)

"Man-made greenhouse warming has made a small contribution to the warming seen on Earth in recent years, but it cannot compete with the increase in solar irradiance," Abdussamatov said.

It is difficult to say.

Regards

I thought this was good.

Climate Change - the Scientific Debate


Welly

Welly Avatar

Location: Lotusland
Gender: Female


Posted: Nov 30, 2009 - 12:02pm

Interesting!


Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 85, 86, 87, 88  Next