NotNow wrote:
Keith Nuttle wrote:
NotNow wrote:
Keith Nuttle wrote:
NotNow wrote:
Calif Bill wrote:



If the past does not matter you have no basis to say there is global
warming. Yesterday, last week, last year, last decades'
temperatures, don't exist therefore there are no temperatures to
compare today's temperature, so it can not be increasing

Do this. Show me unmitigated, researchable data that proves for a
fact that global warming isn't occurring.

There is some data showing regional warming. There is some data
showing regional cooling. We have been collecting data on the weather
for a little more than two hundred years. Probably half of this time
with imprecise equipment and poor sampling techniques. The first half
of this database has a very limited scope in relation to the total
surface area of the earth. There are still large area of the surface
of the earth (water and land) that have no data history for the
temperature.

Based on this small sampling of data there are some privative computer
models that have been developed that based on this small data pool
project the numbers forward and show a warming trend. However they
did not predict the cooling that has been experienced in the current
century. They can not accurately predict the weather from day to day.
(We have record high temperatures in the western US and record low
highs in the Midwestern US. In fact because of these low temperature
we may see increases in alcohol (gasoline), and various foods because
of low yields.)

If you get passed the politics and look at the data being generated,
there are signs that the world is warming, but there are also signs
that it is cooling. The ice on one side of the antarctic has been
decreasing BUT the ice on the other side has been increasing. The
current that comes out of the Arctic down the west side of Greenland
is colder and stronger after weakening in the late 1900's

Archeology, paleontology and other long term sciences have shown that
global warming is a cyclic phenomena, with cycles 100000 years or more
in length. There are too many variables, and the cycles too long, to
make any accurate prediction from the limited data set we currently
have. There is definitely too little data available to start trying
to modify the weather when we don't know all of the variables that
control it. (If we do something wrong we could make a bad situation
worse.) It is absolutely too early to start throwing trillions of
dollars at a situation that is not known nor understood.

I fully understand that there is a cyclic element to the problem. BUT,
you can not deny data that shows that air pollution has corresponded
perfectly with the warming trend that we are now seeing. That has only
occurred before with super volcano events. Anyone who just shoves good
data under the rug because it doesn't meet their current ideology just
isn't very good at science.


Global warming also corresponds to the growth in the feminist movement,
the development of the computer industry, the growth in the Latino
population of the US, and several other non related phenomena.

I will stick with my original statement, there just is not sufficient
data to predict long range climate trends. As a scientist all data is
valid whether if fits you preconceived notions or not.

I have been involved in to many experiments where the final conclusion
was not what was indicated by the initial trend in a few data points.
In most of these cases, when the absolute variation in the data was know
the trend in the initial data was shown to be random variance.