| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#1
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Okay, for the few that still thinks global warming isn't man
Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 06:38:19 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker wrote: Sure enough! Now, tell me in the above where it scientifically states without a doubt that man has not aided in global warming. Never mind. Unfortunate - I thought you'd want to actually talk some science and maybe we could have come to some sort of conclusion. I'm not playing the semantics game with you. "semantics"???? It's the whole argument! |
|
#2
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Okay, for the few that still thinks global warming isn't man made:
"Tom Francis - SWSports" wrote in message ... On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 18:14:22 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 13:11:58 -0500, NotNow wrote: Please read completely. Don't kill the messenger, don't give anecdotal crap, but respond with good, solid science to refute each of the points. http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0219-01.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific...al_oscillation I'll condense it for you. 1750: PDO displays an unusually strong oscillation.[2] 1905: After a strong swing, PDO changed to a "warm" phase. 1946: PDO changed to a "cool" phase. [See the blue section of the graph on the right] 1977: PDO changed to a "warm" phase.[3] 1998: PDO index showed several years of "cool" values, but did not remain in that pattern.[4] 2008: The early stages of a cool phase of the basin-wide Pacific Decadal Oscillation Sorry dude - hit the send button a little fast. Click on the Senate Testimony link. http://windfarms.wordpress.com/2008/...tions-not-co2/ Here's another - a little more condensed, but fairly accurate. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...=aU.evtnk6DPo# Here's a key point to keep in mind. The relationship between global temperature and solar activity is confused by the difference between global temperature and surface temperature. Global temperature is the average temperature of the oceans - simple fact because they are Earth's heat sink. As we've all know ocean temperatures are not evenly distributed. The Atlantic and Pacific oceans both experience oscillations, where unusually warm or cold waters take turns at the ocean surface. It's very similar to lake water turnover in fact. Lake Lanier, one that you're very familiar with, exhibits this effect as well. This surface water is a primary determinant of the earth's surface temperature, so the ocean oscillations cause surface temperature to oscillate with respect to the actual local and/or global temperature. We also need to account for the largest source of raw energy which is the Sun. It's no accident that, coincident with normal warm/cold cycles, that the increasedecrease in sunspots and solar prominences, mass coronal ejections and solar flares. The high magnetic energy components of these various solar events are very coincident with Earth weather and weather patterns. One of the more interesting studies done in 2007, which I can't find on the web but I'll keep looking - at the minimum I'll be glad to send you a copy of it, studied a solar event that occured in 1998 and it's effect on weather patterns. It was a major mass ejection that caused an unusual wet/dry pattern in the Northern Hemisphere. There is also some interest in what are called Milankovitch Cycles - basically eccentricities in Earth's orbit around the sun. Oddly, these cycles also seem to correspond to warm/cold cycles and long term Earth weather patterns. Ok, your turn - let's talk some science. Is that what caused the various warm periods and cold periods (greenland settlements, little ice age etc)? I've been wondering what caused those cycles. del |
|
#3
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Okay, for the few that still thinks global warming isn't man made:
On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 21:29:14 -0600, "Del Cecchi"
wrote: "Tom Francis - SWSports" wrote in message ... On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 18:14:22 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 13:11:58 -0500, NotNow wrote: Please read completely. Don't kill the messenger, don't give anecdotal crap, but respond with good, solid science to refute each of the points. http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0219-01.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific...al_oscillation I'll condense it for you. 1750: PDO displays an unusually strong oscillation.[2] 1905: After a strong swing, PDO changed to a "warm" phase. 1946: PDO changed to a "cool" phase. [See the blue section of the graph on the right] 1977: PDO changed to a "warm" phase.[3] 1998: PDO index showed several years of "cool" values, but did not remain in that pattern.[4] 2008: The early stages of a cool phase of the basin-wide Pacific Decadal Oscillation Sorry dude - hit the send button a little fast. Click on the Senate Testimony link. http://windfarms.wordpress.com/2008/...tions-not-co2/ Here's another - a little more condensed, but fairly accurate. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...=aU.evtnk6DPo# Here's a key point to keep in mind. The relationship between global temperature and solar activity is confused by the difference between global temperature and surface temperature. Global temperature is the average temperature of the oceans - simple fact because they are Earth's heat sink. As we've all know ocean temperatures are not evenly distributed. The Atlantic and Pacific oceans both experience oscillations, where unusually warm or cold waters take turns at the ocean surface. It's very similar to lake water turnover in fact. Lake Lanier, one that you're very familiar with, exhibits this effect as well. This surface water is a primary determinant of the earth's surface temperature, so the ocean oscillations cause surface temperature to oscillate with respect to the actual local and/or global temperature. We also need to account for the largest source of raw energy which is the Sun. It's no accident that, coincident with normal warm/cold cycles, that the increasedecrease in sunspots and solar prominences, mass coronal ejections and solar flares. The high magnetic energy components of these various solar events are very coincident with Earth weather and weather patterns. One of the more interesting studies done in 2007, which I can't find on the web but I'll keep looking - at the minimum I'll be glad to send you a copy of it, studied a solar event that occured in 1998 and it's effect on weather patterns. It was a major mass ejection that caused an unusual wet/dry pattern in the Northern Hemisphere. There is also some interest in what are called Milankovitch Cycles - basically eccentricities in Earth's orbit around the sun. Oddly, these cycles also seem to correspond to warm/cold cycles and long term Earth weather patterns. Ok, your turn - let's talk some science. Is that what caused the various warm periods and cold periods (greenland settlements, little ice age etc)? I've been wondering what caused those cycles. Normal variations. All oceans have periods of oscillation. What causes these oscillations is primarily solar cycles and orbital extremes. There has been some research that indicates that even minor variations in "top spin" of Earth's axial rotation can cause fluctuations can move the major ocean currents by a couple of hundred miles temporarily. There have been times when you can spot tropical fish, of the sort one sees in the Caribbean, swimming around Fort Adams at the mouth of Narragansett Bay - all due to a shift in the Gulf Stream further inshore. One of the big concerns now is about Arctic Ice and it's so called "retreat". While the global warming crowd is pushing the concept of greenhouse effect, and is the idea that is being pushed hard by the alarmists, some research suggests that this too is part of a normal long term pattern when older ice is replaced by newer ice. Of course this occurs on a larger time scale than 20/30 years. When you investigate a litter in terms of solar activity and Earth's own orbital variations in obliquity and eccentricity due to precession. There also is some newer research into insolation (INcoming SOLar radiATION) variations. Previously, it was thought because of our deep and thick atmosphere, the insolation effect wasn't as pronounced as it would be on planets like Mars and/or Jupiter, but that may be a false assumption given the current solar minimum and it's obvious effects on tropospheric weather patterns. Admittedly, pollution does have some effect at the surface, but it's a huge deep atmosphere with lots going on - the pollution from emissions may be exactly that - pollution with affects humans in other ways, but have little to no effect on the greenhouse effect. I suspect we're going to see some very interesting results very soon in atmospheric modeling as there are some new ways of analyzing deep field data sets coming on line very soon. The atmosphere may not be as complex to model as previously thought and these new techniques may sound the death knell for global warming. Wouldn't that be amusing. :) |
|
#4
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Okay, for the few that still thinks global warming isn't man
On Nov 4, 6:14*pm, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote: On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 13:11:58 -0500, NotNow wrote: Please read completely. Don't kill the messenger, don't give anecdotal crap, but respond with good, solid science to refute each of the points. *http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0219-01.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific...al_oscillation I'll condense it for you. 1750: PDO displays an unusually strong oscillation.[2] 1905: After a strong swing, PDO changed to a "warm" phase. 1946: PDO changed to a "cool" phase. [See the blue section of the graph on the right] 1977: PDO changed to a "warm" phase.[3] 1998: PDO index showed several years of "cool" values, but did not remain in that pattern.[4] 2008: The early stages of a cool phase of the basin-wide Pacific Decadal Oscillation That does NOTHING to scientifically prove that man has had no impact on global warming. |
|
#5
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Okay, for the few that still thinks global warming isn't man
Loogypicker wrote:
On Nov 4, 6:14 pm, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 13:11:58 -0500, NotNow wrote: Please read completely. Don't kill the messenger, don't give anecdotal crap, but respond with good, solid science to refute each of the points. http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0219-01.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific...al_oscillation I'll condense it for you. 1750: PDO displays an unusually strong oscillation.[2] 1905: After a strong swing, PDO changed to a "warm" phase. 1946: PDO changed to a "cool" phase. [See the blue section of the graph on the right] 1977: PDO changed to a "warm" phase.[3] 1998: PDO index showed several years of "cool" values, but did not remain in that pattern.[4] 2008: The early stages of a cool phase of the basin-wide Pacific Decadal Oscillation That does NOTHING to scientifically prove that man has had no impact on global warming. If you follow all of the long term sciences such as Archeology, Paleontology, etc. you will see that all of them show the long term cyclic variation in the climate. In fact from those same sciences, the climate is now at a 100k year peak, and is about to take the plunge to a much colder climate. One of the recent studies that confirmed this trend was the study of the settlement in what is now the English Channel and the North Sea. If these algorian and obamodytes really believed in global warming they would be supporting the operations of nuclear plant, be 100% behind the construction of new nuclear plants, and not closing the western waste storage facility. The only possible conclusion from their actions is that climate change is nothing more that a new way to tax the American Voter. |
|
#6
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Okay, for the few that still thinks global warming isn't man
On Nov 5, 11:04*am, Keith Nuttle wrote:
Loogypicker wrote: On Nov 4, 6:14 pm, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 13:11:58 -0500, NotNow wrote: Please read completely. Don't kill the messenger, don't give anecdotal crap, but respond with good, solid science to refute each of the points. *http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0219-01.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific...al_oscillation I'll condense it for you. 1750: PDO displays an unusually strong oscillation.[2] 1905: After a strong swing, PDO changed to a "warm" phase. 1946: PDO changed to a "cool" phase. [See the blue section of the graph on the right] 1977: PDO changed to a "warm" phase.[3] 1998: PDO index showed several years of "cool" values, but did not remain in that pattern.[4] 2008: The early stages of a cool phase of the basin-wide Pacific Decadal Oscillation That does NOTHING to scientifically prove that man has had no impact on global warming. If you follow all of the long term sciences such as Archeology, Paleontology, etc. you will see that all of them show the long term cyclic variation in the climate. *In fact from those same sciences, the climate is now at a 100k year peak, and is about to take the plunge to a much colder climate. One of the recent studies that confirmed this trend was the study of the * settlement in what is now the English Channel and the North Sea. If these algorian and obamodytes really believed in global warming they would be supporting the operations of nuclear plant, be 100% behind the construction of new nuclear plants, and not closing the western waste storage facility. *The only possible conclusion from their actions is that climate change is nothing more that a new way to tax the American Voter. Loogy: Are you asking someone to prove a negative? |
|
#8
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Okay, for the few that still thinks global warming isn't man
Frogwatch wrote:
On Nov 5, 11:04 am, Keith Nuttle wrote: Loogypicker wrote: On Nov 4, 6:14 pm, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 13:11:58 -0500, NotNow wrote: Please read completely. Don't kill the messenger, don't give anecdotal crap, but respond with good, solid science to refute each of the points. http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0219-01.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific...al_oscillation I'll condense it for you. 1750: PDO displays an unusually strong oscillation.[2] 1905: After a strong swing, PDO changed to a "warm" phase. 1946: PDO changed to a "cool" phase. [See the blue section of the graph on the right] 1977: PDO changed to a "warm" phase.[3] 1998: PDO index showed several years of "cool" values, but did not remain in that pattern.[4] 2008: The early stages of a cool phase of the basin-wide Pacific Decadal Oscillation That does NOTHING to scientifically prove that man has had no impact on global warming. If you follow all of the long term sciences such as Archeology, Paleontology, etc. you will see that all of them show the long term cyclic variation in the climate. In fact from those same sciences, the climate is now at a 100k year peak, and is about to take the plunge to a much colder climate. One of the recent studies that confirmed this trend was the study of the settlement in what is now the English Channel and the North Sea. If these algorian and obamodytes really believed in global warming they would be supporting the operations of nuclear plant, be 100% behind the construction of new nuclear plants, and not closing the western waste storage facility. The only possible conclusion from their actions is that climate change is nothing more that a new way to tax the American Voter. Loogy: Are you asking someone to prove a negative? No. |
|
#9
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Okay, for the few that still thinks global warming isn't man
Keith Nuttle wrote:
Loogypicker wrote: On Nov 4, 6:14 pm, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 13:11:58 -0500, NotNow wrote: Please read completely. Don't kill the messenger, don't give anecdotal crap, but respond with good, solid science to refute each of the points. http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0219-01.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific...al_oscillation I'll condense it for you. 1750: PDO displays an unusually strong oscillation.[2] 1905: After a strong swing, PDO changed to a "warm" phase. 1946: PDO changed to a "cool" phase. [See the blue section of the graph on the right] 1977: PDO changed to a "warm" phase.[3] 1998: PDO index showed several years of "cool" values, but did not remain in that pattern.[4] 2008: The early stages of a cool phase of the basin-wide Pacific Decadal Oscillation That does NOTHING to scientifically prove that man has had no impact on global warming. If you follow all of the long term sciences such as Archeology, Paleontology, etc. you will see that all of them show the long term cyclic variation in the climate. In fact from those same sciences, the climate is now at a 100k year peak, and is about to take the plunge to a much colder climate. One of the recent studies that confirmed this trend was the study of the settlement in what is now the English Channel and the North Sea. If these algorian and obamodytes really believed in global warming they would be supporting the operations of nuclear plant, be 100% behind the construction of new nuclear plants, and not closing the western waste storage facility. The only possible conclusion from their actions is that climate change is nothing more that a new way to tax the American Voter. Again, (and again) no one is saying that cyclic warming/cooling events haven't taken place. BUT, there is lots of data that shows a direct correlation between CO2 levels and warming. It just amazes me that some just shove this data under the table and instead let the republican party talking heads act as their scientists. |
|
#10
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Okay, for the few that still thinks global warming isn't man
NotNow wrote:
Keith Nuttle wrote: Loogypicker wrote: On Nov 4, 6:14 pm, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote: On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 13:11:58 -0500, NotNow wrote: Please read completely. Don't kill the messenger, don't give anecdotal crap, but respond with good, solid science to refute each of the points. http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0219-01.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific...al_oscillation I'll condense it for you. 1750: PDO displays an unusually strong oscillation.[2] 1905: After a strong swing, PDO changed to a "warm" phase. 1946: PDO changed to a "cool" phase. [See the blue section of the graph on the right] 1977: PDO changed to a "warm" phase.[3] 1998: PDO index showed several years of "cool" values, but did not remain in that pattern.[4] 2008: The early stages of a cool phase of the basin-wide Pacific Decadal Oscillation That does NOTHING to scientifically prove that man has had no impact on global warming. If you follow all of the long term sciences such as Archeology, Paleontology, etc. you will see that all of them show the long term cyclic variation in the climate. In fact from those same sciences, the climate is now at a 100k year peak, and is about to take the plunge to a much colder climate. One of the recent studies that confirmed this trend was the study of the settlement in what is now the English Channel and the North Sea. If these algorian and obamodytes really believed in global warming they would be supporting the operations of nuclear plant, be 100% behind the construction of new nuclear plants, and not closing the western waste storage facility. The only possible conclusion from their actions is that climate change is nothing more that a new way to tax the American Voter. Again, (and again) no one is saying that cyclic warming/cooling events haven't taken place. BUT, there is lots of data that shows a direct correlation between CO2 levels and warming. It just amazes me that some just shove this data under the table and instead let the republican party talking heads act as their scientists. These same long term studies show that the changing Carbon Dioxide levels were occurring long before man, started to build the current society. Carbon Dioxide levels are cyclic just like the temperatures. Even the privative climate computer models can not explain the cooling that has occurred in the past 10 years when the Carbon dioxide levels are supposedly raising. IF man knew EVER VARIABLE affecting the climate and he had a SUFFICIENTLY SOPHISTICATED computer model that showed global warming then we should act, until then anything we do is likely to make the situation worst as we don't know what we are doing. We have picked a couple of dozen variables out of millions and are trying to predict the future. It is like me modeling the stock market on my 386 laptop and betting a a million dollars on stocks that my computer says is going up. |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Global warming | Cruising | |||
| More on man made global warming | General | |||
| First global warming, now this!!! | ASA | |||
| More on Global Warming | ASA | |||
| Global Flyer... made it! | ASA | |||
![NotNow[_3_] is offline](https://www.boatbanter.com/images/SultanThemeVB3R/statusicon/user_offline.gif)
Hybrid Mode
