Posted on 03/04/2008 10:55:54 PM PST by neverdem
“Michaels pointed out that the surface records show average global temperatures increasing at a steady rate of +0.17 degrees centigrade per decade since 1977”
Over just 3 decades? And this is enough to indicate the world is warming and will continue to warm?
This ship is sinkin’ fast, dudes.
Like when any salesman says, “Trust me.”. I learned along time ago to walk away when I hear those words.
I am convinced, and have seen no evidence to the contrary, that Earth has warmed and cooled for its entire history. How else would explain glaciers in Minnesota or tropical plant residue beneath the polar ice?
Man might be doing something to affect the level of change, and possibly the rate, but Earth and its atmosphere is too big to be changed by its inhabitants. Sure, you can change small areas of it for a short time, and the effects might be seen or felt half-way around the world a bit later, but eventually Mother Nature is going to handle the insult.
Nothing the alarmists, on either side, have ever predicted has come true. We need to be good to our environment, especially our atmosphere since it’s the air we breathe, but not at the cost of other aspects of a civilized life.
It has been in the 70s the past few days, oh wait this is S. California never mind.
There, I guess we're even.
Actually only two decades since the last 10 years have been flat. I'm amazed...the guy says there is a quantifiable trend since 1977 (three decades), but this trend is currently experiencing a downward variation (which just happens to cover 1/3 of the 3 decade time period).
3 decades, but the last one doesn’t count
I’m planning a vineyard in Minnesota...just a few more years and I’ll be able to grow grapes.
This ship is sinkin’ fast, dudes.
It as if the facts which contradict Al Gore have reached a tipping point.
The real money quote in the whole thing.
Man-made or caused by natural cycles the correct response to climate change is to have a vibrant economy so we can adapt.
If the government really wants to do something useful, it can fund a crash program to develop food crops that grow in hotter dryer, hotter wetter, colder dryer and colder wetter climates than are currently used for most agriculture, draw up plans for aquaducts in case agricultural areas develop droughts, and make contingency plans for things like rising sea-levels, reglaciation, population migrations and the like. Putting a strangle-hold on the economy with a rationing system (which is what carbon credits really are, even in the 'cap and trade' version with its nod to the market in letting people sell their ration) is exactly the wrong response regardless of the cause.
Good post. You’re right. The one thing that global climate has ~never~ done is remain the same for ~any~ amount of time. There are changes and cycles at every scale, from mere moments to epochal time frames.
We must of course be good stewards of the planet. It’s the only one we have handy. We must be smart about the way we utilize resources and we should clean up our messes. But it is ~wealth~ that promotes clean, green living and a cleaner environment. It is the richest countries that have the resources to help clean up after the poorest, who typically foul their environments and misuse and abuse their resources. It is technology that offers better and more efficient living for more people using resources more effectively.
You are way out there in kookville. A real denier. A regular flat-earther. The earth was perfectly stable until the combustion engine came along.
Solar news:
The aurora was on display last night. Bright and covered half the sky. Some motion but generally slow shifting. The color was washed out and pale, nearly milky white like Casper’s ghost. What does it mean for Global Warming?
Amazing Climate Predictions Revealed—Climate Models Reviled
Obama the Messiah of Generation Narcissism
In the Slums of Fallujah Mike Totten
From time to time, I’ll ping on noteworthy articles about politics, foreign and military affairs. FReepmail me if you want on or off my list.
|
|
|||
Gods |
Thanks neverdem.According to recent reports, Greenland's ice cap is now losing about 57 cubic miles of ice annually. If that rate were sustained over the next 100 years, a little over 0.8 percent of the ice cap would melt away into the oceans. Michaels also talked about the recent steep reduction in summer Arctic sea ice. However, he pointed to research by UCLA biological geographer Glen MacDonald and his colleagues who found that the Eurasian tree line reached as far as the shores of the Arctic Ocean 9,000 to 7,000 years ago. Why? Because "the mean July temperatures along the northern coastline of Russia may have been 2.5° to 7.0° celsius warmer than modern [ones]." |
||
|
· Mirabilis · Texas AM Anthropology News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · · History or Science & Nature Podcasts · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists · |
|||
Vigilanteman: Interesting graphic. The weight of the ice sheets alone has depressed most of Greenland to below sea level. In fact, if all the ice in Greenland were to melt (which took 18,000 years to build), then 88% of the excess could be contained in the Qatarra Depression with a simple 50 mile or so long canal from the Medditerranean to drain it in. [Island Found in Arctic Circle (Warming Island), Ananova, April 17, 2007]
 |
||
| · join · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post new topic · | ||
BWA-HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
I agree.
Also, trying to correlate human activity with global change is pretty near impossible.
It is more politically driven than scientifically driven.
Libs like Gore and Streisand who like their private jets and homes with large thermal footprints, agonize over the unwashed masses alleged abuses of natural resources.
As is the case with liberal politics its quite hypocritical and class driven.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.