Science and global warming? Your thoughts on this article?

[ganstey]

The climate of our planet in the last 4 billion odd years has changed more times than anyone will ever know. We werent there on nearly all of them.....yet it still changed. It will change again...and again....and again. Its nothing to do with us, at least the climate change is not because of our actions. Ours isnt the only planet on which changes have been noted either.

I'm not aware that any serious scientist is claiming that the climate isn't changing, the issue is the rate at which it is changing. The current rate of change is off the scale compared to the changes in deep-time. So something must be different this time. One of the things we know for sure that is different this time is that man is around and is polluting the planet like never before. One of the main reasons why we can't predict what is going to happen this time is that we have nothing to compare it with. All the other significant changes in the climate have happened at a much, much slower rate.

There is a very strong correlation between CO2 in the atmosphere, and global temperature. CO2 concentrations are rising rapidly (search for "Keeling Curve") and so it follows that global temperatures are also going to rise. The main contributor of CO2 to the atmosphere at the present time is man.

To say other planets have undergone climate change is irrelevant, as their atmospheric conditions are nothing like ours. If we found another planet that was currently undergoing rapid climate change, and it hosted a bacteria that was producing huge amounts of greenhouse gases, would you assert that it can't be down to the bacteria because we've undergone climate change and yet we don't have those bacteria?

Graham

 

[HillBill]

Similar happened 5200 years ago
http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/quelcoro.htm

We have no way of knowing exactly how previous climate changes worked or how fast they developed. TBH i expect they vary. I just do not for one second believe that this is man made. If other planets are experiencing similar changes then, obviously whats happening on those isn't because of us. So, that being said, what in our solar system could cause changes on more than one ( possibly all?) planet at the same time? If you take life forms out of the equation, as there are none we know of on other planets, then you are left with a natural phenomenon/cycle? than encompasses our whole solar system perhaps? or maybe even something on a larger scale? say a galactic event? My point is, that if we concentrate on this planet, at this time, are we missing the bigger picture?

I'm not aware that any serious scientist is claiming that the climate isn't changing, the issue is the rate at which it is changing. The current rate of change is off the scale compared to the changes in deep-time. So something must be different this time. One of the things we know for sure that is different this time is that man is around and is polluting the planet like never before. One of the main reasons why we can't predict what is going to happen this time is that we have nothing to compare it with. All the other significant changes in the climate have happened at a much, much slower rate.

There is a very strong correlation between CO2 in the atmosphere, and global temperature. CO2 concentrations are rising rapidly (search for "Keeling Curve") and so it follows that global temperatures are also going to rise. The main contributor of CO2 to the atmosphere at the present time is man.

To say other planets have undergone climate change is irrelevant, as their atmospheric conditions are nothing like ours. If we found another planet that was currently undergoing rapid climate change, and it hosted a bacteria that was producing huge amounts of greenhouse gases, would you assert that it can't be down to the bacteria because we've undergone climate change and yet we don't have those bacteria?

Graham

 

[ged]

Similar happened 5200 years ago
http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/quelcoro.htm

We have no way of knowing exactly how previous climate changes worked or how fast they developed. TBH i expect they vary. I just do not for one second believe that this is man made. If other planets are experiencing similar changes then, obviously whats happening on those isn't because of us. So, that being said, what in our solar system could cause changes on more than one ( possibly all?) planet at the same time? If you take life forms out of the equation, as there are none we know of on other planets, then you are left with a natural phenomenon/cycle? than encompasses our whole solar system perhaps? or maybe even something on a larger scale? say a galactic event? My point is, that if we concentrate on this planet, at this time, are we missing the bigger picture?

When you can present a case that makes any sense at all, maybe we'll talk about it.

 

[khimbar]

IBTL.

Since Al Gore and his companies are making billions from 'green taxes' and since he recently equated climate change 'deniers' with racists, I'm inclined to leave my light bulbs on over night and leave the tap running when brushing my teeth.

This quote speaks volumes to me.


"In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill ... All these dangers are caused by human intervention and it is only through changed attitudes and behaviour that they can be overcome. The real enemy, then, is humanity itself."

— in The First Global Revolution, pp.104-105 by Alexander King, founder of the Club of Rome and Bertrand Schneider, secretary of the Club of Rome

 

[ganstey]

HillBill,

For what it's worth I totally disagree with your view, as it appears to be based on feeling rather than science. Having read that article, either the author or the reporter have got their terms confused. Climate change happens over a long timescale, weather is what happens over a short timescale. From the article "It had to be captured by a very large snowfall at the time, a snowfall and climate change that began very abruptly fast enough to capture a plant but not kill it." What we are talking about are long-lasting changes to the planet's climate, not a sudden and heavy snowfall. Sorry but this article does not stand up to scrutiny.

You're not going to persuade me to change my view, and I don't suppose I'll be able to change yours. So I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

Graham

 

[toilet digger]

Similar happened 5200 years ago
http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/quelcoro.htm

We have no way of knowing exactly how previous climate changes worked or how fast they developed. TBH i expect they vary. I just do not for one second believe that this is man made. If other planets are experiencing similar changes then, obviously whats happening on those isn't because of us. So, that being said, what in our solar system could cause changes on more than one ( possibly all?) planet at the same time? If you take life forms out of the equation, as there are none we know of on other planets, then you are left with a natural phenomenon/cycle? than encompasses our whole solar system perhaps? or maybe even something on a larger scale? say a galactic event? My point is, that if we concentrate on this planet, at this time, are we missing the bigger picture?

skimmed over the article in question, seemed a little vague in its purpose more than anything, felt they were trying to prove the last glacial period occured at all. if you guy are interested in climate changes in historic times, a good example is ; volcanic activity and subsequent atmospheric particulate contaminants and the mini ice age in britain. cause and effect

gotta say i'm really enjoying this thread chaps.

 

[Maggot]

Global warming.......

"No proof is needed for the believers
No proof is enough for the non-believers"

 

[ganstey]

IBTL.

Since Al Gore and his companies are making billions from 'green taxes' and since he recently equated climate change 'deniers' with racists, I'm inclined to leave my light bulbs on over night and leave the tap running when brushing my teeth.

This quote speaks volumes to me.


"In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill ... All these dangers are caused by human intervention and it is only through changed attitudes and behaviour that they can be overcome. The real enemy, then, is humanity itself."

— in The First Global Revolution, pp.104-105 by Alexander King, founder of the Club of Rome and Bertrand Schneider, secretary of the Club of Rome

Your post appears to contradict itself. At first you seem to be accusing Al Gore of creating the global warming story as a money-making venture. Then in what you quote you are saying that climate change is down to humans and only humans can correct it. Al Gore is a politician and I don't trust politicians of any party. But there is overwhelming scientific evidence that climate change is happening faster than the planet can adjust to, and that we are a prime cause of that rate of change. I do agree with the final statement in your quote "The real enemy, then, is humanity itself."

Graham

 

[khimbar]

Your post appears to contradict itself. At first you seem to be accusing Al Gore of creating the global warming story as a money-making venture. Then in what you quote you are saying that climate change is down to humans and only humans can correct it. Al Gore is a politician and I don't trust politicians of any party. But there is overwhelming scientific evidence that climate change is happening faster than the planet can adjust to, and that we are a prime cause of that rate of change. I do agree with the final statement in your quote "The real enemy, then, is humanity itself."

Graham

I'm not saying I agree with that quote. I'm saying that quote because the people who said it (the CFR, of which I think Al Gore is a member) said it. I'm not saying Gore created the story.

I'm saying the CFR/whoever made up man made global warming, as a way to control people and get more money from taxes on 'green' issues. And its working very well for them.

 

[HillBill]

Of course

Couple more articles. The first of which does suggest that the climate change in question was long lasting.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/12/041219142907.htm

This wiki article has some info on it also, with some interesting points the other articles don't mention
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4th_millennium_BC#Environmental_changes

HillBill,

For what it's worth I totally disagree with your view, as it appears to be based on feeling rather than science. Having read that article, either the author or the reporter have got their terms confused. Climate change happens over a long timescale, weather is what happens over a short timescale. From the article "It had to be captured by a very large snowfall at the time, a snowfall and climate change that began very abruptly fast enough to capture a plant but not kill it." What we are talking about are long-lasting changes to the planet's climate, not a sudden and heavy snowfall. Sorry but this article does not stand up to scrutiny.

You're not going to persuade me to change my view, and I don't suppose I'll be able to change yours. So I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

Graham

 

[HillBill]

I do believe it is happening, i just don't agree as to why its happening

Global warming.......

"No proof is needed for the believers
No proof is enough for the non-believers"

 

[ganstey]

I do believe it is happening, i just don't agree as to why its happening

OK, that's fair enough. But what we do know is that there is a strong correlation between CO2 and climate change. We are the only organism that has the intelligence and the means to reduce the amount of CO2 going into the atmosphere. Does it not therefore make sense for us to do what we can to help Planet Earth, even if we didn't cause it in the first place (though I believe we did)? Let's face it, one of the biggest losers is going to be us humans.

Graham

 

[Wayland]

Sort of like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic?

 

[Harvestman]

Back in the early 1990's I attended the annual conference of the British Ecological Society. The chairman's speech was a rousing cry of "There are those who say climate change is not happening, and we should all carry on as normal. We know they are wrong. There are those who say it is already too late to avert disaster. We know they are wrong too. WE are the people with access to the data, and we know that with the right information, it is not too late!"

At this point he paused for applause for his rallying cry.

Silence. Not a single clap from over 200 delegates.

Basically, everyone in the room, the people with access to the data and who could actually see what was happening, were one and all convinced that it was already too late.

That has stayed with me throughout all the subsequent 'debate' about this topic.

 

[toilet digger]

Back in the early 1990's I attended the annual conference of the British Ecological Society. The chairman's speech was a rousing cry of "There are those who say climate change is not happening, and we should all carry on as normal. We know they are wrong. There are those who say it is already too late to avert disaster. We know they are wrong too. WE are the people with access to the data, and we know that with the right information, it is not too late!"

At this point he paused for applause for his rallying cry.

Silence. Not a single clap from over 200 delegates.

Basically, everyone in the room, the people with access to the data and who could actually see what was happening, were one and all convinced that it was already too late.

That has stayed with me throughout all the subsequent 'debate' about this topic.

i concure, but and this is the important factor which most media and scientific research fails to acknowledge is that, this has happened countless times before. species have adapted, or migrated, or perished.
the only apparent focus/arguement seems mainly concerned with ''who caused this'' or ''how are we going to stop it?''. foolhardy to my . the inconvenient truth (did ya like that? ) is that there is simply too many humans on a crowded planet which is about to undergo dramatic change, energy requirement, water, and food production will not be met in a matter of decades. humanity has behaved like locusts for the last millenia and as the fossil record shows us, NO species is beyond its environments (planets) reproach.

 

[ganstey]

Silence. Not a single clap from over 200 delegates.

Basically, everyone in the room, the people with access to the data and who could actually see what was happening, were one and all convinced that it was already too late.

But one doesn't necessarily follow from the other. Maybe they didn't clap because it was such a lame rallying cry, or maybe they thought it wasn't happening. Or maybe they hadn't examined the evidence and so didn't know one way or the other. Science has come a long way since the 1990s.

Graham

 

[santaman2000]

But one doesn't necessarily follow from the other. Maybe they didn't clap because it was such a lame rallying cry, or maybe they thought it wasn't happening. Or maybe they hadn't examined the evidence and so didn't know one way or the other. Science has come a long way since the 1990s.

Graham

Or maybe it was just to hot/cold to put forth the effort.