The random political thoughts thread (Part Deux)

[wendybeth]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

WB - why then hasn't the average temperature increased since 1998?

Green house gas emissions have not fallen in that time frame, but have rather increased.

It isn't an issue of warming (at least to me), as there is data to show an increase of a degree or so in the last 100 years.

It is an indisputable fact that there have been periods of warming and cooling far before any such green house emissions by man came into play. These things happen naturally in the planetary (and more largely due to the solar) cycle. Therefore, no panic. We have no - zero, zip, none, nada - control over it.

Depends on where you get your data there, Scaeagles. 1998 was hot, but not the hottest, and the trend clerly shows increase, not decrease, in temps. Things are heating up.

Again, loads of documentation- by very reputable sources- is available that shows gw is happening, whether you like it or not. Not so much is out there to support your position. I wish it really were as you say, because the alternative sucks, but I can't do the ostrich thing and pretend it all away.

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by wendybeth

Again, loads of documentation- by very reputable sources- is available that shows gw is happening, whether you like it or not. Not so much is out there to support your position. I wish it really were as you say, because the alternative sucks, but I can't do the ostrich thing and pretend it all away.

My sources are reputable as well.

Please show me, however, where I said the planet was not warming. I did cite a link in conflict to the temperature data you posted in your link.

I have said I am not convinced it is man caused. Again, there were massive periods of global warming and cooling that could not have possibly been influenced by man.

Why is it so hard to accept that is what I'm saying? I'll say it again - data shows an increase in average temprature of about a degree over the last 100 years. So there is warming.

WB, did you read the link I posted earlier from the guy at MIT? My philosophy is really in line with what he's saying.

[Motorboat Cruiser]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

My sources are reputable as well.

Depends on your definition of "reputable", I suppose. A little checking on google reveals that Bob Carter, the author of your first cite has received almost 100K in funding from Exxon. Richard Lindzen, the author of your second cite has received funding from Exxon, Shell, Unocal, and ARCO and at one point was charging the oil and coal industry $2,500 a day for his consulting services.

Perhaps you could find a researcher that supports your opinion that hasn't been paid off by the oil industry.

[sleepyjeff]

Originally Posted by Motorboat Cruiser

Perhaps you could find a researcher that supports your opinion that hasn't been paid off by the oil industry.

This one is paid by the State of Oregon: Oregon State Climatologist George Taylor.


http://www.ospirg.org/OR.asp?id2=18806

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by Motorboat Cruiser

Depends on your definition of "reputable", I suppose. A little checking on google reveals that Bob Carter, the author of your first cite has received almost 100K in funding from Exxon. Richard Lindzen, the author of your second cite has received funding from Exxon, Shell, Unocal, and ARCO and at one point was charging the oil and coal industry $2,500 a day for his consulting services.

Perhaps you could find a researcher that supports your opinion that hasn't been paid off by the oil industry.

I'm sure that all the scientists spouting hysteria over impossible scenarios have nothing to do with the Sierra Club or Al Gore, and that intimidation of those with data that suggests other than panic scenarios really aren't pressured to withhold data.

[scaeagles]

Well, WB, what can we do about it? The fact is that we can't do anything to change sun cycles or planetary cycles.

Even the Kyoto protocols don't claim to be able to do squat about what the projected doom sayers say is going to happen. The reason I have cited the MIT column is because so much of what is being said could happen due to global water can't happen. It's alarmism.

I find it so comical that many who say that the government is trying to keep us in fear about terrorism as a method of control are so open to being controlled about fears regarding global warming.

[sleepyjeff]

A federally sponsored inquiry into the effects of possible climate changes caused by heavy supersonic traffic in the stratosphere has concluded that even a slight cooling could cost the world from $200 billion to 500 times that much in damage done to agriculture, public health and other effects.
~Walter Sullivan NYT; 1975.

Walter Sullivan(yes, THE Walter Sullivan of the Walter Sulilvan Award for Scientific Journalism which was won this year by Time Magazine and its "musing" about global warming) is concerned here that the planet is cooling.

Scientists Ask Why World Climate Is Changing; Major Cooling May Be Ahead; Scientists Ponder Why World's Climate Is Changing; a Major Cooling Widely Considered to Be Inevitable.
~Walter Sullivan NYT; May 21, 1975.

More concern.

"Surely we cannot let ecological qualms halt dreams of fertilizing the Sahara or warming up Antarctica with nuclear power, thus rendering habitable millions of new acres."
~Oppenhiemer NYT; 1972

Another writer at the NYT thinks that maybe we humans can slow "global cooling".......kinda glad now we didn't "panic" back then?

Warming Arctic Climate Melting Glaciers Faster, Raising Ocean Level, Scientist Says.
~NYT; 1947

Of course those who were in the "cooling" crowd back in the 70s had people doubting them pointing to experts from the 40s saying the planet was warming up...........kinda see a 30 year cycle here?

findings indicate that global warming is melting polar ice ... findings indicate that global warming is melting polar ice ... reported indicators of warming have led researchers to devise .
~Walter Sullivan NYT; August 14, 1990.

Now Walter Sullivan is no longer concerned about global cooling....quite the opposite now........maybe he was bored?

[Gemini Cricket]

From the play I'm in 'You Can't Take It With You'

"I used to worry about the world, too. Got all worked up about whether Cleveland or Blaine was going to be elected President- seemed awfully important at the time. But who cares now? What I'm trying to say, Mr. Kirby, is that I've had 75 years that nobody can take away from me, no matter what they do to the world." ~ Grandpa Sycamore

(Or something to that effect. I'm paraphrasing...)

[Not Afraid]

Here are links to the last most recent IPCC Evaluations.

And an interesting article that is a couple years old but still relevent in it's overall information.

Both are nice assessments of information from a variety of sources.

[scaeagles]

Like I said, we can play the exchange of links game all day. You may not respect my viewpoint on this, which is fine, but I'm not going to fell badly about agreeing with an MIT atmospheric scientist.