Do you dispute the fact that historically rising CO2 levels have followed rather than preceded warming periods?
Lets answer the questions in the order they were asked :-)
Global Warming Alarmist Admits...
by metatron 40 Replies latest jw friends
-
besty
-
slimboyfat
My "position" is that I understand the evidence indicates rising CO2 levels following warming periods ather than preceding them. The implication for global warming is clear.
Lovelock has apparently gone a bit further than simply joining the mainstream global warming fold. He states that nothing much has happened as far as global warming is concerned yet. They have been waiting, and waiting... Still to happen.
It's no shame to contemplate you may have been wrong.
-
FreeWilly
Wow still at it Besty?
-
steve2
A documentary film was released recently in the United States called "An Inconsistent Truth" - a critcial take on Al Gore's blockbuster documentary film "An Inconvenient Truth". The newer film managed to get into the lower reaches of the US box office movies earlier this year - but otherwise sunk without too much impact. It challenged aspects of the "science" presented in Gore's movie. I managed with some difficulty to locate reviews of the movie; in general it got a lukewarm reception - primarily it seems because it took the popular Gore's movie to task. The commonest critique of "An Inconsistent Truth" was 'now is not the time to call into question the science of global-warming causation'. Some sources suggested that the reason the film never got a wider release was because of spooking commercial interestswhich have stepped in to support the human-caused global warming argument. Nothing much changes: Money talks - even in scientific circles....
Where have we heard that line before about not questioning the accepted order? Ah yes, in religious circles: "Brothers and sisters, we are deep into the time of the end. Now is not the time to be quibbling about Jehovah's provisions through the faithful and discreet slave".
The trouble with the dialogue over global warming is it does have an annoying-sounding religiosity about it.
-
bohm
The way i see it:
- CO2 concentrations is going up due to human activity.
- Global mean temperature is consistently rising in all areas of the world.
If there has been any development in this forum in terms of how global warming is discussed it would be that it seem even the sceptics conceed that the above two are observational facts. I cannot resist: we told you so!
Now, we have many models which directly link CO2 concentration to a rise in temperature which in the resent years they have grown more and more sophisticated. But the underlying physics is quite basic, namely the spectral characteristics of CO2 which give the greenhouse effect.
Nobody here seem to challenge the underlying physics and (i bet!) none of the deniers has done any real work as to figure out what is wrong with the actual simulations.
So it all seem to be quite basic: We have two observational facts, and our best knowledge of physical suggest they are causally linked. Compare the situation with cancer, i bet any sceptic was presented with the following 3 claims:
- Factory is releasing chemical agent X into the water supply of your town.
- After chemical agent X was released into water supply, cancer insidents has begun to rise
- The best knowledge of biophysics suggest that X cause cancer
they would quite frankly properly not give a shit about the oppinions of a fat ex vice president, nor wonder if further experiments might confirm the sun, wind or rock and roll due to some yet unestablished causal mechanism might play a role. Nevertheless, "OMG al gores movie might have been wrong!!!" ... "OMG this dude selectively plotted shit in excel, look at the graphs!!!" and so on and on it goes.
Now on to paleoclimatology... actually not. When all you get is something like: " Ancient warming records generally show warming trends preceding CO 2 increase trends." there is really nothing to challenge, since the story of ancient climate is largely the story of impact events, erosion, plate tectonics and increasing decreasing periods of vulcanism.
If it is suggested paleoclimatology show that realeasing more CO2 into the atmosphere cool things down i think that is extremely silly given the poor temperal resolution of the geological record (and even more so the proxies for past atmospheric concentration of various gasses). But do go ahead, and show any scientific study which is relevant to the current human forcing of CO2 and not what happends over millions of years.
-
besty
@SBF:
So your position is that CO2 is not a greenhouse gas?
Its a simple yes or no answer - I'm not so much interested in what you think the evidence indicates about rising and falling warming periods before and after interglacials etc - just whether you understand CO2 to be a greenhouse gas, or not.
-
-
metatron
Don't be deceived. Climate change involves science and that's fair. It's about facts. However, there continue to be problems with excessive speculation and evil schemes by the elite - and bankers in particular.
A Canadian economist put it simply - have agreed upon metrics for sea level rises and taxes that go into effect if and only if such rises are significant. No rise, no tax.
Why do we keep reading such wild doom and gloom speculation about climate change - that often sound little different from the Awake magazine?
Because the TBTJ Banks want Carbon Markets that they can manage (and manipulate profitably) and governmental elites who are equally greedy - want ever more control.
If people honestly want to do something good for the earth and climate, let them watch the TED lecture by Allan Savory about desertification and locking up carbon in soil. You won't likely hear much about this effort because it doesn't satisfy the sociopathic elite that dominate mass media. Reducing desertification would help the climate, locking up enormous amounts of carbon, -and help poor people in the 3rd world - not the rich elite.
metatron
-
metatron
The greedy hands of Goldman Sachs coupled with the controlled media in the US equals excessive speculation about climate doom. Ask yourself why, day after day, all these scandals about the US (such as Snowden) are exposed in British newspapers ?
metatron
-
Watchtower-Free
Global warming is caused by the Sun .
NASA Climatologists refutes man made global warming