The New Global Warming Thread

[Kerostasis]

Meanwhile, NASA has gotten some serious results from a 15+ year study of Greenland's ice sheet. Some areas are melting at a rate of 65-100 feet per year of lost vertical height. With roughly 9" of loss = .12 inches of sea rise, do the math.

*does some math*

Ok, the math says I should be underwater right now. I think there must be something wrong with that math.

Then again, it is hurricane season now. I better go look out the window and see if its raining yet.

[Nikolas]

I was just thinking of resurrecting this thread!

The link is to an Oxford style moderated debate: Three pro-anthropogenic global warmers face off against three anti-anthropogenics. The fun part is that the audience is polled before and after!

Before the debate: 57.32% considered Global Warming a crisis. 29.88% did not.

After the debate: 42.22% considered Global Warming a crisis. 46.22% did not.

Ouch!

[AMosely]

*does some math*

Ok, the math says I should be underwater right now. I think there must be something wrong with that math.

I should have been more elaborate in my summary, but if you'd read the article, it indicates that the 9"/.12" ratio is estimated based on average decrease. The value I cited was not an average. Misleading as it was, the average growth from year to year is what concerns me. The extremes of 100' in a year are not good signs.

I still don't understand how some people can find this funny, or compare it to other planetary changes that have little effect on human life. These changes in the Earth environment, regardless of whether the planet or the human species has witnessed them before in time, will have major impacts on the way humans and other species live our lives. Why joke about it?

[AMosely]

[
Before the debate: 57.32% considered Global Warming a crisis. 29.88% did not.

After the debate: 42.22% considered Global Warming a crisis. 46.22% did not.

Ouch!

The motion was "global warming is not a crisis." Agree or disagree? I'm not at all surprised by the results, nor do I think they are particularly meaningful. I personally don't even think it is a crisis - not yet.

A better question is whether or not scientific study (not even to mention prediction/modeling) can reliably alter human conciousness. History would strongly indicate that the answer is no. Look at Gallileo, Newton, Einstein - few of their findings were accepted as truth until long after their deaths - and many remain in contention.

[Lucky Shot]

No one is joking. I don't understand how the argument is that a warming earth is due almost entirely to human involvement when it is happening on other planets. Incredulous, in fact. Especially when you consider that the earth has been warmer in the recent geologic past and that wasn't due to human CO2 emissions.

Lucky Shot

[Kerostasis]

I should have been more elaborate in my summary, but if you'd read the article, it indicates that the 9"/.12" ratio is estimated based on average decrease. The value I cited was not an average. Misleading as it was, the average growth from year to year is what concerns me. The extremes of 100' in a year are not good signs.

I did read the article. I just figured you'd chosen to cite those particular numbers to make a point of some sort, so I wanted to help you illustrate it.

Of course, the article mentions that while some parts of the ice sheet are thinning, others are actually still growing, which isn't nearly so effective at scaring people. The full report is supposed to be out in a month or two, if I remember correctly.

[CingularDuality]

Why joke about it?

The joke is the implication that somehow humans are causing global warming.

[snooggums]

The joke is the implication that somehow humans are causing global warming.

Even I don't give a rats behind about global warming as I assume humans will adapt, but to disbelieve that we are contributing to a warming atmosphere entirely is pretty ignorant. We do pump many toxins and warming agents into the air on top of what's already there. Think if it like a full glass, each bit you add will put it over the top.

Now are we the only source? Probably not. Are we helping it along? Yes. What can we do about it? Pollute less, stop overfishing the oceans and stop deforesting the planet. Let small wildfires burn instead of locking changing forests into one step of their development, basically stop having such a large impact on the ecosystem.

[AMosely]

The joke is the implication that somehow humans are causing global warming.

.. and also numerous posts in this thread about random things being written off as global warming, or hurricane season, etc..

Let me restate my opinion again, because I must be doing a bad job of it. I agree that humans are not causing global warming, and agree with the statement that climate change in general is a natural and unavoidable planetary cycle.

However, I would debate any assertion claiming that human beings are not currently contributing to the current warming trend in a significant way. There is a tremendous amount of theoretical and physical evidence to support this. This is precisely what the IPCC has been focusing on for several years and has published their findings and recommendations on. Further, I would debate any assertion that a rapid rise in surface temperature does not pose a significant ecologic and economic threat to most species on Earth. The mentality that this is somehow a scare tactic is self-defeating, as this is a classic case of choosing to error on the side of caution instead of arrogance.

Put the issue of global warming aside. Why wouldn't we want to reduce the negative effects of our species on our only planet? Why wouldn't we want to invest in healthier, more efficient sources of energy? Doesn't everyone desire to leave the planet healthier than when they inherited it? If your answer is "because it costs too much," you are not thinking far enough ahead.

[AMosely]

Nice IPCC summary for policymakers here:

http://www.ipcc.ch/SPM2feb07.pdf

[War.mongeR1]

Meh. Global warming shouldn't be THAT big of a deal. The stronger of our species will evolve and start to grow gills. The one's who don't start getting gills probably deserved to die anyhow as they are the weaker of our species. Either way, we'll adapt. And besides, the herd needs to be thinned out anyhow. It's just the earth's way of cleaning house.

[CingularDuality]

I'm sure that humans are contributing to something, but whether or not that something has a significant impact on the warming of our world has yet to be demonstrated. We've got lots of correlation, but that's it.

And, yeah, I'm a cold, heartless bastard that also thinks that we need some major population control. Maybe this is just Earth's way of wiping out a large percentage of the nuisance that is homo sapiens?

[Franko]

And, yeah, I'm a cold, heartless bastard that also thinks that we need some major population control. Maybe this is just Earth's way of wiping out a large percentage of the nuisance that is homo sapiens?

Well if climate change is real, which it appears to be, regardless of whether or not you think its anthropogenic, you may get your wish on population control because the biosphere is quite sensitive to any change, and we've become quite used to a certain standard of living that requires ecosystems to perform a certain way. If ecosystems collapse, we collapse.

[USN_Squid]

In a study recently published in Geophysical Research Letters, H.B. Hammel of the Space Science Institute in Boulder, Colo., and G.W. Lockwood of Lowell Observatory in Flagstaff, Ariz., found that Neptune's brightness appears to correlate with temperature changes on Earth. They also noted that Neptune's temperature warmed from 1980 to 2004.

Mars, another planet that man has yet to visit, is also going through a warming period. According to NASA's findings, ice caps near its south pole are melting.

"The long-term increase in solar irradiance is heating both Earth and Mars," is the conclusion of Habibullo Abdussamatov, head of St. Petersburg's Pulkovo Astronomical Observatory in Russia.

Article

[AMosely]

Very different angle in this story. The effects of climate change, whether real, perceived, or self-induced are almost impossible to map out:

"Unless properly managed, a rush to reshape the world's economy to arrest climate change could end up trampling the lifestyles of the rich, the livelihoods of the rural poor, and the earth's most vulnerable habitats."

http://www.reuters.com/article/newsO...10482220070606